Thursday, 12 May 2016

Captain America: Civil War

Captain America: Civil War

Hats off to directors Anthony and Joe Russo for giving the audience a great joy ride. This is what we go to the cinema for. I can imagine the two directors, like Russel Crowe in Gladiator, holding a mic and yelling demandingly at the audience “..are you not entertained?! Are you not entertained?!” outstretched arms with palms open and a gangster lean. The impression I get is that CamCw will do well at the box office, it is likely to have greater staying power as word of mouth spreads and encourages people to see the movie, there are also likely to be more people who see the movie more than once to relive the experience. In terms of how it will compare to how other blockbusters have performed I would expect the returns from this movie to be surprising at the tail end of its run rather than the beginning. This is due to the fact that after the Batman Vs Superman (BvS) debacle people will go in expecting to be disappointed but will be pleasantly surprised. It’s therefore important for the marketing team not to let up as the movie progresses. It needs to spread the awareness about people who have actually seen the movie stating how good and entertaining it is. The impact BvS is likely to have on CamCw brings to fore an important point and this is that this genre of movies in reality cannot afford to work against one another. When audiences leave the cinema after watching  a superhero movie on a high it will tend to encourage them to watch the next offering, the fact that it is a Marvel or DC movie will not be a deal breaker as audiences for the most part simply want to be entertained. The opposite will occur if a movie in this genre doesn't hit the spot. At the end of the day the genre as a whole suffers or rises with each movie made. Its very much like a relay race and each movie in this genre is a baton. If any director or studio drops the baton or fumbles and produces a dud due to carelessness or failing to understand the project it hurts the whole genre.   

The first impression one might get after watching Captain America: Civil War (CAmCW) is watching a Franchise on the verge of greatness. This stems from what is nothing less than visionary. For example: opening a whole new vista and world for the audience to explore in Tchalla’s world in what appears a doorway to Africa, splitting the Avengers into two functional teams or body corporates, one under Tony Stark’s capital and empire, the other under Tchalla’s. This allows the Franchise to broaden its creative material and narrative. Whatever Tony’s wealth can do for the team can be matched by Tchalla working closely with Steve Rogers allowing them to eventually become one Avenger unit with separate divisions that carry out separate Avenger Missions e.g a Wakanda Division of the Avengers, one team based in different locations. The two divisions may work together, have AGM (Annual General Meetings) so to speak where all the superheros gather to discuss pressing issues. They accept they are one institution but may not take orders from the same team leader. They don't always have to agree, will occasionally step on each others toes and may go toe to toe if necessary, for example when and if they come for Bucky, to bring him in for his perceived misdeeds. Even the vibranium shield Cap gave up or was stripped of by Tony can be ceremoniously and meaningfully replaced by one built and designed in Wakanda, the very source of the metal it was first built from. This important development would define the beginning of a new era in the Avengers narrative. What impressed me the most about CamCw is how close watching the movie was to actually reading a Marvel comic book. This couldn’t have been easy for the directors to achieve.

If you haven’t yet seen this movie, make the time to go and see it.

I’ll not go over more about the movie for now due to the fact that there would have to be numerous spoilers. For now let’s talk about what could be made of the future Black Panther movie in 2018.

Ensuring the Makings of a Blockbuster in the Black Panther movie, 2018

The first Black Panther movie is due out in 2018. The soft ingredients the audience might expect in this movie are first and foremost the firm establishment of a new Avengers team in Wakanda using Tshalla’s resources and Steve Rogers experience. The new team will have to learn to work together and will get to explore their new home. Hopefully Tchalla will see to it Hawkeye’s family is spirited into Wakanda to join him in the exotic African paradise as a surprise that gels their new friendship. Scarlet Witch will meet a fictional sangoma that helps her understand, better control and discover new abilities. Bucky’s arm will be built bigger, badder and stronger by Wakanda scientists when he is woken up because the team needs his help. Falcon will get a little romantic action with Wakandan Princess (aka Lupita Nyong’o) and upgrade his flying kit as well as his new sidekick drone, which is upgraded to look more bird of prey or falcon-like and enhanced with artificial intelligence. Antman will be intrigued by Wakandan wildlife, particularly its red ant species and discover new abilities by interacting with them.

When Tchalla returns with the new Avengers team they are likely to be introduced to a world of power and privilege of an African monarchy, as well as how government functions and so on; the intrigues of how a country with the most important mineral in the world functions. It will be interesting Coogler's technological interpretation of the fictional Wakanda as the wealthiest and most advanced nation on earth from an African perspective (historically rich powerful countries tend to impose their moral values, are pushy with other governments and have a love hate relationship with other countries, Wakanda is likely to be no different). In the beginning it will be peachy. But their new world will be threatened by a succession challenge from Tchalla’s nemsis e.g. possibly an evil cousin with a claim to the throne and group of sinister elders. Tchalla will have to prove that he deserves the title of king. This will make for some great story telling. In the midst of this there is likely to be a different kind of struggle. Tchalla’s security is provided by a group of highly trained women who have become accustomed to making decisions about his security and who have grown very close to him. But now Tchalla’s life is threatened by his cousin’s challenge to his kingship and he asks Natasha Romanov for help with his security. Consequently, Romanov must shadow Tchalla and accompany him as a guest everywhere he goes.

Finding synergies between real life and fiction

The Wakanda monarchy is ofcourse fictional, but its all in good fun and some of the moral issues touched on are positive. Tchalla is a morally upright and positive force, who was dutiful to his father, cares about the fate and welfare of his people; all the positive traits the public expects of a good monarch. Wouldn't it be great for Marvel to approach Prince Harry and have a few cameo scenes with him and Tchalla in the 2018 movie? This would simply be a public relations activity on Harry's part that in general casts a positive light in the audience and public mind about the monarchy. Wishful thinking, but this would be very good PR. Mobilizing resources for charitable causes, finding friends who believe in what you are doing and networking in order to create the contacts that will aid in charitable causes is hard work. Marvel could offer to donate to some of Harry's charities, Chadwick Boseman and other cast members could lend their time to some of the charitable work Harry is doing. Engagements like this reflect modern society especially when the message in a movie casts a positive light on the monarchy and work it does to help people in need and charities across the world. This kind of collaboration with the film industry becomes a modern way of connecting with the audience and the public in general that a young royal like Harry would excel at. When the audience sees a genuine royal make this effort or appearance they will know its to bring awareness to charitable work they are doing, and to generate a positive influence on society. This is a billion dollar industry and it is not child's play to consider credible tie ins and collaborations that raise funds for charity. At the end of the day this kind of PR is simply like any other effort a hard working royal may engage in to support the causes he or she believes in. Obviously its not an easy task to accomplish, but how to reach out and make these collaborations happen is really the responsibility of a marketing team. 


Tchalla's return to Wakanda

Into this tight space enters Natasha Romanov’s experience as a double agent. She learns a lot, is awed and schooled by the sheer expertise of the Dora Milaje. But as an outsider her critique spots subtle flaws in Tchalla’s security detail and methodology some that save his life when she is brought on as a security consultant to the new king. It would be wise to capitalise on the obvious onscreen chemistry between Tchalla and Romanov in CamCw. This and the budding romantic relationship between her and Tchalla can go on to stir conflict between her and the leader of the Dora Milaje aka Florence Kasumba that will inevitably cause them to duel or spar in the 2018 movie. The narrative Dora Milaje has been infiltrated by an agent loyal to Tchalla’s cousin, but who Kasumba trusts implicitly. The grand conflict and battle between Romanov and the Dora Milaje and her budding complex romantic relationship with Tchalla must be well written and executed to further launch Black Panther (BP) in 2018 and help set a solid stage for a future Black Widow movie. Tchalla and Romanov hit it off, become very close and fall in love but soon discover that Tchalla as king must follow strict custom about whom he may be with. The Princess aka Lupita (who is rumoured to be joining the BP 2018 cast) has been chosen as a favorite for him to marry by royal houses since their teenage years. But unlike other royals in her house she is a bit of rebel, an activist with heart for the disadvantaged. She frowns on some of the excesses of the royals. She and Tchalla have been close friends since childhood and she adores him as he does her, but they both resent the fact that the decision for her to be his queen one day is not her own rather it is one that has been made without her consent. Tchalla is protective of her but when Sam Wilson arrives in Wakanda she is smitten by him. She happens to be more interested in Falcon while Tchalla, happens to be attracted to Romanov and she to him building on the chemistry seen in CamCw. Tchalla is torn by his duty to the royal houses and the fact that he still adores Lupita's character to the extent that he does feel jealous about her interest in Sam. In a heart breaking twist, after going the distance Romanov and Tchalla realise they cannot be together officially and have to make a decision to set it aside and put work before their relationship. In a bid to remain with Sam and prevent any romantic relationship with Tchalla Lupita’s highly trained character joins the Dora Milaje  as its leader. As a member of the Dora Milaje she may still remain a candidate to beTchalla's bride but as a rule Tchalla's relationship with the DM is required to be strictly professional allowing her to fend off Tchalla and still see Sam.  Meanwhile Kasumba’s character opts to leave Wakanda and joins Tony Stark’s team as the new Pepper bringing more diversity to Stark's team as well as create a key link to Wakanda on his team. The testy and peppy character she showed in her encounter with Romanov would play off well with Tony, being headstrong they would tend to rub each other the wrong way which is adequate for upping the interest from the audience. This level of diversity and conflict should be enough to muster public intrigue, interest and international appeal necessary for Scarlett Johansson to launch a successful future Black Widow movie. Throw into this turmoil the invasion of Wakanda to get Bucky back and you have the makings of a blockbuster. In addition to this the audience does not believe for minute that Zemo is done with the Avengers and his capture may be nothing more than just another cog in his wheel of a larger plan to destroy and take over Wakanda's Vibranium set in motion to pave the way for Klaw and Doom. The other members of the Winter Soldier experiment he made the audience believe were gone by his hand may still be very much alive. For all we know a bullet hole to the head may be inadequate to kill them if they have a pinch of the healing properties of Wolverine, they may just take longer to recover from such an injury. He could still use them to set him free and pose a renewed threat with allies such as Klaw, Doom etc in the future. There is so much the audience could be wowed with in this movie.

In creed Ryan Coogler proves that he is not only adept at directing riveting action but can direct complex personalities, intriguing and unusual romantic relationships as he did with Bianca and Adonis. This is a rare gift and he should use it alongside the politics of Wakanda, its wealth in Vibranium resources and a superhero showdown to set the stage for an unforgettable BP debut in 2018. The important aspect to note would be to ensure that the romance is packaged in a way that adds to the pace of the movie, it should not subtract from it or cause an uncomfortable and boring lull in pace. Few directors are gifted enough to get this aspect right, in Creed Coogler shows that he is one of the few. The Russo brothers have also provided good cues in CamCw for how to handle romance in this genre as was masterfully shown in the relationship between Steve and Sharon.

After the success of CamCw Kevin Feige's leadership of Marvel Studios is now truly nothing short of legendary.
  

The Dora Milaje

She only says one line in the movie, but boy does she deliver it. Florence Kasumba's poise, tone of voice and confidence when she confronts Romanov was one of the most memorable scenes in CamCw. "Move or you will be moved." She was downright intimidating, as though in that moment there was nothing in the universe this woman feared. It was thoroughly entertaining.

In my view the Dora Milaje are a marketing manager and merchandisers dream. Dora Milaje already sounds like the original term for the well known Black Girl Rising movement associated with artists like Beyonce. It evokes powerful images of a sexy, strong, fierce, principled woman willing to stand her ground, fight and die for what she believes in, its got nothing to do with putting men down, if its her king then she's gonna go all out for him, there will be no compromise.


Girl Power. An awesome Studio asset: The Dora Milaje:
e.g. Midnight Angels. #Squad
It offers Marvel a unique platform to both rival and complement DCs Wonder Woman and her tribe of female warriors. If properly managed by Marvel and handled correctly by Coogler the Dora Milaje (DM) can bring new credibility to female superheroes. The interaction between the formidable DM and Romanov for instance in CamCw was more than interesting. Audiences would pay to watch an entire movie just based on that bad ass confrontation.

One word for Florence Kasumba's fierce introduction of the Dora Milaje
to the big screen "Wow!!!" [next course please!]
The Dora Milaje myth could therefore be used to launch any female superhero's career on the big screen, a sounding board like that could easily catapult female superhero movies into a new space audiences would want to see. Black Widow vs the Dora Milaje. Storm vs the Dora Milaje. Any heroine who goes up against the Dora Milaje would become a "made" woman. Audiences would pay to watch this because they would know its value for money. The key factor for Marvel to capitalize on this is that Coogler has to ensure that when he unveils his interpretation of the Dora Milaje every woman will be so in awe and so amorous of them that they want to be one of them; that is they identify with these warriors: #Squad.  Not only will the DM allow Marvel to sell more female inspired movies, the concept can be further grounded not just in toys and action figures but in Dora Milaje handbags, jewelry, fashion, shoes, clothing lines and so on simply by Marvel partnering with leading fashion houses and designers to create these clothes and accessories. Dora Milaje would stand for something in pop culture and modern social circles that can be used to further enhance the presence of female superheroes in stand alone movies that is currently lagging due to lacking a credible method to ensure they are taken more seriously such that they become mainstream, DM could change this scenario.

Avengers Wakanda: #Squad

Technically, Bucky is one of the most important characters in CamCw. Why? Bucky is a Winter Soldier. A formidable, almost unstoppable force no one wants the misfortune of ever having to go toe to toe with. Instead of Civil War CamCw could have easily been called the War over Bucky. The Russo brothers ingeniously used Bucky as the power yardstick for almost every hero in CamCw by which the audience gauges how they fair in the skill and ability scale; most importantly newcomers Black Panther and Spiderman (who stops Bucky's incredibly powerful bionic arm effortlessly, a demonstration to the audience that despite his youth his strength is off the charts). Sebastian Stan fits the Bucky role perfectly. What is most interesting about him is that there seems to be no transition in his persona between the character he plays in this movie and the real life Sebastian Stan. Its as though he's not acting, which is what gifted acting tends to be all about. Bucky is too good in this role to bench, he has to be made a permanent member of the team. The fact that anyone who knows Bucky's code can hack him and turn him into a personal assassin makes him all the more interesting. You can never guarantee he will be on your side, this uncertainty makes him awesome. The Russo brothers recognised this and used it to full effect. The only brushstrokes this now requires is Bucky developing his own techniques for fighting back the word activated mind control sufficiently enough to make him an operational member of the team. He needs to go through some kind of mental training with Scarlet's help for example that enables him to resist mind control. Scarlet would allow him to simulate "going under" with her powers and yet be able to communicate with him thus helping him find ways to counter the activation. Its easy to imagine a scene where someone is using the code to take over Bucky's mind, but midway Bucky himself begins to say the words that activate the Winter Soldier mind control. When he is in full trance and ready to comply he says out loud those ominous words, "What are your orders..Bucky?" In other words he's used a trick that allows his alter ego to take orders not from the person activating the code but from himself. Having gained this ability, when he's in a tight spot he can say the code to himself and it becomes like an upgrade that pushes him into a mental zone and terminator mode where he is himself, still lucent and much more powerful than he is when he is conventional Bucky. But even when he gains this kind of control of himself and is able to resist being controlled the fact that you will never be quite sure if Bucky is on your side is what makes him interesting as there are formidable foes who may still be able to penetrate his defenses and exploit this weakness. This can be taken a step further by his ability to feign being under mind control in order to take down an enemy. Not knowing if he is with you or not is worth gold to the intrigue required to keep him relevant.

Boseman as Tchalla

Chadwick Boseman does Tchalla justice. He carries the persona and fits the part of a royal who is also a superhero perfectly. His African accent is not perfect but it was passable and pleasant. He is the Black Panther. To act the part of an African, an actor has to learn the African disposition. Boseman nails this. What is the African disposition? Africans across the continent grow up in homes where traditionally respect, especially for your parents, their peers and elders is a tremendous grounding factor. This respect cannot be learned without discipline. Consequently, humility, patience and calm tends to be the main disposition of Africans because we are taught to project this by having to learn how to control our emotions in formal settings from an early age. This does not mean we cannot be arrogant, angry, selfish, headstrong and conceited when we want to be. It just means we are taught from an early age how to suppress this kind of emotion and attitude through traditions grounded in respect for our parents and elders that range from how we are expected to speak to them, how we address and greet them, the tone of voice you can use, how we are expected to behave in their presence, how we place our hands when we hand something to them, which may sometimes require you in some very formal settings to genuflect, curtsy or kneel in deference and many other social or traditional signs of respect. Most Africans have learned to seamlessly change gears or switch it up depending on whose company they are in because in a Western setting, in many cases the African disposition can be inappropriate or will be misunderstood, so they drop customary behaviour and adopt a more Western disposition, vice versa. Your African friend who is loud, the life of the party and social may suddenly be calm, reserved and show deference as though he is a completely different person because he recognizes the two personas may be inappropriate in different company. Its great to hear that Michael B. Jordan will be on the cast of Black Panther. Observing Michael on and off the screen shows that he is a very confident young man. This kind of persona of confidence he projects in every situation and with anyone on and off screen is more Western than African. Its acceptable in Western society as being a jock or very self assured. However, in African society this kind of confidence can very easily be mistaken for general arrogance or impudence. Africans will tend to have this kind of persona when amongst their friends and peers where tradition is on the back foot (for example when Tchalla casually jokes about being interested in seeing Romanov and his Chief of Security tussle) but will not have it in formal situations and with certain people or when in certain company. Michael will have to learn how alter his disposition if the part he will act in Black Panther in 2018 is that of an African to one that is able to project humility and calm as Boseman does in CamCw. This is not an easy idea to put across because often we are unaware of what we project and how people see us. It sounds superfluous but learning to project humility and calm as Africans do as a result of upbringing can be more intimidating than projecting confidence and power that can easily be mistaken for arrogance. Michael will bring the kind of talent that will attract audiences to the coming movie and its great to hear he is on board for this film.

The Black Panther suite is just sick. Its the best superhero gear I have seen thus far. His fighting style is also on point, that signature triple kick is just off the chain. The audience in the cinema gasped and cheered when he did that triple, think you could keep him in the air long enough to realistically add a fourth kick next time? Lets see just how gifted your choreography is wink, wink. The audience would be floored by that. What was amazing was the relentlessness of the triple kick. When the audience thinks the two strikes are over, there's a remarkable third. Its used to, two punches from one opponent, one from the other, a duck from one, block and punch from the other. That continuous pummeling from Tchalla without letting up was extreme and set him apart (It reminds me of a mystical trigram strike of the Hyuga clan that cannot be blocked or stopped once it begins). It can be further developed as his signature method of fighting. Its like bringing a machine gun to a pistol fight. In other words it doesn't have to be a triple kick alone but a continuous barrage of continuous well executed blows that don't let up, don't give an opponent an inch to respond or adequately defend and force the audience to think "ouch, I'm glad it isn't me on the receiving end of that." Further developing this relentless attack style for Black Panther, that leaves an opponent no breathing space, will help set him apart in the Marvel universe.

Black Panther; identifying the box office direction and
the need to define personal fighting styles...

No two people fight alike, even if they are trained under the same martial art, how they fight will develop unique traits and characteristics unique to them. Sometimes it can be something as subtle as Bruce Lee thumbing his nose and how he places his fists that sets a fighter apart. Many choreographers, even on big budget movies don't get this. It is absolutely important to distinguish personal fighting styles. This kind of differentiation is what separates mediocre fight choreography from choreography genius. For Sharon this could be as simple as pinning one side of her hair behind an ear and a unique or unusual stance unseen before that tells the audience she means business and is about to brawl. My all time favourite fighting persona does not come from any live action movie, it comes from a cartoon, namely Naruto. It is none other than Itachi. If you do not know who Itachi is look him up. Itachi fights effortlessly, moves through the air and executes moves with the uncanny calm of a master. At no point does he become agitated or express fear even when faced with the most difficult foe or situation during battle. It's not that he has no emotion or feelings which would be dull. He has been up against some of the most difficult adversaries, has seen it all and it takes a lot to impress or move him. Consequently, when he does react or is moved it carries weight and makes viewers more attentive. His moves during combat are sequenced, minimal, understated but devastating and he is one of the most daunting adversaries of the Naruto universe. Most importantly, no one in the naruto universe displays this exact same fighting style and character. Differentiation is key. Some of this could be seen in how Black Panther fought and moved, for instance the calm with which he blocks the path and rises to confront Bucky after chasing him up the stairs and in the eerie way his footsteps made no sound even when he hit the ground hard. It was signature panther stealth and agility. This was excellent. Another favorite fighter is Minato Namikaze. In Naruto there is the concept of "No wasted move". If a skilled fighter like Minato or Itachi only has to shift his weight from one leg to the other and turn his head by 0.1122 degrees to watch a punch, kick or laser beam swish by that's the only exertion they will make as to do more than this represents wasted effort. Consequently, instead of common heaving and ho-ing, grunt work of deep ducking, diving and dodging observed in CamCw greater finesse can be brought to Black Panther in 2018 where some brawlers differentiate their fighting style into the no wasted move method which is no less deadly and just as theatrical. It goes back to the the concept of "gentle fist" in kung-fu or Bruce Lee's one inch punch. Power is not always exhibited by the strain or effort a combatant places in a blow or strike but in the training and skill that has been applied to its execution.

Black Panther's fighting is stylized around a panther. This is a major development and historically ties into Chinese kung-fu. Marvel should therefore not doubt for a moment that the strong performance of CamCw in China has a lot to do with the martial arts personified by Tchalla that are in fact also fundamental to how kung-fu is stylized around nature and its unique creatures. This may indicate the significant earning potential future movies that will include characters like Iron Fist can have and where to point future movies like Black Panther in 2018. It also gives Marvel a very important cue that higher movie ticket sales will require the Black Panther to go up against adversaries with similar or very advanced martial arts skill/training that intrigues and wows the audience. Chinese kung-fu movies where once wildly popular across the world. The tendency over the years however was to begin to find fighting that involves techniques stylized around animals such as snakes, tigers, eagles, crane, preying mantis and so on as gimmicky or superficial to an actual fight and therefore they became outdated. A classic clip that says this is the one where Indiana Jones contemptuously shoots a sword wielding foe. However, Black Panther proves that there is still a huge market for these fighting styles, how they are used and the myths behind them or how they were created simply has to be revisited, re-interpreted, re-established as incredibly deadly and made once again palatable for a modern market.

The Black Panther movie is coming in 2018. Fine, but the billion dollar question is just what the heck is it going to be about? Especially if its going to distinguish itself masterfully from the numerous offerings in this genre. Marvel must know and realise exactly what the blockbuster-edge of Black Panther will be. CamCw shows that advanced and mystical martial arts is the direction the box-office is going and keeping a finger on that pulse, interpreting it correctly and implementing it in this movie alongside a good narrative is a smart financial play. Even Spiderman fighting and moving like a spider is very much like a modern expansion and reinterpretation of techniques transferred from creature to man in movies like Snake in the Eagle's Shadow (1976) giving birth to the concept of superheroes to make them more mainstream. The fundamentals remain the same and maybe the audience is now ready to revisit the action and thrill of high octane kung-fu in superhero movies like Black Panther. This is where fight choreographers need to step in and step up, in order to begin to find ways of bringing back these ancient fighting concepts in subtle ways and reintroducing them in a manner that modern audiences can digest, Tchalla, Black Panther does exactly that in CamCw and the positive response cannot be ignored by a Studio like Marvel. Consequently, Black Panther will require opponents who are tougher and more skilled in kung-fu and other martial arts than Bucky and Captain America who are technically conventional brawlers. They are thus unable to push Tchalla to reveal the full extent of not just his super-strength and skill but his deep and intricate knowledge of other martial arts; their strengths and weakness. Black Panther in 2018 may need to revisit the deeper lore of martial arts such as the intricate concept of pressure points and their link to the human nervous system such that a master knowledgeable about these points could strike them to induce  specific weakness or forms of paralysis. See the Hyuga Clan and Neji in Naruto and the concept of tenketsu. A master can predict exactly how many tenketsu strikes it will take to defeat an opponent and how in visualization they are shown to the audience drawn around the adversary. The ability to show adjustments in vision that show the opponents chakra that the master uses to strike. The tri-gam, ying-yang, chakra sounds and visuals for unstoppable gentle fist strikes used by the clan would be fantastic if adopted in live action as something spectacular audiences have never been treated to before.

The other readily adoptable art is the creepy use of puppets in martial arts as weapons by a hidden adversary. In Naruto we see Chiyo, Sasori and Kankuro use this technique. The clever use of sometimes visible and often invisible chakra strings and diverse puppets, some indistinguishable from humans or the opponent is worth adopting in live action movies as a martial art with a lore audiences have never seen in a live action movie. Puppets can be made to look human or look half animal or half human; since they can look like anything the creepy factor they can create is very high. This can be very useful for creating a mysterious adversary, that does not appear human, that can be struck down with lethal blows but keeps coming back until the big reveal when the audience realises that the strange fiend that appears living and breathing is in fact a puppet and cannot be killed without first finding the hidden puppet master. There are many fantastic African creatures, effigies and masks from cultures across Africa from which can be adopted for use in this way for a Black Panther movie. Puppets can range from being large to capture and trap opponents, tiny, skinny, stealthy, rigged with hidden weapons and gadgets, and even be controlled in large groups or to made appear intimidating in order to use fear to weaken an opponent. There is plenty of material that can be drawn on to create this kind of enterprising opponent.











In Zambia Makishi dancers are popular. There are countless styles and effigies
cgi and visual artists can draw on to
create an "African Puppetmaster" styled around the Sasori concept
as one of the adversaries for Tchalla
 adopted for a Black Panther movie that
would not only intrigue but scare the pants off movie audiences
across the world who at first would believe these are actual living
creatures. They discover later they are in fact being controlled by a hidden puppeteer using a
specialized form of martial arts.
Sasori's puppet Hiruko is one of the weirdest, most creative and creepiest ideas I've ever seen expressed in an animation, its awesome and in a format that as is remains ripe for the live action. In Naruto legend has it that Sasori could control a hundred puppets at a time and took down an entire nation with them using the "Red Secret Technique". The puppet master labours over his or her puppets and each one represents something that his deep in his or her psyche. Sometimes it will take an opponent a while to figure out just what it is exactly he or she is up against because the puppets can appear human or inhuman, appear to move independently, can be made to walk or float using invisible chakra strings and each have their own persona or personality that is completely different from the puppeteer. They speak with different voices, can even be controlled and appear in groups such that the audience would find it hard to believe they are controlled by one person. Chioba controlled 10 lethal puppets when she faced off with Sasori. Puppetry in martial arts is one of the strangest, most deadly and feared techniques in Naruto. It would be great to see this technique interpreted into a live action movie like Black Panther to full effect to further imbue a mysterious African flavour using traditional African art and effigies for inspiration. This kind of intrigue would wow and draw in audiences.

This is possibly the kind of level of martial arts lore and ideas the Black Panther movie can draw on to distinguish it from other superheo movies. If the object of the battle is not to knock the opponent out but disable a leg or even  a lethal arm such as Bucky's the master will simply strike the tenketsu linking the arm to the nervous system temporarily disabling it, thus restraining the opponent but keeping them lucid and vulnerable for interrogation. Coogler should also study how speed is expressed in cartoons like Naruto, for example how an opponent can be at a distance, leap towards his adversary, the adversary thinks he has gotten away but the opponent is moving right behind them. In Naruto this is sometimes referred to as shadow dancing. There is a lot of really great and theatrical martial arts visuals that have not been brought to the big screen that Coogler and his team can make use of, they just have to look in the right places. This is probably the level of mastery that needs to be explored to move the Black Panther movie into a league of its own, especially if the bid is to break the psychological one billion dollar ticket sale mark for movies at this level. If Coogler plays his cards right this will be the first movie he directs that crosses the one billion dollar threshold; but to do this he needs to pay attention to detail, understand audience psychology and hit all the buttons that pull audiences into the cinema.

Its important to know and understand this in the build up to the Black Panther movie in 2018 as it means Tchalla's foes will have to challenge him enough to take his fight scenes and choreography way beyond the introduction the audience saw in CamCw. Technically, this means that Captain America and Bucky were actually no match for him when it comes to the knowledge of fighting and fighting skills but relied mainly on super-strength to hold him off. There was inadequate blocking, striking and parrying in CamCw neither was it intricate enough to qualify for a Black Panther movie to rise to the level of a martial arts exhibition. Its as though Tchalla was going easy on these other heroes. Though it was a great introduction his abilities seemed a little underplayed. Theatrically this can only be explained if he was holding back because this wasn't his movie (wink, wink). Just avoid the clumsy high-wire methods used in martial arts movies of the past that make leaps, jumps and other superhuman feats look fake and lame. Tchalla's fighting method looks similar to Tiger-Claw kung-fu, however, methodologically its technique will have been adopted from the black panther by the ancient Wakandans who developed the martial art. Some of this ancient lore will probably have to be referenced or mentioned by Coogler in the 2018 movie.

Marvel needs to note that for Black Panther 2018 to be successful it is essentially a martial arts movie re-interpreted into a superhero movie on a scale the audience has never seen before. Listen to the advice, don't ignore it as they did in BvS. The style is fundamentally kung-fu. But we are not talking about conventional martial arts here, but martial arts that relies on science and that is mystical in nature. This edge enables it to deflect or absorb Visions lasor and penetrate his impenetrable defenses, break Scarlett Witch's mind spell or cut through her gravity. How? All these powers must work through and be controlled by a nervous system and or pressure or chakra points that are fundamentally understood in martial arts. If the right tenketsu or pressure points are struck Spiderman would find that he is temporarily unable to fire his webs or if struck in another patter, unable to stick to walls, an alternate pattern and he temporarily loses his Spidy sense or super-strength. At first the audience may think feats like this impossible, but martial arts involves the study and insight that enables the practitioner to break down and analyse an opponents ability, power or source of super-human strength or special abilities and thereby determine an opponents real and potential weaknesses no matter how great or powerful they may seem. This is achieved through the seen and unseen workings of the human physiology. It is martial arts on a level audiences have simply never seen before that would even do the unthinkable like challenge a hero like Superman, Vision or Ironman. For instance Ironman's tenkutsu can be struck even through his seemingly impenetrable suite using gentle fist to direct chakra through the metal and directly into his body thereby weakening or disabling him. In CamCw when Hawkeye confronts Vision, he hits him over and over, but Vision is impervious to physical blows from a mortal. However, even an intelligent synthetic being like Vision has a life force built around pressure points. If Hawkeye were knowledgeable of the mystical martial arts he would alter his consciousness to be able to see them. He could then strike Visions pressure points and Vision would be affected by these strikes that are not on a physical plane where he is impervious but at metaphysical level so to speak allowing a mortal with the skill to penetrate the defenses of an immortal and cause injury. Having struck the right pressure points even Vision could be temporarily stripped of invulnerability and would feel Hawkeye's blows. The ability to exploit pressure points realistically narrows the huge gap in ability between mortals and immortals, humans and superhumans. The knowledge and superhuman ability to do this, for Tchalla, would come from something he used science to invent or create, namely Shadow Physics. This is the level Tchalla, his knowledge of the martial arts of the Black Panther, his vast education and skill in science has to bring to the table and the audience needs to feel its weight. His opponents have to be just as gifted especially in martial arts, to create a threat and challenge that movie goers will feel is worth paying to see in 2018. Marvel and Coogler shouldn't get this formula wrong.

Shaolin monks learn to do two and one finger press ups to strengthen a specific region of the body. They learn the nerve centres and pressure points on the human body. A simple flick of the wrist and snakelike strike off the hand or two fingered strike can look benign but be deadly if it finds its target. During battle the human body is a map a fighter reads to determine which path to take to the desired pain, temporary disability or discomfort  he or she wishes to inflict. Fight choreography is a complex and multi-layered, multi-faceted art. It brings audiences to cinemas in droves when the choreographers are in tune with what the market wants to see. It should never be taken for granted. In this genre it is absolutely essential to get it right. Its great to see how fight choreography in this genre is growing. You don't have to see a punch or kick connect to know it was powerful, and the impact of a blow can be interpreted and expressed in so many ways to wow an audience. However, developing personalized fighting styles for every fighter is still lagging. It requires a great deal of creativity from a director of fight choreography, is tedious, time consuming but if its what you're paid to do, make the time and put in the effort if you want to move a movie from mundane to great and to hit those financial targets.

I used to enjoy watching the television series Arrow and still watch it occasionally, but one of the weaknesses of the series is that absolutely everyone fights the same, there is no definitive uniqueness, no personalized finesse in a series that relies very heavily on martial arts; this is a remarkable mistake. Black Widow for instance has a unique fighting technique that is often characterized by using her opponent's own body against them swinging under and over them into a choke hold or to throw them. I noticed that the fight choreography used for Sharon Carter during the fight with Bucky almost mimicked Black Widows. This is a big mistake, sloppy. Really. Sharon should have a fighting technique and mannerisms developed especially for her. Its sloppy to simply use Black Widows style.  Her stance, the position in which she places her hands and fingers, the way she strikes must say something about who she is, her history and her past. The audience should look at her in action and say what fighting style is the woman using? Those subtle hand gestures and strange strikes..Is..is that mantis? The team overseeing fight choreography should not let this tarnish Marvel's track record for being able to give each person a unique fighting method and style. Marvel has the best fight choreography right now, no one compares. Its often very difficult to show untrained women genuinely and skillfully throw down in a fist fight. Often they  don't hold their fists in the correct position, stance is off, punching, kicking trajectory is off, there is no perceivable power in a strike and the intent is not deadly enough. All this can be corrected by a great choreographer and camera play. None of these weaknesses are seen in Scarlet Jonhansson's fights and fighting style. She isn't a professional fighter in real life, and yet on the screen she brawls like a female champion. The fight choreography for Black Widow and Sharon Carter (less the copying) is excellent, believable, hard. Its not the lame stick fighting by Oberyn's daughters seen in Westeros in season 5 of Game of Thrones. They are supposed to be highly skilled female warriors, but the choreography is pathetic. The audience should not have to pretend a fighter is a master at fighting, male or female, when they are shown with poor or weak fighting choreography.

The airport fight scene

The airport fight scene was awesome. Its possibly the first time an audience has been treated to their favorite superheroes lined up like that. The best part of this battle royal was the nuances within the battle itself. For example, Tschalla wasn't interested in anyone else but Bucky. During the battle that's the fight he was looking for. In our local African languages we have a term for that, its called "chikonko". Its a very definitive word. Its stronger than the English  word "grudge". It means you have something against someone and whatever it takes you are going to get them. Tchalla had a "chikinko" for Bucky because he felt Bucky was responsible for his father's death. The method used during the airport fight was to to pit similar abilities against one another and stage assists. This is nice, but I think its more important next time to advance this to building up "chikonkos" between heroes that may have nothing to do with their special abilities. For instance if Black Widow has chikonko for Scarlet Witch she will not care that there is a vast difference in their special abilities, she will pointedly go after Scarlett during the battle, make her way to her and the audience will know why. These grudges during a fight fest are more important than pitting similar abilities against one another. Ideally a director should build these grudges and rivalries up. Sometimes it can be as simple as something inappropriate or untrue they heard a opposing hero say about them in a television interview that made them seethe. Chikonkos need to exist to make the fight more sinister and move the battle to another level. Black Widow would have gone after Scarlet and at some point Vision might have had to temporarily intervene not because he has similar abilities to Scarlet but because his team member is in a position where for a moment she is in over her head. Its important to remember that technically the personal grudges or rivalries are even more important than the battle itself, in terms of what an audience will find thrilling to watch.  Sometimes these rivalries can take on verbal confrontations earlier in the movie, or behind the scenes Hawkeye may have no idea Spiderman has a grudge to settle over something he inadvertently did when they bumped into one another at a Cafe last month when he had Spiderman sent to the back of a long queue for a popular cappuccino. Consequently time has to be spent building these personal grudges and chikonkos during the movie, even if its between team mates as it was with the Avengers, these personal issues need to exist to add salt the audience can savour to the battle.

Falcon's upgrades are awesome. It was really entertaining to watch him use his wings as shields and deploy the drone to aid in combat. The transitions between hand to hand combat and his aerial feats were superb. Everyone in CamCw was on point. From Don Cheadle's War Machine to Scott Lang's Ant Man. Chris Evans and Robert Downey Junior held it down as they always do. Elizabeth Oslen, Paul Bettany and Tom Holland were  awesome. Scarlett Johanson is as bad ass as always ,she has become the gel that holds the Avengers together and really is the darling of the movie, the audience likes her more with each new offering from Marvel.

Romance and humour

Captain America: Civil War is an awesome package. It has intrigue, action, suspense, is a thriller, is smart, tackles real relatable issues and has humour. One of my favourite scenes with humour is the ride in the old VW Beatle and the exchange between Bucky and Sam, and the youthful way in which they react when Steve and Sharon kiss. Both times I watched the movie the audience reacted warmly, loudly and humorously, it brought out the youthful side in everyone. At best this simple scene between Steve and Sharon and the very clever subtle build up to it is how romance in an action movie like this should be kept. It should be light, rather than long and boring; deep but not overbearing. It should tend to have second person shots and reviews such as Sam and Bucky's reaction as means of keeping it from becoming too cloistered. First person scenes where one or both of the couple are shown should be kept brief but poignant or meaningful and should not interfere with the pace of the movie. The Russo brothers got the romance right, it added to rather than subtracted from the pace and overall quality and enjoyment of the movie.

Observations

Areas to note for the Russo brothers would be maintaining the pace of the movie. CM Winter Soldier had a fantastic pace, it never let up from the get go. CM Civil War was just as snappy but there were moments when the dominoes stalled and audience could feel a slight lull in pace. Its also time to revisit Captain America's head gear, it feels outdated, think more - skull-cap maybe. His suite is on point but its head gear is not keeping up with Tchalla's amazing costume. Vision's visage was awesome, the skin texture looked real, amasing work there.

The Score and Soundtrack

The score in CamCw was alright, the action was intense enough to sometimes forget it was there aiding every scene. However, more could have been done to improve it. Tchalla and Black Panther's theme music for instance, no African drums, no gulleteral growl from a panther worked into it? There is room to do more.

With Coogler directing Black Panther it is hoped there will be a strong African and American R&B and Rap influence in the coming movie. R&B and Rap fits this genre well. It made Deadpool more enjoyable to watch. Hopefully Coogler can work with someone who can move this aspect to the next level.

Diversity & the Writers

Marvel must be commended for the diversity that audiences are beginning to see. The Studio its leadership, casting director, art and visual effects directors, actors and staff are now moving ahead of the curve. Every great movie hinges on the quality of the screenplay; and the writers are the foundation on which all the parts come together seamlessly for this movie to make sense from the start to the very end. The questions the movie forces the audience to ask and the suspense filled manner in which they unfold was second to none. They did an awesome job and deserve their fair share of the credit. The reel is being kept fresh.

There is no doubt that Marvel's move to improve diversity under Kevin Feige's leadership has had big gains for CamCw especially in the international market. There is a finger firmly on the audience's pulse and its paying off not just at the box office, but its pushing back audience fatigue as well as adding to the longevity of this genre. Diversity, creativity, insight and sheer talent are what will keep it alive. Audience fatigue for this genre is a very real threat to its profitability. When directors get it wrong and create a dud that doesn't resonate well it does not bode well for the industry. Its important for studios to appreciate that as much as there may be rivalries to see who can make the biggest block buster every super hero movie that flops has an impact on the industry as whole. If this boat is going to be kept afloat it will take a collective effort or we will not be graced by these movies anymore as they will go the way of the dodo.

These are small observations. CamCw is without a doubt one of the best ever offerings from Marvel. This is a movie you don't want to miss or only get to see once. I will be going to see it for a third time soon.

I have now seen it for the third time. Damn its good.

Early on most did not expect CamCw to break the $1 billion threshold as it has now done, however, as I explained at the beginning of this review the surprises in performance would come towards the end of the run of this great movie. Let's hope creativity thrives and a finger is kept on the pulse of what will entertain audiences in future.

Wakanda: See you in the Cinema in 2018!



Wednesday, 6 April 2016

Zack Snyder's Batman Vs Superman

Fiction is enjoyable, because it is an opportunity to escape from the mundane world of fact and all its needy issues and problems that need to be solved. Zack Snyder's Superman Vs Batman has all the ingredients required to create a block-buster. It is meticulously made, has great actors and a big budget. Watching the movie you can tell that it is in the hands of a genius. Some fault the movie saying it is too grim and it is uncharacteristically somber, but these qualities should not stop a movie from captivating the audience or being interesting to watch, a recent example that demonstrates this is Leonardo and Alejandro's the Revenant. Mid way through BvS I was actually quite disappointed, and at the very end when it was over it felt like I'd just finished watching a long documentary made for the Discovery Channel. Nevertheless, documentaries can be interesting, I just didn't think I'd be watching a Batman and Superman movie depicted as one. Snyder's technique for making his "type" of picture becomes very clear in this movie. What he is actually doing is shooting a movie in third person a technique supposedly used to inject realism, that is, make the audience feel as though he is transforming fantasy or fiction into fact or non-fiction. He uses the same style or technique in The 300 and Watchmen. A documentary will tend to feel as though its shot in "third person" or impersonally because the material rather than the lens is what the screen tries to impress upon the audience. Its an interesting technique that Snyder has probably perfected over years and realized elevates his work above that of other directors. Therefore, hoping for the same success he has experienced in the past he relies heavily upon this style and seems to have finely honed it in Batman Vs Superman (BvS). The Revenant, like BvS is a grim, somber movie but it is shot from three emotional perspectives employed by the camera lens, namely 1st, 2nd and 3rd person. The audience is pulled into Leonardo's personal emotional space (1st person), it is given time to view him from the eyes of other actors who interact with him (2nd person) and the narrative is allowed at times to seem as though impersonal observation (3rd person). Snyder's gist is that he masterfully attempts to keep the lens in 3rd person throughout the movie even when close ups are are applied, the angle of the shot encourages distance. This makes the roles the actors play seem remote from the audience, that is, the audience never really gets intimate with any of the characters on the screen. this style of filming gives the audience the feeling that the actors know they are being watched; which is supposed to be fine, since the idea is to make it seem as though the audience is observing events as they occur as might be observed in a documentary being filmed live. Its a masterful technique, that has delivered block-busters for Snyder before but even this technique will not survive a good story that has a plot that is not effectively delivered. Snyder's style will not work in a movie that has too much content to deliver. This is due to the fact that a great deal of what the lens conveys must feed off the scene rather than the dialogue to maintain a higher level of realism or to seem impersonal. This is like playing back footage from a security camera. The camera predominantly captures people "doing" things rather than playing to the camera or taking selfies. The problem with this technique is that, like footage from a security camera, any action taking place will be great to watch, but scenes with dialogue will seem boring, seem distant or will feel listless. The audience will keep wanting the scenes with dialogue to get by quickly, because they can't really connect with the people talking, i.e., the same way a random security camera feed or recording with sound, picking up what people are saying, will seem uninteresting because there is no personal connection created between the people talking, what they are talking about and the audience observing the footage.

BvS will sell tickets and make money for a short while, not because its a great movie, but because it is a great idea, and everyone will want to see the movie for its novelty but the majority will not want to pay to see it more than once at the cinema, and that really, is the tragedy. Its seems a strange thing to say, but BvS suffers from trying too hard to be perfect. Its too careful, lacks diversity, is out dated and not in touch with a modern audience. In terms of character, having swag and likability BvS is being outclassed by television series like Supergirl, the Flash and Marvel's Agents of Shield. Something that a few years ago would be unthinkable. In a Man of Steel review I pointed this out. BvS is not cool, its not hip, it has zero swag or the swag is too square, there is no intermittent injection of humour, there is no funk. Its simply too square. Its not even interesting square. Its boring "do your homework" square.   

In the same Man of Steel review I discouraged comparisons between Superman and "God", and trying to draw similarities between Superman as a Jesus Christ "saviour" type of figure. This is due to the fact that if you were ever truly a fan of Superman from childhood growing up you would know and understand he was never considered a deity and therefore never thought of as god-like. For a director like Snyder not to get this, is a red flag. Secondly to even attempt to use scenes or dialogue that attribute qualities of Jesus Christ to Superman shows a complete lack of understanding of the psychology that conditions modern day Christians. This ignorance could easily lead to a director carelessly allowing scenes or dialogue that could consequently put off a significant demographic. Furthermore, to try to say Superman is not a god, when he is capable of superhuman feats will inadvertently create the same dilemma. After viewing the first trailer for BvS this faus pas was obvious and I pointed it out. The ideal approach was not to mention anything to do with deification or Jesus Christ as it could not be done without lowering the quality of the movie by being irreverent and there really was absolutely no need for it. Don't include something, if you don't know how or its unnecessary but has consequences. BvS comes across as though parts of the script that include religious views were written by people who wanted to inject positive views but knowing nothing about the psychology of Christians they couldn't see how what they were doing was inappropriate. In Christianity God is not about being able to fly, saving people from capsules or burning buildings. It is predominantly about self sacrifice, being willing to lay down your life for others even though they don't understand what you are doing, being able to forgive those who have wronged you etc etc and these qualities are made real by how Christ faced his own challenges. Christians are therefore less pedagogic today than they have been in the past. They admire quality rather than quantity, humility rather than power, service rather than sovereignty and Christ epitomizes strength rather than power.  There is no comparison, so it is a faut pas to even bother to try to draw similarities between Jesus and Superman, for a director to make this mistake means they really don't know what they are doing where religion is concerned in a movie and don't really understand the psychology within modern day Christianity. 

If you introduced a superhero movie with the following intro as Snyder did, the weaknesses in his understanding of religion that will take the movie in the wrong direction become immediately evident:

"Fearing the actions of a god-like Super Hero left unchecked, Gotham City's own formidable, forceful vigilante takes on Metropolis' most revered, modern-day savior, while the world wrestles with what sort of hero it really needs. And with Batman and Superman at war with one another, a new threat quickly arises, putting mankind in greater danger than it's ever known before."

Throwing in words such as "god-like" and "saviour" is out of context in that it reveals a flawed understanding in the author. It  simply shows you don't understand the very religion you are gleaning ideas from to put in your movie. You are acting from outside the religion looking in rather than the inside looking out.

Understandably, the Superman Franchise is such a valuable asset that it is considered too important to fail. Lets face it, no executive wants to be in charge of a sure thing, the cash cow, a money spinner when it doesn't pan out. No one wants  to be the guy in the hero line-up  whose turn it was to get candy from a baby and got knocked out. The pressure will be so intense they are likely to find themselves forced not to admit the reception has not met expectations. Therefore, the problem with Superman begins at the executive level. Giving executives at Warner Brothers a project like Superman to manage is too heavy a burden; its simply too much pressure. Its either the movie will be too closely managed or the executives will take a leap of faith and hand every detail of the movie to a renown director who they believe couldn't possibly fail them, potentially exposing the jugular to a great director who doesn't get it. What Warner Brothers needs to do is the unthinkable, that is, distance itself, step away from projects like this and give them room to breathe in hands that are not too close to the Studio and the stress thereby giving room to more modern creativity. BvS suffers from performance anxiety and consequently fails to deliver, its like a premature caused by such high expectation that in the end leaves everyone feeling dazed and confused about how it could suddenly all be over in one release; this trend will keep repeating itself. Lease Superman out to another smaller studio to produce and develop. Don't look for a director that has successfully directed action fantasy blockbusters this time. You need a director more in touch with his youthful side, who is exposed to diversity and is knowledgeable about modern social trends  as this is required to understand what the audience would consider interesting adults rather than boring adult stereotypes that BvS portrays. Instead look for a director that has delivered a successful teen or college movie that was clever, diverse, gritty, dark yet funny, hip, in touch with the audience and had a great story, then give them room to work. If this is too much of a stretch reach out to the creative minds behind the Flash, Supergirl and so on as they seem to be more clued in to what would resonate in the market. When Cisco Ramon channels Reverb using that Matrix template he projects a modern youthful cool factor you should be trying to tap into in a movie like BvS. In that scene Cisco displays that fragile balance between the cool nerd and his alter ego super cool hero persona; both being attractive to an audience, precisely the kind of balance that made Chistopher Reeves famous channeling the two sides of Superman. Its something actors can learn to do with the right direction. You actually already have a lot of creative, talented people around you already going in the right direction, they just need to be trusted with bigger projects.

Lex

Lex Luther doesn't work in BvS not because he's portrayed as psychopath or sociopath rather because there's nothing modern about him the audience can connect with. Jesse Eisenburg is a very talented actor. Its not that he didn't pull off Lex, its the character of Lex itself that was unrelatable because he drops out of no-where. For Lex to be a successful villain in the eyes of a modern day audience he has to do things and behave in ways that make the audience genuinely like him, then pepper this behaviour with cruelty that makes the audience struggle with whether he is good or bad. A director knows a modern day relatable villain is one seen to do things the audience can relate to in their own lives, even show compassion; he may be crazy but the audience must like him for some reason and yet at some point in the narrative should despise him for obvious reasons; the director has to keep the audience caught in the ever persistent trap of not really knowing whether to despise or like a villain otherwise he or she becomes too one dimensional to be memorable. Its important to note that the very same formula applies to the hero or protagonist with the exception that a tad more weight is placed on the likability scale that endears the hero to the audience. An always smiling goody two shoes hero inevitably becomes one dimensional and as forgettable as the villain on the opposite side of the equation. There is nothing Lex does in BvS scenes that is relatable on which his being a sociopath can be built on - he comes off as rather barmy from the get go, in fact Snyder doesn't tell the audience why this new Lex hates Batman and Superman (or the reason is too innocuous to buy into .i.e. god versus man) even though he rather than Batman vs Superman is the movie's arch rival.  Lex as the main villain almost makes the Bat and Supe squabble appear disjointed or disconnected from the flow of the movie due to the fact that Lex's interference is not carefully explained (why does he hate Batman and Superman so much? What did they do to hurt or injure him?) ; consequently this missing space turns his presence into a persistent irritation in the movie rather than an asset. The audience is trying to focus on Batman and Superman brawling but he's like a noisy fly buzzing in the audiences ear that keeps having to be waved away. In addition to this the movie relies completely on brute strength with no intelligence or finesse when it introduces Doomsday as the threat that brings Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman together. More time could have been spent showing how intelligent and resourceful a foe Doomsday was, for example, a mind link between the creature and Lex would have allowed him to fully possess the creature, even feel its pain (intelligence combined with incredible power), rather than the time spent showing how Lex was clever enough to create Doomsday. It would have allowed Doomsday to speak and interact during the battle. The material content in BvS is superb, amazing, but its not well put together. Lex for instance could have had absolutely no interest in the battle between Batman and Superman. He could have started out as just another sane bloke dealing with normal everyday social issues. The audience would be made to think wow, Lex is actually a really nice guy. He would be going about his business until the BvS battle interfered with a key plan or killed someone he cared about and this drew him manically over the edge. Consequently, Superman's battle with Zod would have developed Batman's anger towards Superman, but in his effort to bring Superman down he himself would cause the very same destruction and pain consequently affecting Lex in exactly the same way. Batman went after Superman seeking justice. This would force him to see that as much as he sought justice by going after Superman, it was not justice but vengeance. When Lex reveals the injury Batman has caused him and unleashes the terrifying Doomsday, a threat to mankind worse than anything Batman may have attributed to Superman, Batman realizes that he too is guilty of the very same crime for which he accused Superman. This failing on his part is what prevents him from plunging the Kryptonite spear into Superman's heart at the last minute. Instead he grievously admit his folly allowing them to work together. In that moment Batman's revelation of what true justice means then becomes the story line for why he forms the Justice League with Superman.

Trailers

Trailers are slowly ruining movies especially in this genre. Many of the most important scenes in BvS were already in the trailers and the audience felt like it had already in some ways watched the movie which is very anti-climactic. Yet, at the same time the Studio needs to market a movie and get a feel of how the audience reacts to trailers in order to gauge what kind of response a movie will get. The way around this may be to blend visual formats. For instance when actors are shown in stills or not moving in videos they can be shown as normal trailer footage, but when there is any kind of action graphical tools are used to transform the footage into watercolour or pencil moving image. Either this or switch to the negative of the same footage. Anyone with a decent phone can change normal picture into a water-colour painting. Applying this method to trailers allows the audience to see what Batman's suite for instance will look like for a moment, but when he moves the water-colour allows the audience to get a vague idea of what the action will be like, but it will never see the actual scenes in their complete visual glory until they movie itself is watched. This is kind of how black and white Japanese manga transformed into anime works. The manga is a rough prelude that doesn't trash the actual anime. Studios could use this technique to avoid trailers ruining movies. If the audience gets used to this effect, when it sees a water-colour effect in a movie clip it automatically knows this is a scene the director wants the audience to get the full effect only during the movie itself or that its a trailer, not the actual movie. To see the footage in its full brilliance they will have to wait until they buy a ticket and are actually in the cinema. This will certainly work for this genre of movies. Personally, I think a director should never display the full quality of their work in a trailer for this genre; the content can be the same but the texture of the picture and maybe even the quality of the sound should be altered so that it is never the whole enchilada.
tbc.



Monday, 15 February 2016

Deadpool, 2016

Technically Deadpool, the movie, is on point. Satire is very difficult to pull off and can easily be misinterpreted. Clearly the producers made sure every t was crossed and every i dotted. There were no obvious flaws in the action and the execution was clinical. There is a basic use of diversity. The sound track supports the genre. Deadpool is also the first Superhero movie in which a Superhero smackdown punch has been properly demonstrated in a live action movie. This kind of punch or strike is common in comics and animations like Dragon Ball z and Naruto, but sadly has never been properly transferred to when Superheroes brawl in live action movies; instead they usually punch each other like regular people. This seems to be a very difficult lesson to either learn or accept, failing to apply it will cost the Studio money so its better to get it right.

This “super-punch” is where a Superhero strike contains so much “kinetic” energy that it compresses, then launches or catapults the nemesis struck across the sky. The punch can be shown by the director to make contact or at times the swing is shown and the sound of the punch is heard but no visual of the fist connecting is offered. The outcome is the nemesis being flung by the impact. When one super strikes another, for example Superman and Batman (in his super-strength suite) or Captain America and Iron Man the contact really should never be the same as two normal people fighting. They are superhuman and therefore the contact during battle should be epic. A classic example that can be used to demonstrate this is when Goku and Vegeta battle they are sometimes depicted as moving so fast that all observers can see are circular percussive explosions of air in various places across the sky.

Most directors don’t get the difference between normal people fighting, punching and blocking and supers doing the same. They take this and apply the same to Superhero’s whose strength is many times greater than the average person. An example of this is in the latest Batman Vs Superman trailer. When Superman swings to strike and Batman blocks Superman’s  arm the impact is treated like any other block e.g. like that between two normal people. Its the audience that fills in the missing visual portrayal by knowing Superman's strength - this is a huge technical oversight. Imagine someone watching this didn't know who Superman was. He or she would think Superman simply turned his head with that glare to admire his amazing bicep. There is nothing augmented in the scene to express what just happened. What tends to be forgotten is that when Superman swings his arm even a forklift couldn’t block or parry it, he’s not a normal human being. This is why he is astonished when Batman blocks his arm. When Batman blocks Superman’s fist it is fundamentally like an unstoppable force meeting an immovable object. This kind of impact is the same for any confrontation between supers with incredible strength, it cannot be depicted like any brawl between normal people this would be like showing the flash at super-speed running like any ordinary person; the scene could very easily come across as quite stupid, and simply look like a guy admiring his bicep. When two normal human beings fight the ducking, blocking and punching produces common sounds and the common impact of flesh against flesh, by standers can hang around and watch the kung-fu, boxing or flying fists. When two super-strength super-heroes fight many directors do not understand that it is absolutely not the same. What may be a simple brawl between two super-strength superheroes is on par with a clash between two armies, the movement, speed and intensity of an arm through the air is no different from a ballistic missile whistling through the air, the explosive impact of the warhead of that missile is no different from a punch connecting with an opponent’s gut or the forearm that blocks the punch. Even a super who blocks or parry's another super's blow cannot treat the impact like any other. Average people cannot stand around and watch supers brawl because the impact of blows will be louder than a tank firing off a round, windows will crack or break, boulders will suddenly prop themselves up revealing moist earth, lose rock and stones will eerily launch into the air and puddles will suddenly form rings as though caught in a quake. Most directors creating Superhero movies don’t get this. The sound of a blocked punch is supposed to be unearthly, it should feel like two freight trains are colliding head on, the air should reverberate, a ripple should affect the camera lens and the screen should rock a little as though even the camera couldn’t withstand the collision because this is exactly what a battle on this scale would cause. Where Superman's arm makes contact with Batman's any rain or water caught between them would be compressed waft out vapourised into steam, whatever alloy Batmans suite is made of would momentarily glow at the point of contact to indicate heat, the reverberating bang of the arms meeting would deafen the audience, the car they are standing on would slide to the side in the direction of Superman's punch, the audience would see that this is not going to be any ordinary battle. The latest Batman Vs Superman trailer is excellent, the tone is right, the execution of the Batman fight scene is flawless; it has the makings of a blockbuster. However, Batman blocking Superman’s arm was nice, it was a wow moment, but it lacked proper execution in that the imaginary forces at play that would create that moment would necessitate it be accompanied by earth moving sound and visual effects to make the impact live up to the fantasy; this is unless Superman’s strength is what has been reduced to match Batman’s (which would be lame) rather than Batman’s suite that has been enhanced to match Superman’s strength.

Superman turns his head with a glare to admire his amazing bicep.

The difference between good and great: Batman blocks Superman's
punch, amazing moment. But the execution is not as earth shaking
as it should be. It would not take much for Warner Brothers to go
back and improve the sound effects for this feat and the CGI
applied to surroundings that would be required to demonstrate
the superhuman nature of one powerful force
stopping another. This scene is good, but it can be made great.
Blockbusters are by necessity cut from greatness.

The solid, realistic feel of punches between Colossus/Negasonic and Angel Dust in Deadpool that send nemeses flying are possibly the first properly executed punch between supers demonstrated in live action. When Batman stops superman’s arm in that block, what has just happened needs to be interpreted correctly. The expression of shock on Superman’s face is superb, but the actual block itself is too understated. That moment needs to be slowed down, the sound of the block should be like a wrecking ball striking immovable rock, puddles nearby should suddenly ripple, glass should crack and people hundreds of meters away should hear an unearthly, deafening bang.  The clash of two supers should ideally be properly depicted in live action, this is currently not happening in live action movies.




The first properly executed punch between supers in television and movie history
(o.k maybe that's a bit of an exaggeration, but its spot on)



Finally the cinema audience for this genre is being treated to live action
combat that is only seen in exceptional animations like DBZ and Naruto

Having just seen episode 16 of Supergirl the 3 minute battle between Martian Man Hunter (MMH) and Supergirl simply cannot go without mention. Finally somebody gets the real methodology by which a superhero fight takes place and executes it with the right technical detail. I replayed (pvr-ed) that fight four or five times. Cute Kara rocks the sexy bad-girl version of Supergirl affected by red Kryptonite very genuinely, so well throughout the episode that the audience might want to see more of the style and attitude linger in Kara herself. The way Kara disarms Alex and her crew was well executed. When Supergirl's uppercut connects  MMH is launched into the sky, she then leaps powerfully after him,  he's seen still drifting upward: that was perfectly sequenced. Someone deserves credit for this. His flight is shown in perspective from where Supergirl is standing. In the distance the audience can see a tiny image of him and his cape swirl just before he hits the building. Excellent, it feels real. Perspective is critical. The breaking glass as they plough up the building, but seen from a distance, the perspective of one of the people in the crowed, nice.  The audience watching some with their mobile phones filming the fight injects the awe, some of the spectators fleeing the scene injects the fear: two essential emotions (rather than just one) that cannot be conveyed by simply showing the two supers alone. That shift from mobile phone screen to the actual fight, nice, it adds to the realism. The planning behind this battle is meticulous and multi-dimensional, well done, really. These are important layers that build up the depth in the battle often left out even in big budget movies. The couple fleeing hand in hand when Hank transforms, another layer, brilliant. These layers are the mark between mundane and genius. When MMH punches Supergirl and she rips through the building all the way out to the other end, beautifully done, well executed. It was technically flawless. There is physical drama when Supergirl fails to punch a dematerialising MMH who finally sends her plunging downward with hands clasped he hammers down also with excellent execution. The only place we can get this kind of quality is in Japanese anime like DBZ, Naruto, One Punch Man and so on, thus far no director has been able to transfer this kind of blistering action and energy successfully to live action; which has been hugely disappointing, but this is now changing. Finally somebody gets how a brawl between supers should be portrayed. When she hits the ground the pavement is upheaved. This is one of the best "technically" executed fight scenes between supers that demonstrates superhuman ability in film or television, the visuals where on point. In terms of technical quality and execution, this is even better than the fight between Superman and the three Kryptonians in Man of Steel. The only room for improvement is the sound that backs the fight. For instance, when Hank realizes that if he doesn't transform and intervene Supergirl would kill Alex that beautifully slowed down moment when he begins to transform as he tilts toward her should have been backed by a more heroic "in your face" musical score to enhance the drama of the moment - this is absolutely important. Also, when it comes to visuals don't be afraid to take over the whole screen. For example, when Kara uses her heat vision you can light up or white out the entire screen as though a camera flash has gone off blinding everyone including the audience then recede or diminish this light into the thin twin stream of lasers being emitted as they hit the target. If the audience gets that an initial blinding flash means Kara is deploying her lasers then you can even have a terrified bystander hugging a streetlight pole fill the screen, then just show his background light up like several camera flashes with his terrified face in full view of the camera lens and the audience would know what was happening. MMH's costume and facial prosthetics, especially at the end of the fight when he makes his hero landing are also excellent, he looks handsome but alien something extremely difficult to pull off, the only other time work this good (that makes an alien look handsome) has been seen is the Klingon commander in JJ Abrams Star Trek: Into the Darkness, MMH's costume is so well put together he could be on Superman Vs Batman when it debuts and be believable, its that good. With delivery this good MMH could have his own movie or series. The tone of episode 16 dared to swing into grimmer, grittier more adult feel and this quality gave it a little more spark. Again, anyone making live superhero movies should study this episode and try to learn how its done because the audience is tired of fights between supers where there is no finesse and nothing really super about their inhuman strength, speed and ability during a fight. Its really nice to be entertained like that. This episode was a treat. Whats the point of watching television or a movie if the craft isn't technically this good.

Supergirl episode 16 gets it right, a treat to watch.

Deadpool will be a success because it is very carefully made in this delicate satirical genre that teases and pokes fun at everything in pleasant but mean spirited kind of fashion. It is delicate as it is very easy for satire of this kind to go south and be viewed as insulting. The Studio stayed on top of the final product and made sure it was funny but not carelessly offensive to any minority or group in society. Satire has to be very carefully managed or it can be misunderstood and prove bad for business. Anyone who thinks the Deadpool formula is new is very much mistaken, it was applied long before this Fox movie, in the huge hit Hancock starring Will Smith. The movie Hancock proved long ago that satire in a super-hero movie is good for the box office, which is one of the reasons why in an earlier write up on Hancock 2, I made the case that this venture made business sense to make the next installment.

Investors who bankroll movies and television series should be very careful about content as a script with visual scenes or dialogue that deliberately hurts or insults a demographic as, in my opinion, these are red flags for fraud. I recently happened to catch an episode of Billions in which an actor, to emphasize some point, makes references to the Virgin Mary that many people around the world would find insulting and blasphemous. The dialogue was cheap, it simply came across like a pointless attempt at selling sensationalism or a writer exploiting a Studio to selfishly put a personal view in a commercial space at the expense of his or her employers. In House of Cards when Frank spits on the the crucifixion statue of Jesus Christ, this is an example of a wholly unnecessary scene. Its a cheap way of trying to convey a specific quality in the personality of a character in a script when there are numerous alternatives for doing this; its intended to shock in a manner with little substance because it does not take into account the demographic that will be hurt, insulted or slandered by the scene. This is a faux pas a talented writer, director and producer would know how to avoid and yet still get the intensity across. This demographic is a part of the general audience the show depends on for viewership and ratings. In other words the franchise or series is destroying itself, too vain to see this and the executives who manage the series are unable to understand how a successful, fascinating and financially viable project like House of Cards is being made fundamentally redundant and will inevitably begin to fail. Like the dialogue in Billions the scene has no genuinely unavoidable use or context, therefore it is a form of vanity publishing on the part of the writers and series that will inadvertently hurt its and the studio's fortunes. Even if this cannot be seen or understood at the time the ball towards redundancy has been set rolling. A television series is a product like any other that a producer hopes to benefit from through sales. I have yet to come across a product in a supermarket that has a bold label that says "Not for sale to Red-heads". Why? Because the business needs anyone interested enough to buy and buy into the product. Therefore, for Studio executives to fail to screen and exclude that kind of scene or dialogue is a red flag that there is a strong possibility they are not really selling. If they are not selling the series then it is an indication that the Studios time and money is possibly being abused and the investors bankrolling the project are possibly being exposed to fraud as their interests and the return on investment are not the priority; in this sense bad business practices are being disguised as art. It is possibly being used in a method that undercuts the business it is by necessity expected to support that it is an executives role to identify in time, before it is screened, in order to cut it off and spare the Studio and the project the potential exposure to unnecessary loss or redundancy. This kind of potential fraud is very easy to identify, but it has become rampant even in the music industry where something as simple as the use of vulgar language, expletives and so on is applied as "artistic content" when in fact all it does is dampen or shrink the demographic of listeners or people who might be willing to purchase music thus reducing its potential profitability. For instance, if as an artist you publish a song about making love that a mum and dad can smile and wink at each other about because their kids think the song is about ice-cream then you are an artist expressing your music and know how to get your paper, your creativity is savvy but if these parents or people in general have to hastily turn off your music or switch stations as a result of the language you are an artist that is vanity publishing music that technically may have a limited understanding of business. In other words it is art disguised as bad business that an entrepreneur, record label or Studio whose objective is to sell, should ideally know how to avoid, camouflage or find a work-around. For instance in Deadpool, a lot of the verbal and visual adult content is presented in a manner that even if someone who isn't old enough happened to inadvertently observe a scene it would go over their heads and they may only appreciate this when they come across the movie again much later as adults, to do this takes real talent.
  
Ryan Reynolds was a perfect casting choice for this part and plays it to the hilt. Many times I have emphasised the need to separate the hero from the person in television or movies especially if the hero form is not of a normal person. Trying to portray Superheros like the Thing in their strange looking super form to act out normal human social scenes, like a romantic kiss doesn't work. It didn't work in Deadpool. I sat in a packed cinema and was able to gauge the audience's reaction when Deadpool takes off his mask at the end and kisses Vanessa. This should have been a very romantic moment, but it missed the mark, in a comic book it would work, in live action it failed. The audience could be felt cringing, some people looked away and sounds of disapproval went around the audience. It may work in a comic book, but it doesn't work in cinema. It becomes necessary for the director to make adjustments depending on the medium. Even a character like Deadpool should be able to look like a normal human being when not revved into super mode. This is a technical detail a director needs to learn to appreciate. The way Martian Man Hunter seamlessly morphs into Hank in Supergirl when social interaction takes place is a standard that directors should try to follow when they translate heroes from comic book to moving pictures in scenes where they have to socialize with normal people.

The success of Deadpool at the box office proves another very important aspect of movie making that directors have to be very clear about and this is who they are making a movie for. Are they making a sci-fi or fantasy for children or for adults? You cannot make a movie for both these targets at the same time, in all likelihood the movie will fail. Its therefore important to know your target audience early on. Star Wars 7 very nearly suffered from this targeting problem and just barely managed to remedy it. Had Star Wars 7 steered itself toward an adult audience from the very start, without a doubt, it would have cleared the US$2.5 billion mark at the box office. If sufficient time had been spent on building intrigue related to diverse planets, space and the nature of the story it would have gained staying power and eclipsed Avatar. If these two lacking areas are carefully dealt with in episode 8, there is still a chance of breaking existing box office records. Deadpool is rated R, from the very start the dialogue, humour, ideas are targeted at an adult audience. Always remember that for this genre an R rating is not necessarily about violence; focusing on violence without the critical thought process that drives scenes, humour, emotion and dialogue can still make an R rated movie fail. Its about the what, why, how, when and the emotions stirred in the audience associated with the development of the story. The psychology applied fits the target market therefore the interest is high and so too are the ticket sales. The success achieved by Deadpool makes for a good case study.

Diversity

Deadpool, as is expected of this genre of Hollywood movies is weak in diversity in the sense that not a single superhero in Deadpool is black. This will inadvertently dampen the full earning power and importance of this otherwise well put together movie. Diversity is not easy to implement. There are many directors who are non-conformist, who feel being asked to introduce diversity to a project is an interference of their creative liberty. This kind of attitude can possibly be viewed in movies like Hail Caesar. However, directors that allow personal feelings to interfere with their work are not very smart. Failing to apply diversity is an indication of either a shallow mind or a lack of exposure. Saying "diversity is important but the Oscars aren't" and then producing a movie with no diversity like Hail Caesar is double speak one would expect to hear from a person who is less intelligent than he thinks he is. Diversity is not easy. When people who believe in equality try to express it, it is often not welcome. White people who embrace diversity can often be given a hard time by their own kind. They will be ridiculed, bullied, tormented called "ni--er lover" and made to feel ashamed by their own race, their friends, partner or spouse, their family often outside the public eye. Actors and actresses face many pressures and challenges. The same applies to some black actors who embrace diversity, they can often be viewed as sell outs by their own people. Go to a "conservative" white chat-room or forum and read through the racist views expressed after Star Wars 7 about the on-screen relationship or non-relationship between John Boyega and Daisy Ridley. These racist views in "conservative" white communities make it difficult for white people be they actors, directors etc to embrace diversity. Most will turn back to the racist fold with tails between their legs and make movies and television series without diversity. Actors and directors of all races have to be brave when it comes to reaching out and crossing colour lines; they should be given credit for being brave and strong willed enough to not be bullied into a lesser person or shrinking violet by their own kind who are often much less accomplished than they are. Lets not pretend diversity is as easy as a, b, c. When it comes to diversity we have to admit that black people have been at the short end of the stick.  However, being a black person and belonging to a race which endured prosecution does not give you the right to be racist yourself. This makes you no different from those that work against the equality striven for. Even Malcolm X accepted this truth later in his life. Being black in the United States, Africa or anywhere in the world does not absolve you from or reduce your responsibility to embrace equality and diversity.

          While we're on the topic of diversity. The reaction to Beyonce's Superbowl performance is interesting. Anyone who knows anything about the Black Panther movement of the 1960s would know that it was not a racist organisation, but rather a movement evolved by African Americans to monitor and defend themselves against police brutality initially in Oakland California. The movement also organised community social programmes offering free food for children and community health clinics. The movement was eventually undermined and demonized by J Edgar Hoover. If Black consciousness is merely a positive expression of one's race; in this case the black race in all its shades and skin tones, then there was nothing wrong with wearing black attire, headgear and donning Afro's for the performance. This is no different from wearing African traditional dress; it is simply an expression of race that has nothing to do with racism. We live in world dominated by white consciousness in the sense that people around the world wear suites and ties, t-shirts and sneakers, jeans and so on that are really examples of many of the positive attributes and contributions of the white race to humanity. No one ever complains or creates an SNL video that makes fun of being white in the conventional sense of modern culture, the way the short SNL video pokes fun at the idea of Beyonce being black, illustrated using hysteria. Its funny but the video and "hysteria" can be easily misunderstood as a clever shared wink to imply black people are really not that important portrayed in manner that uses the comedy to hide the back-hand. This kind of psychology is not uncommon where people try to prevent black people from working together to uplift one another. Facebook staff recently scrawled "all lives matter" over "black lives matter" messages written on the walls of the social network's Menlo Park, California headquarters. This is a classic example of the obstacles the race faces. What this does is mistakenly attempt to make black people believe that their attempts to help one another is form of black supremacy and therefore make them ashamed of their own race.  Its this kind of seemingly tame and naive attitude that is being used to manipulate black people into preventing them from coming together to try to find solutions to the real problems the race faces such as crime, unemployment, police brutality, disproportionate arrest and incarceration,  poverty, lack of progress, under-representation in diverse structures including award ceremonies so that the race can be a more positive part of humanity. Its a shame to try to prevent black people from coming together. The title of the song "formation" hints at the need for unity amongst black people and the need for them to come together beyond geography not just as an idea or ideal, but a reality; something tangible that improves the welfare and fortunes of the race so it can contribute more to humanity as a collective. The rap artist Nelly, for instance, is said to have put two students through college every year for the past ten years.  This is a positive view that shouldn't be thwarted by trying to confuse black people about their identity, or by trying to make them ashamed of being black as a way of preventing them from helping one another through real life challenges. Manipulating black people into thinking that trying to help each other make progress is a form of "black supremacy" rather than a contribution to humanity has a huge negative impact on the black community. Rather than view wealth as an ideal based on education, employment, job creation, fulfilment, creativity, family values that black people can use to help each other to make positive gains they are instead encouraged to escape the shame of poverty, unemployment and suffering often associated with them by focusing on cars, jewellery, gold chains, opulence, bragging rights, how rich they are, billions which of course are not bad things but, like faith without works, this psychology perpetuates the cycle of poverty in the black community across the world. It becomes an attempt to escape being associated with poverty and hardship due to the shame when it should be what attracts you to black people in need or in difficulty so that you can draw closer and be a part of the solution that lifts them out of the problems and challenges faced.  As a black person you shouldn't be distracted from using your progress to help black people become a positive part of humanity by helping them overcome real day to day challenges. Don't shun it by being manipulated into thinking or feeling it is "black supremacy". As a black person as long as you don't see this manipulation the way you think, live your life, the progress you make and the way you go about your daily business may not be in the direction you really want because you have been cleverly manipulated into disregarding the plight of your people.

There tends to exist a baseless fear of black people congregating or caucusing even if it is for a worthy cause related to black consciousness; this is a double standard when white consciousness is embraced and an every day reality. White consciousness is not racist, it is constantly supported by other races and has nothing to do with the discrimination found in the Ku-Klux-Klan and modern renditions of it that champion hate and white supremacy. Black consciousness has nothing to do with "black supremacy" in the way white supremacy is simply an expression of hate and inhumane racism.

In an inclusive society no-one should ever make you feel ashamed of expressing black consciousness.
When have you ever heard of people of colour rising up in protest or for a rally against wearing western clothing or living that is an expression of white consciousness? Its taken for granted because its done everyday by people who are not white, but you need to remember that this is not their original culture, it is a consummately adopted one. If we can support and embrace what is yours, why can you not equally support and embrace what is ours? Why then should people protest because on just one day Beyonce decided to express black consciousness. This is a selfish attitude. Every day we live in white consciousness, we embrace it, participate in it, wear it, speak it, live it and encourage it for all its positive attributes and contributions to the progress and cohesion of humanity. Why then, should there be so much hysteria when black consciousness is expressed either through a performance, art, dress or any other medium. Are black people only acceptable when they present themselves in white consciousness? If anything the Superbowl is the perfect place for the expression of this kind of diversity and inclusiveness. Anyone can be a part of black consciousness in the same way that anyone can be a part of white consciousness which is a part of everyday reality. As a black person you should be careful and wary about people who attempt to turn your need to have pride, self-respect and have a sense of self worth into "black supremacy" when it has nothing to do with racism. This is the kind of manipulation and negative attitude that keeps you from coming together in order to make positive contributions to the welfare of people of colour. Black people should not allow themselves to be persistently manipulated in this way into abandoning the need for them to come together in order to improve black lives, make them matter and push forward black causes. Any person of any race can be a part of this endeavor. There is nothing exclusive or racist about it, you don't have to be black to sing or enjoy listening to R&B,  and you don't have to be black to have black consciousness in the same way you don't have to be white to have white consciousness which we all live and in a sense celebrate every day in the modern world. Black people around the world face many disadvantages that affect how their lives turn out. Anger, cursing, vulgarity, middle fingers is not the solution to these problems. The reality is that struggling families need help coping with the financial and economic challenges life throws at them, help with parenting, help with keeping their kids in school. What is the point of being so rich when your people are suffering? These kids need help to achieve the best grades, move from high school to college and to eventually find careers they otherwise would not be able to have without someone looking out for them. Those adults that have already fallen through the cracks need support to find meaningful work, counselling, role models and the the support that enables them to earn a decent living. This is the kind of support black people need that black people who come together can try to provide. Less crime, less violence, less negativity in the black community is a positive force that makes life better for all races and is why one black person should never be made to feel ashamed for helping another in need when the entire community benefits from this action.

Had there been some dancers accompanying Bruno and Beyonce of different races, styled in the same way then this would have been understood as it would have expressed how black consciousness is open and all embracing. If Beyonce and company had come out in white leotards or suites and ties, straightened permed hair this would have been acceptable, so lets avoid counterproductive manipulation and accept dancing in a way inspired by African heritage, accept that wearing black headgear or clothes, wearing chitenges or any African dress and donning Afro's to express black consciousness and coming together for black causes are something positive, after all black people are just as much a positive part of humanity as any other race.       

tbc.........

Friday, 1 January 2016

HANCOCK: Its Time to Finish, unfinished Business...

Will Smith: Everybody's hero. Hancock,....where art thou? 

Anyone who understands how difficult it is to create a successful superhero movie would ask why a done deal like Hancock 2 was never made. Unlike other superhero franchises Hancock was somewhat unique in that it was not based on a popular comic book hero and therefore had none of this support. The Hancock concept began without a pre-existing comic book space and superhero fan base and yet was one of the most successful movies of 2008 having cost US$150m it grossed around US$624m at the box-office.

There are many misconceptions about why Hancock was a huge success and why a sequel was never made. Those who know very little about how movies work will tend to think that the audience was “lured” into the movie theatre by major acting talent like Will Smith, Charlize Theron and Jason Bateman, then once lured into the theatre they were put off by the spandex, flying and other superhuman feats from actors they were used to seeing in more serious roles. This is a bogus assessment. The movie Hancock never failed. It drew crowds because people wanted to see it. Given a chance they would watch it again. When a movie is being made these days it the responsibility of the writers and directors to understand the role and power of diversity. An actor like Will Smith has some clout and the original script for Hancock was darker and more insensitive toward minorities. It had to be changed and toned down to suite him at his insistence. However, even with this intervention some felt that when Will was in character, playing the alcoholic and insensitive Hancock some of the humour smacked of prejudice, was insulting and inappropriate. Despite the fact that Will tried to have the insensitive aspects of the script toned down he experienced a backlash. His career has suffered ever since, quite unfairly in what smacks of nothing less than a  form of reverse racism. When an actor is asked to play an unsavory character like Hancock, before he went through rehabilitation, at that point its a job and its unfair to punish them for acting and reading a dialogue he or she didn't write or may not have fully appreciated the repercussions of. Charlize went on to star in Monster's Ball, and won an academy award for this role which placed some distance between herself and the negative reviews concerning prejudice Hancock received in this regard. When one observes the quality and poor reception of movie projects Will has been in since, its likely Will is still judged for his participation in Hancock, which is a pity really, for a talented actor who innately harbours no such prejudices. 


The Hancock strut: When Hancock walks toward the trapped lady police
officer brushing bullets off his shoulder,calmly deflecting a missile 
launched at him, that walk with the limp, that swagger, lets the 
audience know he's a black superhero...the swagger was just
 another aspect of Hancock that made it unusual, 
different and lots of fun to watch. Hancock is a good case study for 
a director giving pointers for how to portray a black superhero. 
Every superhero needs that edge that makes him or her 
different. That's not to say it will work every time, but the walk and poise was an
 attribute  or style of doing things that gave Hancock useful differentiation from
other superheroes the audience had become accustomed to seeing. Heroes should
not have a generic style, each should have a distinct method of fighting and
interacting during battle that gives a distinct persona. Here Will pulls it off
with gusto, but what he accomplished is much, much more difficult than it looks.


A Studio, Franchise, writer, director, artist, executive and any staff member associated with a project, whether it is for television or the cinema, as part of due diligence, can no longer afford to live in a narrow minded space. The world is changing as are the markets that consume television series and movies. Digital Satellite television is rapidly expanding the audiences that receive movies and television series. For instance, in the past a popular Fox television series like 24 might take a year or more before its on television screens in Africa, today it can be broadcast as swiftly as 24hrs after it has aired in the US. Tomorrow they will be aired simultaneously. Like mobile phones access to this technology is becoming cheaper every year, before only the wealthy could afford it, today nearly anyone with a decent income can. Even as you read this the viewing audience is no longer local or national, its global. The same applies to movies. When Star Wars 7 opened on December 18th it was opening in Africa and many other locations around the world almost in tandem. The viewing audience consists of a broad demographic that Studio executives need to be cognizant of when they hire writers, directors and artists to work on a project. Many of these may be talented, but they may also come from a confined space which does not appreciate the changing demographic of the audience. They are used to working with certain groups they have formed ties with, to working with predisposed attitudes and biases to race, gender, minorities and so on. Some may have a chip on their shoulder, ego problems and any other aspects of the human condition that will cause them to deliberately tarnish a project as a way of airing their personal objections against people or certain groups they are required to work with, and even against the Studio that is employing and paying them to deliver a project. If the Studio, understanding the demographic of the audience and aspects of a movie or television series, does not perform due diligence to ensure a project is palatable to a broad audience then from a business point view the executives running the Studio are taking a huge risk on the company's investment. Movies and television series have to be quality controlled before they are screened and Studio executives need to know what to look for in a project that has made its way on to the screen, will hurt some audience groups, and consequently inadvertently hurt the Studio in the long run in terms of the quality of the projects it puts out and the expected financial returns. Studio executives should not be naive about the people they hire and work with on projects. Writers, directors, artists and other staff who they employ on projects who are unhappy about something or about receiving direction from executives can take their personal flaws and objections out on the Studio and craft it into the artwork, dialogue, scenery, CGI and so on in manner that is in some way offensive to the audience. However, moving picture making being an art will make it very difficult for Studio executives funding and overseeing a project to see this kind of subterfuge that will inevitably lower quality and reduce earnings. Due diligence is very important to identify these problems and curtail the damage they can do to the Studio before a project reaches audiences across the world. Its art, but at the end of the day its a business and, like a parent, there are certain fiduciary responsibilities a Studio owes itself and the audience to ensure the financial viability of a project is not sabotaged by not paying attention the final product. Sometimes its best for an executive to admit that he or she may not be qualified to perform due diligence in a specific area e.g. CGI, demograhics and diversity, quality of the acting, believability and so on, in which case its appropriate to bring in someone from outside the project who is and can do this for the studio in confidence.      

Its a responsibility of a Studio to understand modern day audience demographics and carefully handle diversity by providing due diligence that screens unsavory elements of a script and final movie. For instance, when you cast a black actor like John Boyega, Anthony Mackey or Chadwick Boseman the Studio should bare in mind that nearly every black person living in Africa, Europe, the Americas; on earth basically, will tend to identify with that actor. Don't think that when Star Wars writers have Boyega drinking out of a filthy animal trough with a big nosed pig Africans are not going to identify with Boyega and see that its a subliminal insult to them from the Star Wars Franchise. Even if this were not intentional and there is comedic merit anticipated by the crew from the scene this cannot blind the creators of the movie from the potential fall out. It still has to be screened by the studio to see if the same objective can be achieved without the potential for being insulting to any specific group. The presentation of the same scene can very easily be improved to make it more sensitive to the audience. For instance, if it were screened and flagged this specific case could have been neutralized by something as simple as adding one or two other people dying of thirst doing the same thing Boyega was forced to do thereby diluting its association with a specific ethnicity. When Studios introduce series like the Blacklist, with James Spader as the lead actor and the writers, director and other staff hired to create this television series think its cool for Reddington to have Hlsham Tawfic playing Dembe in this modern day as a kind of African man-servant following Reddington around it smacks of colonialism, it adds no real value to the meaning, purpose and narrative of the series. Its like an ignorant child thinking its fun to play with match-sticks and dynamite. It is likely to be viewed by people across Africa to whom colonialism was a very real injustice as the crew's personal indulgence in scenes laced with hate to fullfil some kind of fantasy about superiority. This is not a series about colonialism; there is no context for these scenes in the Blacklist; its as if they are created by a person who lacks exposure, is illiterate or poorly educated and does not understand the potential fall out. To put what is portrayed with Dembe on the Blacklist in context, its like Reddington in a popular series putting a dog leash decorated with Swatikas around a Jew's neck and parading with him continually through various episodes, seasons and scenes of the Blacklist or other television series. In the same way this is insulting to an African audience it will be insulting to a Jewish audience. What would possess any director or Franchise to do this? Possibly in ignorance or deliberately because the director thinks this element looks "cool" in some masochistic way when in fact the Franchise is being exposed to the dangers of inadvertently insulting and demeaning a demographic in the audience in a manner that is unacceptable. An executive or person with exposure would be able to pick out this problem and prevent it from causing a demographic in the audience unnecessary injury, keep it from tarnishing the project and compromising the Studio. A Studio needs to be aware of the demographic, what is being produced and perform due diligence when setting up and overseeing a project in order to protect its interests. There's little Boyega or Hlsham Tawfic can do about it, its a role and his job is to act out what the writers and director give him to do. The actor is making a living and its work. The same goes for Anthony Mackey receiving the same kind of racial abuse from the writers, director and other staff of the Captain America Franchise. But there's little Mackey can do, its a role and his job is to act the part. These are not shortcomings you can always hold the actor personally responsible for. Similarly, Will Smith should not be penalized for the fact that the writers and director of Hancock were insulting and insensitive to a minority. Neither should the Franchise's project suffer if it is still commercially viable. It is the Studio's responsibility to carry out due diligence, hire writers, a director and other staff who are not going to allow their fraternal narrow mindedness, personal prejudices to tarnish the value of a project, who will not undermine the Franchise by placing childish subliminal or overt dialogue and scenes that betray the Studio. Executives don't necessarily have the time or skill to identify these problems. Nevertheless, those racial or other groups affected will tend to regard what they see and hear as a jab at them or as being simply hateful. In theatre it is said that the show must go on, for good reason: Whatever, faults have been made can be corrected or improved upon in the next show, the next episode, the next season or the next sequel. Its up to the Studio and its executives who understand their role to identify what went wrong is not socially acceptable to a modern day audience and is bad for business. Their role is to ensure that when these prejudices surface to reduce the quality of a finished movie or project they ensure when the next installment is made the same mistakes are not made again by hiring the right producers, writers, directors, artists and other staff.     

The truth is that Hancock was a success because the narrative was unique from the very beginning of the movie. Firstly, there is or was no black superhero carrying a movie as the main character on this grand scale. Secondly, most superhero movies do not introduce the superhero as an insensitive, foul mouthed alcoholic boarder-line bum then go on to show him reform into the hero he is meant to be. This rags to hero origin story was stroke of pure genius, original, captivating, interesting enough to follow and discuss with your friends afterwards. To this day Studios like Warner Brothers still don't seem to get this quality about how to make a superhero great. The mistake writers make is to create narratives and screenplays where the Superhero is inherently flawless and godlike, as tends to be done with Superman, thinking this is what will be inserted in the audiences mind, but when audiences see this the psychology used for the objective is completely wrong as they cannot empathise with a flawless hero or a hero with "problems" that aren't real because they make him look good. The creators of Hancock saw this problem and countered it with an indestructible superhero who was human because he was vulnerable, his feelings could be hurt, he was making mistakes, he was trying to help but couldn't see the damage he was doing, his heart was broken, he was suffering inwardly and needed help. Hancock demonstrated that sometimes even a superhero needs to be saved; which is what Ray, a human being without any superpowers, did for Hancock. It may have been portrayed in a way that was rather extreme, but they were on the money and even to this day many Superhero Franchises are no-where close to understanding the ground the approach to Hancock the writers were using was breaking as a means of cracking open the box office and creating blockbuster. Consequently, the Superheros they create are shallow, have no flaws, have no interesting challenges they periodically face other than those relating to their powers, are paper thin and fail to last more than one or two sequels.

This may change with Captain America, Civil War. The differences between Cap and Tony Stark, that lead to their friendship breaking down, choosing sides and outright confrontation is a very good direction for the Franchise as this allows Robert Downey Jr, Chris Hemsworth and the rest of the cast to dig deep and exploit the diverse range of feelings and emotions a crisis between close friends like this creates. There will be feelings of betrayal, one friend standing up for another, mingled with self doubt about how Tony or Cap can turn against a friend, despair over whether things should really go this far, moments where one hero has to hold back, then finally absolute commitment in the moments when its going down and there's no room to pull punches. Inevitably there will be deep and sincere regret because when close friends battle, even if one prevails over the other, nobody wins: there is no glory. There's enough juicy material here to make the audience shed a tear, not know who to support or who is right and who is wrong. There's enough material to make them grip their seats with unease. The director needs to work it. The writers have to suck the audiences into the emotional content of this crisis and the director spin it into moments of superhero agility, super-strength, display of power and brilliance. This is already a blockbuster, the story just has to be executed on the screen by the director in a way the audience will not forget.  

As a writer and director always remember that when "drama" is brought to an action movie, the drama should be very closely tied to the action sequences. For instance just before battle or at intervals during battle to heighten the emotional tension. Avoid separate set pieces where the drama is not tied to action, or if the actor sobs it should be just as he or she is jumping out of a window; you're not making a soap opera. There is nothing more off-putting to an audience that sits down to watch an action movie or television series that finds it has to observe profuse human emotion without an outcome that involves action, confrontation or physical activity; this is like having to watch and listen to the squeal of chalk grated against a chalk-board. Its amazing how even seasoned directors can turn action movies into soap operas. When a member of the audience pays to see a soap opera then its only good for business to give them the drama, but when it  pays to see action the drama cannot be out there without direction it must without exception be in tandem with the full on thrill and action the audience paid to see.

Thirdly the special effects for Hancock were tight for 2008. The audience could watch the superhuman feats without feeling they looked too fake which would have destroyed the movie (today they could be many times better). The fourth factor was diversity. Diversity opened the movie up to a much wider audience and was another first in this genre of movies. For instance, it's not about having an all or mostly black cast for Black Panther because this does not reflect the world today, not even in Africa, believe it or not. Take the time to go to any major shopping centre in Johannesburg, South Africa or the capital of any African country with a thriving economy today and you will see people of all races, Blacks, Whites, Asians moving around freely, shopping, having cappuccinos, watching movies and so on.  The diversity you see is the demographic in the movie theatre audience today and to develop a blockbuster a Studio should put itself out there in the real world, ideally tailor its casting, narrative and material around this diverse demographic. Honcock was one of the first movies that saw audiences were diverse enough to accept seeing diversity in superheroes on the big screen. This kind of big budget diversity debuted with Hancock in 2008, but we are only just beginning to see it applied seriously to the fantasy genre in 2015, notably with the debut of  Black Panther in 2018 ( with Ryan Coogler identified as potential director). Hancock was way ahead of its time in this sense.  It was bold, creative, different, it seemed to follow its own rules and audiences left the theatre feeling as though they’d been slapped in the face only due to the fact that it was nothing like anything they expected to see or had been conditioned to see in this genre of movies. Audiences couldn’t process it psychologically because though they believed in equality it had never been demonstrated to them in this genre. To then say a sequel shouldn’t be made because it was different from what they expected makes no sense when the movie industry is using the very same methodology that made Hancock a success to make similar movies box office hits today: A more diverse cast, supeheroes of different races, real actors known for playing serious roles and so on.

Serious Talent: This genre today cashes in on having very
talented actors who previously took on serious movie roles,
diversity has also become essential, even in a leading role.
The movie Hancock already had all these attributes, it
was way ahead of the competition at the time it debuted in 2008.

Hancock is the movie Will Smith needs to go back and make the sequel to for his fans; this is the right time as audiences are now more open to seeing serious actors taking on superhero roles and diversity is being used to reach a wider demographic and international audience. Like the long wait for Star Wars the Hancock sequel is overdue and the time is ripe for Will, Charlize Theron and Jason Bateman to return to this movie, its success is a done deal.


From a business perspective it makes no sense not to make this movie. To begin with it already has interest from the audience. Secondly, its already been debuted therefore the sequel has very great potential for having a very high return on investment. Certainly, in the industry, this is what is known as "sure thing". The best approach is to take the movie up a notch by having two or three nemeses arrive on earth from outer space bent on world domination. They have super-strength, can fly and have other strange abilities that local authorities cannot handle. They arrive on a ship, are a rogue group being sought by some intergalactic force that they have evaded for the time being. The only hero who can face them and protect earth is Will a.k.a Hancock and at some point they are so powerful he needs Charlize and  Jason’s help. Jason provides the research and tactical support while Charlize provides the extra muscle when Will is overwhelmed. When the nemeses are eventually defeated that intergalactic force comes to pick them up and lock them away. 




Hancock 2 is an opportunity for Columbia Pictures and these stars to get past differences, correct past mistakes, cash in on the current popularity of the sci-fi, superhero and fantasy genre. It makes absolutely no sense for the studio and actors not to benefit from the publicity and the returns gained by properly reviving this lucrative franchise. Anyone who knows anything about business would get the right script, a good director, fund this long overdue movie and dance a jig all the way to the bank.