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.

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.........

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.

Star Wars 7: The Force Awakens Reviewed

Spoiler Alert, please don't read this if you haven't seen the movie. And if you haven't seen it yet then what are you waiting for? 

To begin with JJ Abrams doesn't disappoint. The "Star Wars" feeling is there from the very start. There is no doubt when you are sitting in the audience for the first time that you are watching a Star Wars movie.

Unfortunately I was quite right and this rendition of Star Wars, just barely escapes being labelled a children's sci-fi fantasy from Disney as was the direction being indicated from the trailers; just barely. Had it done so this movie would most certainly have failed.  As I have mentioned earlier Star Wars is an adult Sci-fi fantasy, it is not intended for children. Going any further into this direction would have been enough to sink the Titanic, the Millennium Falcon would not have been able to pull up in time to escape that cliff, but thankfully for some reason it did. It was just that tad bit dark enough, just that little bit frightening enough to make you want to watch the sequel.

In all well done, but I am going to have to break down the movie in ways that are useful to understanding how to improve the sequel. The first flaw identified in the movie comes on very early, and its none other than Poe. This flaw has nothing to do with his acting ability, he is good at his craft. However, one gets the sense that Poe's role in the movie was cobbled together very quickly and inserted. He is too welcoming, too easily befriends Finn, and the attempt to build him up in the audience's mind is too eager, careless, abrupt and too one dimensional on the happy side. For example, when Kylo refers to him as "the best fighter pilot in the resistance" it sounds too manufactured; its as if the author is trying to force feed the audience into liking him, but triggers the opposite reaction. Poe is too optimistic, too smiley and gung-ho throughout the movie to be a believable character which keeps pointing to the idea that his role was cut and pasted in too hastily with very little depth. Consequently he doesn't react appropriately to life threatening situations he faces in SW7; there is a complete absence of fear which doesn't allow the audience to connect with the character he portrays. Even when brought to his knees by storm troopers on Jackoo in the opening scenes there is an uncommon complete absence of apprehension even in a situation where the inhabitants are to be slaughtered, for  example, the way he jokes around with Kylo without a glimmer of foreboding in his eyes, despite the fact that his life is clearly at stake, comes across as bizarre and unreal or fake. This feeling lingers with him in other similar scenes throughout the movie. Either Oscar Isaac is not comfortable in this role and took it reluctantly with a great deal of persuasion or he does not believe enough in the role he is playing to commit himself to it emotionally and this is inadvertently spilling over into the scenes or he is not getting the right pointers on how to deliver the scenes.  Isn't it common knowledge that in film production, from a psychological perspective, watching persons who are continually happy and optimistic for no good reason can be quite depressing for an audience. This could have been done better. It should have been picked up early enough by whoever reviewed these scenes in order to correct them at these editable stages because the problem is very obvious, significantly lowers the quality of the movie early on and affects its pace because the emotional realism of key a person is absent.

Star Wars 7's Dynamic Duo: Brilliant casting choice helps
land Disney a billion dollar box office jackpot.

Finn comes across like a young Denzel Washington, fearless, rough and ready. Lots of potential for this young man in this career. Unlike Poe, his role is well written and well executed with varying types and depths of emotion that he pulls off decisively. There is no farcical marching band for Finn with a megaphone trying to brainwash the audience that he is the best fart at operating this or that. In fact quite the opposite view, the writer has him clueless about how to fly a ship when everyone else on SW7 is downloading their skills and abilities like Neo from the matrix: oh look I can fly anything, I can fly the Millennium Falcon, oh, look I've just downloaded Jedi powers - watch me move stuff with my mind. Then he's drinking water from a dirty trough with a suggestively big nosed alien pig that refuses to share, then he's with the rather unglamorous  sanitation department on the planet roasting Starkiller. The author of Finn's destiny in SW7 is like a DJ trying get Finn off the floor by changing from R&B to dance, to rhumba to country to ballet but Finn keeps gyrating to the rhythm and much to the annoyance of the DJ the audience is clapping along to his antics. Go Finn, you can't hide or keep talent like yours down.

Rey is endearing, she appeals to the audience and is very enjoyable to watch; loads of potential here too, she certainly has a future in this career. The chemistry between Rey and Finn is excellent because they are both very talented, budding actors. The best and most interesting parts of SW7 are when the two actors are in scenes together because they feed off each other's energy and the electricity this generates flows into the audience. The on-screen dynamic the two actors bring when they act out parts in SW7 is significant enough for the audience to feel that something important is missing as Rey hands over the light sabre to Luke Skywalker at the very end. The absence of Finn to observe and share in that single moment of triumph lowers the quality of that final scene. If such a significant scene with an important figure like Luke Skywalker can still be dampened by the absence of the Rey-Finn dynamic, the director needs to be very careful about how to build the next instalment. This dynamic is driving the audience's enthusiasm for Star Wars. The Studio and director should try not to loose this unique thread. They should capitalize on this "golden-goose" aspect of the movie in order for it to be a bigger success. Rey and Finn interacting through the Star Wars adventure as they did in Episode 7, should not be underestimated by Disney, don't kill the goose, as it is likely to be an essential or key ingredient that will determine whether Episode 8 can top episode 7. For SW8 to cash in at the box office and have staying power more screen time and preparation has to be devoted to these two actors and the energy they give off. This energy they put out and the fact that Luke's final appearance, though stupendous, couldn't equal it, is an important pulse for the Franchise to keep its finger on.  The fact that a key light sabre hand-over scene at the very end was dampened by the absence of a member of the dynamic duo is very important for the Studio to make sense of, it cannot afford not to take note of this. It is probably why scenes involving Luke where moved to the very end of the movie. Rey and Finn are both totally committed to their roles and play them to the hilt. As I anticipated we cannot really tell if they are just really good friends or are romantically inclined to one another. This was, in a sense, a lost opportunity because from the audience's point of view the relationship just fell short of being edgy. When she leaves she kisses Finn on the forehead, which leaves the audience even more confused. Had she kissed him on the lips, while he was unconscious, the audience would have deduced she may like him more than she might want him to know and that would piqued their interest. Looking at the staff Rey carries around it appears her character is being modelled around the Old Republic's female Jedi Grand Master Satele Shan.  Watching the action in the Star Wars Old Republic short movie this is a nice idea. Satele Shan has many interesting Jedi abilities unseen before in Star Wars that can be adapted for Rey such as being able to stop a light sabre with her bare hands and use the Force push as a powerful ability to manipulate gravity and compress it into a bast of energy. It would be interesting to see Luke help Rey develop these abilities in the sequel. Hopeful one aspect of Star Wars that will change is the ease with which the Sith are continually seen to take the lives of Jedi, surely the Jedi are more formidable than this.

Luke Skywalker: finding the right direction

The appearance of Luke Skywalker at the very end of SW7 was significant. The audience first sees Luke's back and the worn hooded Jedi cloak. Luke turns around and faces Rey. Her face is filled with emotion, she eats up the lens; its breath-taking for her and the audience to finally meet the legend that is Luke Skywalker once again. The emotion she feels as she stretches the light sabre over to Luke is what the audience feels. However, it must be said at this juncture that it is difficult to understand the expression on Luke's face. Luke is a  Jedi Master, and by now his ability and knowledge of the Force must be at least equal to Master Yoda's (if anyone can equal Yoda). Luke's reaction needs to be honed into a specific emotion when this scene is reintroduced in SW8. When Luke turns around and looks at Rey he does not have the mysterious gaze or disposition of a Master: someone whose mind rests in a loftier plane, whose gaze has the stillness of a mind that has seen what few may comprehend, regal pride of a royal prince but the disposition of one grounded by humility. Luke must send a strong and specific emotion to the audience through the camera lens. It appears great emotion or nostalgia is what I think Luke tries to express in the moment his eyes rest on the light sabre at the end of SW7. This is absolutely wrong.

If Luke really is a great Jedi Master now, then he has taught himself not to become attached to material objects, especially such important ones with a lot of baggage like this particular light sabre. Thinking it is valuable and important is a strong feeling Rey and the audience may have but a Master does not tolerate such mundane emotions concerning material objects. Instead of looking at his old light sabre with a sad kind of nostalgia as was briefly shown at the end of SW7, this means he should look at it with suspicion, as though it is an object brought to corrupt his feelings. Therefore, he should not be happy to see it again, should view it with a little contempt then eventually when he reluctantly holds it treat it like any other meaningless trinket of interest that has no hold over him.  Rey's great emotion when she dramatically stretches out her hand to give him the light sabre is excellent, but it should be very suddenly dashed by Luke's complete disdain for it and the memories it holds. Rey and the audience should be stunned by this. You see, a novice is always stunned or will always tend not to understand a Master's emotions and actions. After taking the sabre, looking it over, there should only be a momentary flicker of emotion seen in Luke's eyes and then with gleaming contempt in his eyes Luke should say something like, "Why have you brought me this useless relic." To Rey's and the audiences shock he should then toss it very high over his shoulder, it should travel upward for an unusually long time as though being driven by Luke's use of the Force over the cliff behind him into the clouds. In shock Rey should somehow summon the power to pull it back as it falls to the sea until it lands carelessly on the grass where they stand. Luke should be seen to observe this display of power carefully. The audience should wonder, did he really throw it away or did he throw this important sabre so carelessly to see this very reaction? Did he want to test Rey's emerging ability to use the Force? At this point the audience will look back at Luke surely expecting him to be astounded by her display. But the writer should again stun the audience when Luke after a long gaze says something wholly unexpected like, "How is it that even the untrained are now able to use the Force in these forlorn days, what a waste...is nothing sacred anymore? I have waited long for a Jedi to be brought to me, and yet you bring me a worthless light sabre I discarded long ago instead?!..."  Rey tries to speak, but Luke interrupts her. He says, "Go back, bring me the one you call Finn. Go back quickly and do not return without him." Rey tries to speak, but Luke turns away abruptly and stands with his back to her. Rey hesitantly turns and walks back to the Millennium Falcon where Chewbacca waits for her. She breaks the news to Chewbacca that they must return. R2D2 watches the Falcon rise and disappear at light speed. [The objective of this narrative is for the Franchise to get the Rey-Finn dynamic that draws an audience as quickly on the screen as is plausible or realistically possible] Remember, Masters are always eccentric, each in their own way; they do not think or see things from an ordinary perspective or immediately reveal exactly what they are thinking; Masters love to play games. Even if Rey should eventually turn out to be Luke's daughter, the daughter he abandoned on Jackoo for good reason and through the Force he knows this already, as a Jedi Master, the attitude and emotion he shows her at first should be negative, he should even refuse to train her. Luke, is a Master and should not be waiting for her with open arms neither should what he does be predictable for Rey and the audience. All this will make Luke more interesting. In fact, when Luke sees Rey for the first time as he did at the end of SW7 in SW8 he should instead ask for Finn, show more interest in him, tell her that it is him whom he has been waiting for here in the map location he gave, not her. He should tell Rey she should return where she came from and not come back unless she brings Finn with her. This will stir great empathy from the audience for Rey which will inadvertently make the audience like her more as a result of this trauma. How she handles it will pull the audience's heart strings. The audience is likely to be stunned, but this effect and emotion is precisely what this scene should evoke as it captures the audience's interest. With tears streaming down her face Rey should leave, much to the audiences irritation  as it thinks how can she depart after so much time and effort to find Luke, why only show a brief encounter with him? But this is precisely what the Franchise wants the audience to feel. Rey should enter her ship. It rises, she navigates, it leaves the planet all the while she is shaken, her face sad, ashen and distraught (sucking the audience in) as she returns to see how the ailing Finn is doing. She should return with the awful story of how Luke rejected her and demanded she instead bring Finn before him to the others. It is only when Princess Leia hears this that she should smile knowing what Luke is doing and say to Rey in front of everyone, "I believe you, you really have found my brother." It should dawn on Rey later on that Finn is seriously injured and had she not returned as Luke had ordered her to Finn would have died. Her presence in the recovery room where he is kept on life support is what gives him the will to fight to stay alive and eventually make a full recovery.

Finn is dying despite the Resistance doing everything medically possible to revive him. This would be a remarkable and moving opportunity to show-case Daisy's singing ability. She is a talented singer. Singing to Finn as he lies in a coma, she tries desperately to reach and connect with him to give him the will to fight his way back to her. As he struggles through the coma, strange dreams and visions flash through his mind, the melody and sound of her voice is what gives him a reason to live, in the visions he runs towards it. Realising that had she not been at Finn's side he would have died Rey is seen to gain an even greater respect for Luke and now appreciates being sent away. Leia should then be seen planning with Rey and making arrangements for her to return to Luke with Finn. When Finn hears he is going to meet Luke, his response should also be unexpected. He should show a little reverence for Luke, but then say with all due respect every trooper and mercenary in the First Order's pay wants his hide, so he has no time to spend learning Jedi tricks in the mountains - he wants to live. Let Leia do her best to persuade him, while he is in the middle of another fully fledged attempt to flee with Poe's help. When Leia fails to dissuade him let Rey be the one who turns him around. He should agree to go with her to meet Luke albeit reluctantly, agreeing to do so only because he realizes how important returning to Luke is to Rey. As they depart in a cut scene Luke, the Jedi Master can be shown with steely eyes sensing they are on their way. He is waiting for them, in a Master stroke he has the two on their way to him, his plan from the very start. When Finn meets Luke his primary instinct should still be to flee again, he should see the training as an obstacle that could very well put him in one place long enough for the First Order to find, torture and kill him. This tension combined with Jedi training should make for plenty of humorous student/master moments between him and Luke. Finn should want to learn just as much as he needs and get going, but Luke should see some potential in him, struggle to make him stay knowing how his and Rey's destiny are linked.

It may be important for Rey to want Luke's training and be eager to learn, but she should harbour a deep distrust of him. This distrust emerges from the way he attempted to throw away the sacred light sabre she had fought tirelessly to bring to him and other suspicions she has developed about him. This creates friction between her and Luke that often creates heated arguments in the midst of training. Rey should be the troublesome but dedicated student who makes steadfast progress while Finn is the student with one eye wide open looking around and not feeling the meditation Luke tries to teach them. Both Rey and Finn should be a serious handful and headache for Luke to train. Luke should at times despair at Rey and Finn's persistent antics, questioning of his methods and the emotive nature of their training should evoke great sympathy for Luke from the audience who understand what he is trying to do even though the two Padawan may not at the time. At this juncture the relationship between Rey and Finn can grow; since they are both very competitive this could cause some conflict between them over physical  challenges and areas such as how to understand the Force and who is making more progress faster; each periodically wanting to outdo the other leading to a little love-hate, jealousy, admiration and deeper companionship.

This is also an important opportunity to introduce those magical "Yoda" moments when Luke is able to demonstrate to the audience, in his own unique way, just how far and how powerful he has become with Force, as it was when Yoda lifted his ship out of the swamp into which it had sunk, something both Luke and the audience thought improbable and were astounded by at the time. One area of ability Luke could have mastered is the ability to enter, present, reveal the incorporeal zone of the Force where previous Jedi Masters and Adepts such as Grand Master Yoda, Obi-wan, Anakin, Mace Windu, Ki-Adi Mundi, Kit Fisto,Plo Koon, Qui Gonn Jin, Quinlan Vos, Shaak Ti and so on reside. Luke having mastered the ability to create a doorway between the physical and incorporeal world is able to facilitate movement of objects and people between the two worlds. It would be the perfect continuation of the Star Wars Saga from the Jedi apparitions seen in Return of the Jedi. This is where Rey and Finn could witness very creepy and mysterious spectral encounters between Luke and these legends, some of whom may still be living, that he must eventually also teach them to access.  Each of these Master's has a specific area of expertise in which they excelled. For instance Mace Windu is renowned as the only Jedi to to have Mastered all 7 forms of light Sabre combat called Juyo or Vapaad. Mace could be shown in cut scenes with Luke imparting his skills to the two Padawan.Finn and Rey could be the first Padawan in the history of the Jedi Order to be trained by all these Masters in conjunction with and through Luke. The appearance of these Masters through Luke's ability during training combined with changes in exotic locations in the Star Wars universe would be awesome. For instance Luke could begin to train them in the use of Jedi telekinesis, then at some point in their training say to Rey and Finn something like, "You have made progress under my instruction. But now to move this aspect of your training further, I would like to introduce you to your next teacher." Then out of the shadows beside Luke a young, youthful, powerful and  formidable looking Jedi would step forth and stare into the screen. Luke would end saying, "I introduce to you may own former teacher, Master Yoda." Rey and Finn would stand transfixed unable to believe their eyes. This method would possibly be the best way of introducing the incorporeal zone to the Star Wars audience. If Snoke is linked to Darth Sidious' Master, the one who is described as being able to create life using the Force, then the ability to access the incorporeal zone of the Force may be an important skill Luke has to pass on to Rey and Finn to counter this threat. Training Rey and Finn using all these Jedi Masters also highlights that they may be entrusted with the task of restoring the Jedi Temple and beginning a new era in which more are brought into the Jedi fold. Being the conduit that brings all the Jedi Master's back to restore the Jedi Heritage and Temple would most likely make Luke the greatest Jedi of all time and the greatest threat to the Sith, which is why they are desperate to find him. However, it may also be a demonstrative prelude to how big a threat Snoke, Kylo and the Knights of Ren may become when his training is complete.

Its only when the Force finally responds to Finn in a powerful unexpected way that he comes round. Astounded, he begins to believe the Force can help him stand his ground against the Order. Finn begins to think less about fleeing and more vigorously about how much he can learn from Luke. Like Rey he becomes Luke's eager student. The Force could also allow Finn to recall the family he was torn from by the First Order. The Order raids remote communities and steals their children in order to turn them into troopers. Finn could have been possibly born in a remote town where the Order thought all had been exterminated using their genocidal methods as was shown in Jackoo in SW7. Rey could be reunited with her family when she discovers Luke [is possibly] her father or he could guide her to the family that left her behind on Jackoo. In the midst of this discovery she discovers her mother fell at the hands of Snoke. These events also stir similar emotions in Finn. He decides he wants to find his family. The Force rekindles heartfelt memories about them. These memories allow him to discover though his family was harmed by Kylo some whom he can find  and be reunited with escaped. A whole new adventure for he and Rey could be spawned from this. They are young and both don't know much about their past. This can be a period of discovery for both of them. Rey would then have a personal score to settle with Snoke while Finn has one to settle with Kylo. Meanwhile Phasma, is chasing him down. This is how Disney could run this story. It will throw the audience off, deepen the intrigue, it will make Luke more interesting and will make the audience wonder who is really the most powerful and most awaited Jedi? Even if Rey is Luke's daughter and more powerful with the Force than Finn, the way Luke treats her should not be ordinary and easily anticipated by Rey and the audience. Don't try to force feed the audience into liking a character in SW8 as was done with Poe in SW7 as this will only have the opposite effect. Trying to make a movie character attractive and likable to an audience viewing a movie is complex psychological process that writers and directors need to understand. It is rarely achieved by over-selling a character. Specific qualities need to be explored in the audience's rather mind with a strong play on empathy. Even if Luke is aware of Rey's ability, as a Master, he will know that to get the best out of a person or student, a Master does not use kid gloves, but is at first rough and abrasive. He may feel Rey must not know who he is to her for now as it may hinder her training; she can only know the truth about their relationship at the end of her training. This allows him to bring out the hidden, skills, talents, thoughts and emotions in the student in order for he or she to learn to control them. Luke is likely to reveal himself and who he is to Rey only at her highest point of frustration and at the lowest point in her descent into despair during training, in that moment he will use this as a teaching moment to set her in the right direction.

With the sudden awakening of the Force in Rey, right now she and the audience thinks there is something special about her, but this kind of emotion and thinking is precisely what a Master like Luke will try to upset first, for instance, by showing more interest in Finn, telling Rey to leave and not come back without him. Even though she is more important in the Jedi scheme of things and this will be revealed later Luke already senses her connection with Finn and sees that one cannot be trained without the other, this is a package deal. He is guided by the Force to take on two Padawan at once, something rare. Together the two are stronger and precisely what he needs to revive the Jedi with the growing threat of the First Order. But he must use a Master's insights to tease out the best in Rey, in a similar fashion that Master Yoda did for him (Remember Master Yoda initially refused to train Luke, and at Luke's lowest point lifted his X-fighter out of the swamp). Training both Rey and Finn allows Disney to keep the dynamic duo in the same cinematic space which will hook the audience in and capitalize on the energy they pour into the audience while developing the onscreen SW8 story. This kind of behaviour, exhibited by Luke, will make him more interesting. Right now the audience does not know what to expect of him. When they last saw him, his training was complete, but this does not mean he was a Jedi Master, that is, at the level of someone like Master Yoda. Don't give the audience a simple gentle, serene and predictable personality they already have in their minds from the last time they saw him. He is now a Master, which means he is eccentric, sees the world as no ordinary person does and will persistently act in ways and do things the audience does not at first understand, but will appreciate later in the movie.

There are times when Luke will have to speak to Finn and Rey separately, taking them on walks. During these times he can give them cryptic messages. For instance he may tell Finn that a critical time is coming when Rey will face Snoke and she will need him to hold her back from Snoke's attempt to pull her to the dark side. During such a walk with Rey he could tell her that Finn is brash and prone to placing himself in dangerous, life threatening situations he will often need Rey to guide him out of. Training provides an opportunity for Rey's relationship with Luke to grow, it started out as abrasive and filled with suspicion, but towards the end of the training they will have grown closer, such that when and if he does reveal he is her father, the emotional buy in from the audience has been painstakingly built to support that moment.

In addition to all this Luke will be aware that there is a man hunt, not just for him, but for Finn and Rey. Therefore, he will accept Finn's practical position that they cannot stay in place, one system or galaxy for too long. Therefore, Luke opts every few weeks to move the location of their training to another remote uninhabited planet or far off system. This gives Disney an opportunity to give Avatar a run for its money by showcasing beautiful new surroundings and native creatures in each new planet or moon they arrive on to continue their training. Intrigue is behind the staying power that pushed Avatar's earnings higher and there is no reason Disney cannot tap into this to push the earning potential of SW8. Diverse environments can be shown from desert and snow, to plush grassy paradises, dense jungle and planets with mysteriously deserted cities. He could take them to planets with weird, life threatening and unexpected terrain, strange lighting, creatures or events Luke deliberately throws them into as part of their training. At some point he could leave them in the middle of no-where, in a hostile environment they possibly may not survive, leave and tell them they must fight their way back to safety and his location using the Force. In the meantime as they move on from one training location to the next Kylo or Phasma could be shown menacingly arriving on one planet after another that was once used for their training using special galactic trackers. She periodically calls Kylo to inform him of her progress, sometimes interrupting the completion of his training under Snoke. He promises to join her on the hunt soon. This keeps the audience aware that while Luke trains Finn and Rey, it is only a matter of time before the nemeses the audience fear catches up to them. Luke, being able to sense their approach, is able to keep them one step ahead, which is how he has avoided them all these years, however, he knows they can run only for so long. On one occasion they could even be caught mid flight in between changing training locations, have one of those interesting space battles, narrowly escape and disappear into another hidden system for Luke to continue and complete their training. The proximity of this danger adds to the cinematic tension that will keep the audience's eyes glued to the screen.

Master Yoda : "Luminous beings are we.."

Luke's discovery of the skill and knowledge by which to bring together the dark, corporeal or material side of the Force and the light or incorporeal side of the Force as well as the ability to pass this knowledge on can be what qualifies him as fulfilling the prophecy that he would bring balance in the Force. This would bring necessary closure to this narrative. The mysterious ability to tap into the knowledge and teaching of all the Grand Masters by linking the corporeal and incorporeal worlds is likely to be the stupendous event that helps restore the decimated Jedi and brings balance to the Force. When they are in incorporeal form the Jedi are able to defy age and can be presented as more youthful and much younger versions of themselves. The Jedi do not fear death, some like Obi-wan even contemptuously turned off the light sabre and allowed themselves to be struck down knowing that if Luke fulfilled the prophecy they would be back bigger and badder. This mind blowing and unprecedented development  in Jedi history finally unraveled by Luke is expected and known to the Jedi. It can be viewed as the reason why Master Obi-wan Kenobi uttered the mysterious, chilling and threatening statement that must have had all Sith and enemies of the Jedi shaking in their boots, "If you strike me down I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine." That day it would seem has arrived as Rey stretches out her hand holding the old light Sabre towards Luke. It can also be the reason why the Sith have sought to exterminate every last Jedi, despite this Luke survived and the prophecy is fulfilled.

This narrative is also critical to channeling characters the audience will want to see in future spin-offs. These can be beefed up by having characters they otherwise would not be able to have without the corporeal and incorporeal story-line.

Luke's ability unifies the corporeal and incorporeal worlds of the Jedi! The audience finally understands 
why the Jedi have a strange contempt for a physical death.

How Disney executives can manage worlds corporeal and incorporeal in Star Wars

From an executives point of view there are two important reasons why Disney should find a formula that brings together incorporeal and corporeal worlds in Star Wars. The first is the business imperative. A character in Star Wars whether it is Yoda, Obi-wan or Anakin is a commercial asset for which it is necessary to maintain a return on investment. The audience forms a relationship with that character. Secondly these characters, their abilities, peculiarities and personalities are an important resource writers need when building a story or narrative that will keep the audience in their seats. When a character dies in Star Wars, which is often necessary it is not just a poetic death. It becomes a commercial loss since Disney  can longer actively use that asset in an ongoing narrative. It becomes a major loss for the writers and directors due to the fact that they lose viable material with which to build a narrative the audience is already connected with. The conclusion may be well, this is understood but how do you generate these two worlds and characters in perpetuity in a way that the audience-psychology will accept?

The best way to do this is to look at a long running Franchise that has already successfully pulled this off. I would recommend that Disney executives looks at Supernatural, the fantasy horror television series created by Eric Kripke on the Warner Brothers circuit.  The series stars Sam and Dean Winchester who are hunters of paranormal beings that have become a danger to society. Sam and Dean are portrayed by Jared Padalecki and Jensen Ackles.

Background

Supernatural, possibly for lack of creative new narratives after running for so long, eventually strayed into wacky religious ideas explored in the series where the lines are blurred between the understanding of good and evil. This has ensured that it is not really for everyone. In this sense it has become an acquired taste, stretches the imagination in how it chooses to interpret religious concepts about angels and heaven or demons and hell. This is the juncture at which the Supernatural narrative lost its direction in the same way distances cannot be measured when you lose the ruler. If, in Supernatural, angels are good and demons are evil then this is a guiding principle or measurement system for the fiction its trying to peddle. The audience can from then on understand why angels in the pursuit of good are sometimes portrayed as unintentionally causing evil, and demons in their pursuit of evil may sometimes unintentionally cause good or why angels fall and demons can find redemption. However, the fundamental error the writers in this series make is that they utterly disorient their audience significantly dropping the show's potentially higher ratings, literary and commercial success by sometimes portraying angels as inherently bad and demons as good creating an unsolvable and fumbled moral dilemma that inevitably will cause the Franchise to lose viewership. They attempt to bestow morality or the definition of what is right or good on the hunters instead of the angels which is a fantastic technical mistake on the part of the writers that must inexorably deteriorate the quality of this fiction and its commercial viability for a television audience.  When writing commercial fiction its important to understand that there is no limit and there are no rules to confine what you imagine or what you dream. However, for a dream to become an asset it cannot remain in the suspended vacuum of the mind of its creator. It must be shared. To be shared it must be conveyed. To be conveyed it must be presented in a manner the minds that receive it will understand it. These two dimensions cannot be crossed without a ruler or device for calibrating the direction and distance between them. This device is based on a simple and defined morality. If as a writer you throw away the measuring device then for all intents and purposes you yourself have lost your way because the audience cannot take the direction and cannot cover the distance your imagination wants to take them potentially rendering whatever it is that you author commercially inadequate. Dominion, is an interesting Syfy television series that suffered from this same moral "bent-rudder" problem in a genre where it was more critical to get this aspect right. Basically, what this means is that as a writer, director and studio you cannot present or portray an Archangel that is  considered a force of good in Biblical canon as "evil" or a "negative force", not even in a fictional commercial television or movie project without consequently putting off, turning away and discouraging the very demographic that may want to watch the show. When a studio makes this mistake a project may quickly become commercially unviable and a misuse or abuse of investor funds. Eventually it will simply not be watched, its ratings will decline and being considered "tainted", it will wind up in the dustbin because hardly any one in the audience will feel it warrants being remembered. Its cancellation was therefore inevitable.

For the writers of Supernatural scratching their heads for new ideas and story lines this gaping flaw represents a misuse of creativity: even marketable fiction has guidelines and fundamental principles evident in any natural society its best not to befuddle. Its best to stretch creativity to its limits in order to tell a story the audience will find interesting without falling prey to the temptation to taint your own work. Restoring guidelines and picking the ruler backup when developing narratives would dramatically improve the fortunes of this series. In its current state Supernatural is not for and will obviously be avoided by those who hold conservative views in this area. The creators of Supernatural do not expect the audience to take their show too seriously though; the bizarre, twisted, outlandish and often laughable misrepresentation of religious ideas are however presented in a way that is intended to be tongue-in-cheek and more for entertainment value than anything else. Anyone with a good sense of humour and an understanding of the difference between fact and fiction would see this, and enjoy watching it every week.

What is being looked at here is not the ethos of the the narrative and its adventures but rather the more technical methodology with which Kripke presents the coexistence of corporeal and incorporeal worlds. This methodology is likely to be ideal for a serious Franchise like Star Wars. Supernatural divides its worlds and manages them separately. Firstly these worlds have their own challenges, objectives, intrigues and societal existence which occasionally collide or coincide in the narrative. Adapting the Supernatural concept: "Heaven" would be an ideal construct for where the Jedi exist in the incorporeal universe whilst interacting with living Jedi. This incorporeal Jedi world would have its own agenda and pursuits such that when it is not in the mainstream narrative it is expected by the audience that life there still goes on. "Hell" would be an ideal construct for the incorporeal Sith whilst interacting with the living or physical Sith and life there similarly goes on with its own objectives and pursuits independent of the terra-firma narrative. Earth would be the ideal construct for the mainstream terra-firma narrative of the Star Wars physical world in which the audience sees Rey, Finn, Kylo and the rest of the cast. This structure allows new worlds to be introduced in a way that seems natural, the Supernatural series does this by occasionally inserting separate worlds like "Purgatory" and so on. For Star Wars this formula can be adapted as a world at the end of Episode 9 where a new civilization can be made to make its debut.

In the Supernatural fantasy the fictional angel Castiel portrayed by Misha Collins travels between these worlds and is able to assume a wholly physical form at will with supernatural attributes; a similar concept and methodology used for Castiel can be developed for the incorporeal Jedi who make an appearance on terra-firma for the first time through Luke's growth in knowledge of the Force which leads to the fulfillment of the Jedi prophecy concerning bringing balance to the Force. It may be important to note how when Castiel appears there is no tell-tale glow around him as is the case with the Jedi apparitions. This is also the probably the best method to apply in Star Wars. It would only be at specific times, e.g., in Supernatural its when Castiel powers up and reveals his wings that anyone can tell he is a angel. Similarly the audience would only see the Jedi glow used in previous episodes when they power up for example during battle. Only then would the audience see there is a difference between the corporeal and incorporeal beings interacting in scenes.  The series' methodology allows these separate worlds to co-exist in a manner that works, and interact with rules that can be adopted for Star Wars. In Supernatural different rules of engagement apply for how entities in the incorporeal world and corporeal world interact or travel between worlds. Personalities, places and objects can be summoned, expelled, possessed, exorcised, trapped, rendered immobile and so on in very specific ways using spells etc. In Star Wars this very specific way of controlling interaction between the two worlds can instead be controlled by gadgets and technology. The introduction of corporeal, incorporeal worlds and therefore immortal characters will be new to Star Wars. How do the Jedi and Sith in the corporeal world control and prevent the incorporeal from overwhelming them? The solution to this is that it can be part of the narrative that Rey after harrowing incorporeal experiences and interference, being adept at technology documents and builds gadgets based on light sabre technology that are able to do many of the same feats for which Supernatural uses the concept of spells. Her long list of gadgets go on to become part of Jedi history and lore, meanwhile the Sith may develop similar technology under Snoke (Snoke used technology to create a giant projection of himself when communicating with Kylo, this is can be a clue for associating him with Sith technology used in incorporeal exploits). Using technology ties in with the fact that Star Wars is a science fiction fantasy, therefore this direction is a perfect fit in the ongoing SW narrative. It will work and be accepted by audience-psychology as long as effort is made by the studio to present this as a form of advanced technology, after all Arthur C Clarke's third law states that Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

What Supernatural, does in an interesting way, is that it has these separate worlds rather than being static and wholly dependent on the main narrative in the physical world, instead constantly in the pursuit of their own agendas. They often face obstacles that cause one world's emissaries to begin to interfere in another world. Because the agendas and objectives in each world are different, in the Supernatural television series the pursuit of a good objective by heaven and an evil objective by hell can have repercussions for people living on earth in the corporeal world. Often these repercussions can have life threatening and negative consequences for innocent people going about their every day business. When this happens hunters Dean and Sam (e.g. Rey and Finn, living Jedi etc) have to step in to investigate the paranormal causes of a problem and offer protection or defend human beings from these dangers. The structure of this narrative would fit perfectly into the moral tensions between the Jedi, the Sith following an incorporeal agenda and those affiliated to these orders but who must also experience a natural corporeal life on terra-firma. Hell in Supernatural is lead by a character portrayed by Mark Sheppard, an ideal position to equate Emperor Snoke to. The volatility and continuous flow of these independent worlds as they each pursue their own objectives is an excellent structure to use for Star Wars. The disparate personal agendas of these worlds would generate many moral conflicts. Dean and Sam often go through periods of soul searching where they try to understand themselves, evaluate their own morality and their role as hunters. These conflicts would often cause both Jedi and Sith living in the corporeal world and facing their own problems there to consequently face powerful issues that force them persistently to question what good and evil are as well as their own innate morality. This will persistently sway them either towards the light and dark side of the Force. This is the type of political structure adapted for the Star Wars universe executives at Disney should be looking for to create a never ending Star Wars narrative that has no end point or expiry date, in terms financial returns and commercial viability. The tie in is so hand in glove, it would be awesome for Disney to collaborate with the writers etc and possibly ask some of these great actors who have honed their skills in this genre to play roles in future Star Wars movies. Jensen and Jared for instance are what a casting director is looking for to portray complex and conflicted Jedi or Sith, they already understand how to believably present these roles. Mark is a shoe in to portray a Sith Lord. Misha in the role of Castiel already expertly portrays the expressions, gaze, disposition and nuances of a Jedi Master. They understand this genre and since acting talent that knows what works is what is required for the success of this specific genre they are what a casting director will be looking for to move a film project to a higher level. As Disney's Star Wars universe expands it will have to create powerful spin-offs that are able to keep up with the main narrative in Episodes 7-9 in which case this is the kind of experienced talent a director making a fantasy like Star Wars would want on the team for the spin offs to be taken serious and to ensure their success.

Misha, Jensen and Jared a.k.a Castiel, Dean and
Sam from the Supernatural cast.

Helmets and other gear

Why does Kylo wear that helmet? I can understand why Vader wore his, he was injured so he had to. Is it just for style?  Is it an Ironman type of thing where it allows him to interact with electronic stuff? If so why not show a modern Ironman like view or heads up display around his face inside the helmet. That would be refreshing and more importantly he would not have to take it off unnecessarily. This also applies to Captain Phasma and any other interesting or key actors who will wear this type of head gear. The audience wants to see their faces, but they have to wear the helmets to be in character, but they can't keep taking off their helmets just so we see its a key actor; the middle ground is to design a heads up display that shows the actor's face. It will also help the audience to be able to see the helmeted character accessing data, receiving and sending information, activating doors or devices simply using their minds and the heads up display inside the helmet. Doing this for a few Storm Troopers will also help the audience understand why they wear this uncomfortable gear. It would be nice to see that there are distinct advantages to the helmets and plasticky suits they wear that makes the audience realize why they have to wear them other than for the suits to simply be a way of telling its a Star Wars movie.

SW7's Introduction of the Force

When Vader assesses Luke's training is complete by observing the quality of his light sabre, this kind of shows that a light saber is no ordinary weapon. It requires a Jedi's skill to turn on properly and wield. Even if a person can wield a sword does not mean they can wield a light saber. To see Finn and Rey turn on the light sabre and fight with it seemed irreverent. However, why this was done was to generate a certain pace in the move, so it can be understood in this sense. On the Jedi and Sith front, one gets the impression, like the quick insertion of Poe's one dimensional character, the ending of this movie was altered. This can be deduced from the fact that neither Finn nor Rey were sufficiently trained to face Kylo. Not by a long shot. They could have beaten and bested him in many ways; but not in the use of the Force, the skill gap was way too large. It would be different if they were both already renown Jedi with reputations.  However, they were rookies. What was believable and immensely entertaining was Rey's ability to withstand Kylo probing her mind; this type of besting of Kylo is the level that should have been used. This is a confrontation they simply could not have realistically survived. The only person skilled enough to face Kylo, was Luke Skywalker. Consequently this ending was most likely re-written. At some point in the confrontation Luke was meant to appear, fend off/defeat Kylo, save Finn and Ray but this was  changed toward the very end. Evidence of this is in Ray's rather hasty fast forwarded almost silly-billy-willy-nilly spontaneous and out of the blue ability to control and use of the force that almost ruined the movie. There are many other creative ways she could have gotten out of that situation with her knowledge of technology and gadgets. However, again its quite easy to see why this was done.

There's a need to move Jedi and Sith brawls to another level

The fight Rey and Finn had against Kylo was nice, not too scripted, but scripted enough. Having studied martial arts myself, this improvised fighting method used in SW7 can very easily go wrong in a movie. What the director should actually be looking for is a martial art for Rey, Finn and other fighters who use sabres that does not use common methods for taking down opponents, is scripted but unexpectedly unique. Looking at previous movies, I would encourage the Franchise to bring in someone specific for this, like Steven Seagal or apply a similar style to his. Steven or a professional who understands his technique will be able to craft a fighting style for both the Jedi and Sith that appears swift, brutal, semi-scripted to show they have been trained to fight but without the showy overly scripted flamboyance seen in Episodes 1-3 For Star Wars you need a fighting technique that draws on Aikido, but since the fighters will tend to be at a distance from another because of their swords there is also a need to find ways of bringing them in close. Very importantly the director needs to exploit the biggest advantage of a light saber and this is the ability to spontaneously "sheath" the blade into the hilt while moving and fully engaged in a tussle. The Franchise has to invest in the the fighting art of the disarmed Jedil. The audience is so accustomed to the light sabre being in hand it is time to begin to explore other mixed methods of fighing. By forcing two combatants to instantly sheath their light saber's at times in unison when in very close combat and resort to fists this allows for many other fighting techniques to be applied even unlikely methods found in Judo and Jujistu. Sheathing and unsheathing light sabres smoothly but spontaneously while in deadly combat should be  the way Jedi and Sith fight otherwise a perpetually drawn or unsheathed light sabre severely limits the drama of sheathing and unsheathing the light sabre blade and also severely limits various fighting styles that can be applied, especially in close combat. The audience should be shown, for instance when Luke trains Rey in Episode 8, that a drawn light sabre does not guarantee the wielder superiority over an opponent using the Force and that at times a Jedi must sheath the blade and resort to hands or fists for self defence or to gain an advantage over an opponent with a sabre especially in very close combat e,g Luke could teach Rey that in very close combat when you are nose to nose and see your opponent sheath his or her light sabre, immediately sheath yours too and prepare to counter because their next move could end your life or cause a severe injury. Sabres also malfunction, they can be damaged, ripped out of the hand by the Force and so on therefore how to successfully and consistently face an opponent with a sabre while you are empty handed should be introduced by the Franchise to spice up these confrontations. Wouldn't it be cool to have Rey's light sabre taken from her during battle, but because of her training under Luke fight back furiously against an opponent with a sabre and win the battle by disarming them. Situations in which one combatant turns off his or her light sabre, fastens it to the hilt and skilfully fights an opponent with a full drawn sabre should be encouraged. Its all about technique and creativity. Kylo piercing Finn's shoulder with the light sabre was excellent, it shows that this movie was not child's play. The pace, tempo and thrill would have been almost none-existent had all these alterations not happened. There was a need to focus on the two characters who held this movie together and kept it together like a heartbeat through sheer talent, Daisy Ridely and John Boyega. Thank the casting director who chose these two, whatever was seen in them is what made this movie rise to the challenge; they brought it, all the way.

With Luke written out and moved to the very end of the movie his role would have previously been to provide the Jedi skill to fill the gap that Rey now had to spontaneously develop. But this was like trying to bring a formula one racing car doing more than 100 miles an hour around a sharp bend, it almost crashed. Daisy's acting talent made it believable and is what kept this vehicle on the road despite the misplaced jump in ability to use the Force, and watching her pull this off on the screen is what must have given JJ and others the confidence to go through with this option. What it therefore lacked was development earlier in the movie to justify how it could happen that rookies like Rey and Finn could hold back Kylo. By the way starting them off as raw, was a very good strategy as it allows the audience to watch their fighting and other skills evolve. The only real problem this created was for Kylo as the audience now wasn't sure what to make of him, should it fear him or not? This is not Batman, Superman or Captain America who already have movies where they have been "made" or proven. This is Kylo's first introduction to the audience; therefore he hasn't been "made" yet so a defeat like the one he suffered can hurt him especially for someone the audience is given the impression at the start is very skilled in the use of the Force and high up in the First Order. It made him seem a little silly and rather ridiculous to come across as so tough, take Han's life, even able to halt a blast in mid flight and then be defeated by two consummate rookies. This made Kylo come across as a bit of a clown, an idiot or pretender, who should not have been as high up in the first order as he was placed. The problem here ofcourse was not Kylo, who played the part exceptionally, but the flow of the narrative, which in turn was affected by editing that was made along the way. These changes were probably necessary, and Kylo had to be sacrificed a little. I would say whoever did the last minute editing saved this movie, yes some aspects had to be sacrificed, but it had to be done to move this movie from mundane to watchable. If this trend continues the next one will be even greater. The best way to spin this in the next sequel is to say that Kylo dramatised and orchestrated his own defeat at the hands of rookies Rey and Finn in order to place some kind of temporary Sith link in Rey's consciousness that would later allow him to trace her path to Luke Skywalker and that would activate or trigger an extrasensory perception he could feel in the Force should she ever make contact with him. This was after all his main objective in the movie from the very beginning. Seeing Rey's budding Jedi ability, he must have concluded Luke would seek her out and with R2D2 suddenly booting up this is very plausible. If this is true then Kylo is a kind of mad genius with an interest in the theatrical who allows himself to play the fool only to turn the tables, exactly what he did with Han on the bridge. He is a basically a socio-path that can alter his emotions and feelings convincingly enough to fool anyone and those who engage him have to be warned in advance about this sinister quality. Even now I can imagine Kylo staggering around in pain and striking his wounded side, re-enacting the battle then bursting into uncontrollable laughter at his own cunning with a menacing gleam in his eyes. He pretended to let down his defenses to allow Han to come close enough before he ran the light sabre through him. This tendency to want to dramatize and play the fool, to masquerade, to acquiesce to self deprecation in order to gain the upper hand could become Kyo's mo, it would forge a unique and memorable character for him distinct form Vader and any other important character in Star Wars. It would be a stroke of genius on the part of JJ and the Franchise.

Other characters and cast

Magical moments include the interaction between Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher. Harrison is an all time favourite, He's one of greats and always fun to watch. Carrie has very strong screen presence, her acting ability is not ordinary; its extra-ordinary. Even today after so many years her presence on the screen is as strong as ever. Her level of ability is rare; I wonder if she is aware of this. Maz Kanata was also a nice character. Once again her face was a little babyish, that dangerous trend toward creating images that are directed at appealing to children, but the quality of the portrayal by Lupita Nyongo was decent making the audience warm to her character. Maz Kanata was diminutive and yet the owner or in control of that place with the many flags which was filled with all sorts of characters and some unsavory types. There must be much more to her than we saw for her to be in charge of a place like that, it would be interesting to find out who she really is in the sequel. After Finn's role in  deserting, helping Poe escape and destroying Starkiller right under the First Orders nose, there is going to be a serious bounty on his head unlike any seen before in Star Wars and at the head of the squad sent to try to bring back his scalp is likely to be an irate Captain Phasma.

More work needs to be done on supreme leader Snoke, his characterisation is off, his visage, the way he speaks and mannerisms are a little too Harry-Potterish and not in a good way. Harry Potter is a children's fantasy adults can watch, but Star Wars is an adult Sci-fi children can later appreciate. Snoke gives off a vibe that he is a version of Voldemort. Come to think of it Voldemort's character is modelled using a snake as the template. Therefore the name Snoke, may in fact be a SW7 tongue in cheek ode to the snake character and its personification through Voldemort brilliantly portrayed by Ralph Fiennes in Harry Potter. This indicates Star Wars is much deeper in the audience targeting problem than first diagnosed. The direction is excellent if it indicates that the SW7 sci-fi fantasy  is going to explore sorcery, the incorporeal and magic and so on. However, you shouldn't use Harry Potter as the template for how the Franchise may do this as this mistake indicates that the SW7 Franchise is being created incorrectly with kids as the primary target audience. Big mistake. I urge you to find another more appropriate inspiration for this that will not derail the gains made thus far, for example Lord of the Rings; Aragorn, presented by Viggo Mortensen. Study how he enters the Paths of the Dead in this movie and most importantly that moment when his sword stops the incorporeal sword of the leader of the Dead Men of Dunharrow. The moment those two swords meet one in the living world the other in the incorporeal; that element, feel and tone is what the SW7 Franchise should use as its template for how to go about this, not the  Harry Potter (HP) template as HP and SW7 do not target the same audience. HP is useful for special effects and how to materialize the deceased and bring them into the physical world of the fantasy, but not in other aspects. This is a methodology Disney must learn to get right for its own financial and commercial wellbeing. Disney is renown for being primarily a Studio that produces works targeted at children. However, the Studio has bought or taken over material like SW7 that is distinctly targeted at an adult audience and may inadvertently make the big mistake of trying to kiddify it. Disney therefore seems to be conflicted and at times confused about who it is making some of these productions for. Disney must not be hesitant or afraid to set its primary target e.g. adults for movies like SW7 and kids for movies like Warner Brother's Harry Potter and should not allow itself to mix this process or targeting up or the Studio will lose money at the box office with movies that were supposed to be a sure thing but tanked as mentioned before, such as Tomorrowland. At the end of the day making movies is a business and if you don't get this right the Studio and Franchise will lose money. The executives at Disney need to understand this process and inculcate this business approach to how the Studio will make and present its movies. There is a very big difference between these two Franchises even though they are both fiction/fantasies. You can be the most gifted director in the world, ranked amongst the best, but the ability to separate this audience and align the movie with the correct target audience will make or break your final product. You have to choose early on and from the very beginning whether the movie you are making is for children or for adults because you cannot target both these audiences at the same time, you can't shoot two disparate targets of this nature at the same time with one bullet or else your project, even if it is an exciting one with notable actors is very likely to fail. Its important to set the adult or children target from the beginning in any project and not be wishy-washy about it as it will affect the writing, the dialogue, the tone, the music, the design, concept art and so on which can all be messed up by fumbling the ball leaving the studio none the wiser about how or why a movie underperformed. This targeting problem affects science fiction and fantasy genres the hardest. If these are a hit, then it is likely one audience was targeted and the other just happened to like the content; if you try to serve both adults and children at the same time in your methodology and approach to creating a movie both will hate it and you will never quite understand what went wrong with a sure thing. Try to understand this problem like this. You are a studio like Disney, the art director, writer, and movie director and your client is not people per say but fundamental human psychology. You take the measurements and begin to hand tailor a tuxedo complete with bow tie for your client. The result is an exquisite tux. When it is given to the client it simply can't be worn because legs can barely enter the trousers as they are too tight, the shirt will not button as the buttons can't reach the button-holes; arms will not fit into the jacket. When the tux is placed on a hanger its clearly for a child not an adult and yet a tuxedo is something adults usually wear. Form a distance you cannot tell if the tux is for a child or an adult until the audience's psychology tries to wear it. . Lots of time was put into the production of a movie, but though the final product looks decent human psychology fails to put it on. The human condition can't wear or can't process it because its improperly targeted. The movie will fail, The problem may never be spotted or understood by its makers due to the fact they keep looking at the tux and it looks perfectly made, indeed it is, but because the fit, proportions, or targeting are off its actually a failed movie. What is lacking is the ability or skill to observe and proportionally determine what has gone wrong. Many movie productions, even those with a big budget and all the right ingredients suffer form this problem and consequently fail leaving everyone wondering what really happened. Its important not to mix up or confuse the target audience. Darth Sidious had an appearance that was definitely  more chilling, he had childish tantrums but he and even these were directed more toward an adult audience. It would appear that Snoke will play a bigger role in the next instalment so there is still time to work on how he looks and talks. The way he speaks is too "nerdy" and childish for someone presumably as sinister and as high up as he is. Andy Serkis needs to seriously revisit his portrayal of this character. Andy is  adept at this craft, but it may be necessary to remember that Snoke is a Sith overlord, right now the portrayal does not give the impression that this is a man who understands the Dark Side, power, and has fought his way to the top to get it. Some members of the First Order, like General Huck especially when he addresses the troops in the square, also give off this same vibe. It comes across as if they are "play acting" which would be ok in a children's movie, but not in an adult movie where "play acting" a part makes it difficult to believe their roles or take them seriously as villains. They are not  those eerily sophisticated types in Star Wars 3-4 who tell a pilot "You may start your landing." Watch Vader's interaction with the crew in Star Wars 3-4 when they come out of light speed too close to the rebel system. There is nothing about these interactions that says childish or targeted at what kids might fancy. The quality and tone is distinctly targeted at an adult audience. It doesn't mean it can't be somewhat funny or comical, it just means that the sniper's scope for the movie, the methodology, the execution and who it is directed at: kids or adults are very clearly understood by the Studio and the director. The tone consequently sets interest from the audience and whether a blockbuster has been created or not. When it comes to villains, no matter how distasteful, be careful not to portray them as dweebs; a villain must be portrayed as formidable as this helps improve the audiences perception of the hero who challenges them. However, the giant image of Snoke was visually interesting, very nice, and turning the image into a hologram just when the audience is thinking what the heck is he, a giant? that too was brilliant. The method used here, where Snoke's image appeared semi-transparent and actually wasn't really there can be used to build an entire new direction for Star Wars based on an incorporeal world where the presence of the deceased in the same space and world of the living can be explained using technology and science as a projection of some kind manipulated using the Force that can be observed with appropriate technology. The ability of deceased Jedi to take physical form can be paired with their telekinetic ability and ability to compress matter around them.

This video demonstrates the overall tone in Star Wars.

The targeting is unmistakably for adults rather than kids. 

    "You may start your landing..."



BB8

BB8 was nice to watch. More work could have been done to make him more "bad ass", more adult so to speak. For example the way he could shoot out hooks with lines to pull himself up, the way he turns his head, moves it around the ball it rides and other aspects could have been capable of being more menacing, pushed a little further to make him appear more lethal, but with the occasional soft shots, like the one where he peers around the corner or flicks out the lighter as a thumbs up. To come across as more adult BB8 will have to pull more awesome stunts and gadgets that a "toyish" thing could not possibly be expected to do or have.

What I would suggest the Franchise consider for BB8 is make the audience believe his gentle appearance is in fact a decoy, used to hide the fact that he is a highly adept battle droid with exceptional defence capabilities. The means to demonstrate this is to put BB8 up against a lethal first order droid of similar occupation that threatens Finn, Rey or Poe. They are in a position where they are disarmed and can't fight back. The audience thinks they are done for. The menacing first order droid moves in for the kill, but to everyone's amazement BB8 intervenes. Uses his hooks and lines to move agilely around the droid as well as other hidden gadgets to execute a number of impressive strikes, bringing it down in such a heroic and shocking manner that the audience realises he is no ordinary droid.

Design and Concept Art

The artwork, composition, attention to detail and quality of the aliens in Star Wars 7 cannot go without mention. These deserve an Academy Award. The aliens look and feel believable. They are tastefully portrayed. These are amongst the best I have ever seen in any movie to date. They put to shame the weak nonsense being given to movie audiences in the form of "Doomsday" in the upcoming Batman Vs Superman movie where design, and concept art for such characters seems to be interpreted as making something look revolting, talentless and cheap. This poorly supervised approach to delivering design and concept art in a movie appears to lack due diligence by the Studio and is very bad for business in the long term.  Its actually very disappointing to watch Studios with the income and the talent to produce excellent, compelling design and concept art sink into such mediocrity simply because no one is paying sufficient attention to what's going on in the production process. It is not money well spent, no different from a bad investment and playing with other people's money. A movie in a Franchise is only as lucrative as the new audience it will attract to watch it and the pull factor that will cause the audience to want to watch the next instalment. Without appropriate quality controls or the ability to spot flaws in the work being presented to the Studio by artisans working on a project a movie is no different from any other bad business investment. The design and concept art in Star Wars 7 shows what a real artist can achieve when he or she takes their profession seriously and the direction in which a movie is going is understood. The aliens may have been in the background,  understated in SW7, but this is only because other than Chewbacca and Maz Kanata there was no alien with a major up front and centre role in the movie, nevertheless the visual quality of this work was exceptional. Really guys, well done, its people like you who make going to the movies worthwhile .    



The quality of the design and concept art for creating and depicting aliens
 in SW7 is the best thus far. Well done.

 Assessing the way forward

My assessment is that everyone who worked on this movie did a very good job. It must be a very difficult project because it comes with a lot of baggage. The flight scenes and jumps into hyper space where awesome; they felt very real. What direction should Star Wars 7 the coming prequels go? My personal observation is that Return of the Jedi clearly gives the Franchise the direction it should be going, where is this? In the final scene where Anakin, Obi wan Kenobi and Yoda appear as shining apparitions at the end of the movie. I feel technically this is truly where Start Wars left and it is precisely were the next phase in the adventure should head. The Studio, producers and director need to be able to see this opportunity. If they are not dead then where are they? What other civilisations live in this alternate world? Why do some Jedi's bodies literally  disappear from the physical world when they fall in battle? Why did Yoda tell Luke during training that people are more than just flesh or physical bodies? If so then what more are they? Its as if the entire Star Wars tale is to prepare the audience for this cross-over or hyper jump into the mysterious, creepy, frightening, intriguing and fantastic world of the incorporeal where the story can get bigger and "badder". But this opportunity and leap has yet to happen. This other creepy universe is the direction the Franchise should look at in terms of where to go from here and treat as just another expansion of the universe, a jump into an unknown and hidden dimension made possible by enhancements in Star Wars technology. It allows the Franchise to bring back a host of characters, Yoda, Vader and so on. The secret to the Studio and director pulling this off realistically is to flip the script on the audience and present the incorporeal world as the real world and the physical world the present SW7 characters inhabit as a "dreamlike-world" in which human beings are in a kind of primitive "transit" before they pass on. Doing this breaks the "which universe is the real one" problem the audience will face when it processes this narrative. There is a huge amount of new intrigue and material that the Franchise and writers can hew from this; it simply can't be ignored. I can visualise Rey talking to a little green man, deep in conversation, he nods every now again agreeing with what she's saying. They're in a shadowy hallway. The camera moves in close and round them. It reveals he has large,  pointy ears. There's a shock of dark hair braided down his back. He is dressed like a Jedi, a formidable and yet calm stance with his hands behind his back. His features look familiar. But no..no it can't be. There's no hunch on his back, he's much taller. His complexion is smooth and there is the power of youth in his eyes. He appears the same age as Rey. It couldn't be... and as the camera moves to his side suddenly his head turns and he looks straight into the lens at the audience with stern piercing eyes as though they are intruding on his conversation, right there, in that moment, there's no mistaking it, this is... Master Yoda self materialized from the incorporeal zone to tend to a new threat.  Imagine this were an actual scene in the next movie? Wow....I'm awestruck just thinking about it.

The very creepy way in which the light sabre in Kanata's laire calls to Rey, now that tone in the movie, if that had permeated more: that weird, whats going on, other worldly, mind bending,ghostly, horrorish feeling evoked by how that part of the movie was presented harks back to what made Star Wars great, that right there, try to hold onto and work that feeling using that technique in the next one. That feeling where the audience is uncomfortable, screaming to Rey no Rey, don't go in through that door, but she does anyway then no,no whatever you do don't open that box, but its exactly what she does, that thread right there is where the Star Wars blockbuster will be found in future; that was more thrilling and more frightening than the creature on the Millennium Falcon chasing them down. It is therefore to do with the methodology used for presenting these scenes rather than the props. Focus on this and apply this method more thoroughly to the next one.

The Franchise is probably afraid to make the jump into hyper space that brings together separate worlds of life and death. This fear shows that it is a new area, if this fear was not there it would not be the next big hit for this Sci-Fi to take; use advances in technology to blur the distinct lines between living and non living, fear is precisely why the Franchise should do so; its the next challenge to pull off in this fictional tale. This direction is absolutely necessary due to the fact that the Star Wars story is spent, the audience can feel the fastenings holding up the Franchise groaning with strain, ready to snap. The story cannot keep being rehashed, Millennium Falcon's interior and exterior need to be modernized. Please, please don't show us that outdated interior and exterior again. Reinvent that ship, give it to the "pimp my ride" of the Dagobah system if need be for goodness sake. The SW7 sequels cannot and should not linger in the past in terms of the stylistic content and the Franchise's view on technology, objects and the narrative. Resist the urge to regurgitate the stuff that was designed in the 70s and 80s, even back then it was just an interpretation. Those pointy wedges and grids for targeting? No, No please, spare us!, instead use sophisticated digital targeting, touch screens, update the antiquated style of technology; present the same but reinterpret and modernize it; break with that outdated style. That was ok for this first reintroduction, but having to see that stuff again or watch another story rehashed will be like being forced to eat an old shoe at a gourmet restaurant.

Another important point for Disney and the Star Wars Franchise to consider in Episode 8, that is also long over-due is the debut of a third previously unheard of civilization to the world of Star Wars. This third and powerful civilization will throw the Empire (First Order) and Rebels (the Resistance) into a tail spin forcing them to re-re-evaluate their place in the universe and to try to make sense of their rivalry in the wake of this new and mysterious threat. This new civilization is so accomplished and remarkable that it forces the Jedi and the Sith, the Order and the Resistance to temporarily set aside their differences, even work together in an uneasy truce in order to assess the the level of threat new comers present and if they can be trusted or not. It should make absolutely no sense for them to keep attacking each other as this new civilization begins to penetrate their space, their cities, culture, politics, trade and very existence when questions remain unanswered : what is their true motive, where have they truly come form, why is it that nothing about them is known until this time? They may first come in peace but investigations may very quickly begin later to show that they do not come as docile visitors but conquerors. I have spoken of the need for this angle before. It is quite necessary to begin to introduce snippets of this new civilization in SW8 by having strange ships appear and disappear from both the Order and the Resistance radar. For example during Rey and Finn's confrontation with Kylo these people would mysteriously appear and be seen to observe the battle, flick open equipment showing they are recording and documenting the event and then vanish to a ship floating in the distance. A ship the audience has never seen in the Star Wars universe before. These kinds of mysterious appearances could have and should have begun in SW7 without interfering with the narrative or the movie that was SW7, but the audience, on seeing this presence unseen by the SW7 cast would have sat up and said "What the heck was that!" The Franchise would provide no explanation of these people and their civilization to the audience until the very end of Episode 9 when they make a dramatic entrance and turn the Star Wars fictional political universe upside down somewhat like Luke's appearance. If Star Wars is to develop a narrative, cinematic experience and sufficient material to extend powerfully beyond a 9th Episode it must begin to lay the foundation for this intrigue now, the opportunity to begin to do this was already  missed in SW7. It has to begin in SW8 as to begin to do so by SW9 will be too late to provide sufficient texture to this narrative. In SW8 and 9, the Jedi and Sith could be shown feeling or sensing that they are being watched, but unable to pinpoint where this feeling is coming from. Robots like BB8 and R2D2 may be able to pick up these stealthy intrusions on their sensors, try to warn the others but be dismissed as malfunctioning. The audience will clearly see that something us brewing. It may take the Franchise the duration of SW8 and SW9 to fully develop every aspect and detail of this new civilization under very tight wraps , but this does not prevent glimpses of its mysterious scouts and their stealthy vessels needling the audience and rousing their interest while the SW8 and 9 movies are made and eventually screened. This new civilization will be in search of exerting its own kind of influence in the Star Wars universe. It will have its own flavor of Force users, its own version of an army of Storm Troopers (possibly fashioned around the concept of the Elves in Lord of the Rings but with the concept art twist that they are a technologically advanced civilization). They will have their own flavor of leaders and lords as well as unique technological advancements that are at times indistinguishable from sorcery. Even their version of Force users do not recognize, use or understand the Force as it has been portrayed thus far. Their unique interpretation of it allows their Force users to exhibit abilities the Sith and Jedi both considered impossible. As the SW8 story progresses into SW9 the mysterious appearances become more intrusive on screen. The approach of this civilization into the Star Wars universe, its dramatic unveiling at the end of SW9 can be used to gain enough new material, momentum and intrigue to launch or catapult the Star Wars Franchise into a new Saga in Episodes 10, 11 and 12. 

In all hats off to JJ Abrams, well done, you didn't disappoint. This was a great re-introduction to link the new narrative to the past. Now, please in the next instalment take Star Wars to the next level and blow our minds with new worlds never before seen! Rian Johnson who directed Loopers takes the wheel in episode 8. Let's wish him all the best in the next instalment of this sci-fi adventure.