Despite the fact crime drama series Castle has yet to be renewed for a ninth season, it appears if the show does come back it will be filled with changes. Stana Katic has decided not to return as police captain Katherine Beckett. Also dropping from the cast is Tamala Jones, who played medical examiner Dr. Lanie Parish. Though the loss of Jones from the cast alone would come as a blow, fans are curious how the show will continue without Katic as her chemistry with Nathan Fillion who played main character Richard Castle was the driving force of the series. The characters become so close they were able to grow from colleagues, to lovers, and finally got married in season seven. What will the show become without her?
Speculatively, the show is primed to jump the shark (the expression used when a show goes far away from its original premise) without being centered on the relationship between Beckett and Castle. Since the first episode it was the interaction between the characters which made it possible for the series to have eight seasons. What will they do without this appeal? Try introducing a new character? A love interest for Castle with Beckett gone? Have the show focus more on Castle playing a private investigator? Whatever the case, the premise sounds weak without the dynamic of the Castle and Beckett relationship. It may be time to pack it up and call it quits. Without the magic which made the series so appealing, talks of cut backs, and major cast members jumping ship, the ninth season has all the makings of becoming another tacked on unneeded season in the same vein of Scrubs: Med School.
Another week, another episode of Outlander. And, as I predicted, it seems as though the bulk of the show will be set in the 18th century and will focus on Jamie and Claire‘s efforts to put an end to the Jacobite uprising. Claire’s relatively stable life in the 20th century will likely be revealed to the audience in snippets few and far between over the remainder of the season. It’s likely, then, that there won’t be too much discussion of time travel or other standard fantasy/science fiction fare in the second season of Outlander. Instead, the show will probably revert back to its first season format, that of historical fiction melodrama. It is possible, of course, that Claire and company may meet other time travelers along the way: last season Claire met the ill-fated Geillis Duncan (Lotte Verbeek) who had traveled to the 18th century from the 1960s. Enough speculation, though, on with the recap …
“Not in Scotland Anymore” – The Recap
Jamie’s night terrors are straight out of a Tarantino film
“Not in Scotland Anymore” began with a relatively familiar scene: Jamie and Claire engaged in connubial bliss. Their passion is interrupted abruptly, though, when Claire turns into “Black Jack” Randall (don’t you hate it when that happens?). Jamie in a fit of rage stabs Randall repeatedly but Randall doesn’t die. Instead, Jamie wakes up from his night terror, startling a sleeping Claire. Jamie says that he won’t be able to fall asleep again that night. While Jamie battles his inner demons, though, Claire is busy learning the ins and outs of running an 18th century household in France.
“Not in Scotland Anymore” worked to situate Claire, Jamie, and Murtagh in their new surroudings. One strong element in this episode was making Jamie and Murtagh seem more out of place in France than Claire. Claire’s unflappable 20th-century nature and comparative worldliness makes her seem more fashionable and more intimidating than the two Scotsmen. That being said, Claire’s decidedly modern approach to housekeeping isn’t making her servants happy: in one scene, Claire’s chambermaid makes her promise to stop making her own bed.
Having been called out for her domestic improprieties by her maid, Claire decides to do what she knows best and takes a carriage to the local apothecary shop. After a brief discussion of her credentials and identity, the apothecary, Master Raymond (Dominique Pinon), admits to knowing the name “Claire Fraser” and having heard of her involvement in the burning of St. Germain’s ship. Raymond claims that he is no friend of St. Germain and that any enemy of St. Germain’s is a friend of his. He warmly provides Claire with a gift of the herbs she needs to make a sleeping potion for Jamie.
Jamie, meanwhile, is attempting to ensure that he sleeps through the night in a different way. He and Murtagh, both longing for their home, engage in Highland training and strengthening exercises. Jamie still hasn’t regained the full use of one of his hands after his torture by “Black Jack” Randall. The two draw quite a crowd of nosy onlookers during their practice duel, but these quickly disperse after a few prophetic words from Murtagh involving the fate of each person’s balls should they continue to gawk. As the crowd disperses, the two Highlanders discuss how they can go about stopping the Jacobite uprising. Murtagh suggests murdering Charles Stuart, the Pretender to the English Throne and figurehead of the uprising. Jamie rejects this idea, though, reminding Murtagh that Charles’s father, the deposed King James, would likely take up the Jacobite Cause to avenge his son’s murder. Murtagh wants action but Jamie wants a plan.
Like most royalty, Charles III’s a bit full of himself
Claire, Jamie, and Murtagh, perplexed as to what this plan should entail, happily receive a letter from Charles Stuart (Andrew Gower) requesting that Jamie meet with him concerning the willingness of the Scottish tribes to engage in a war with England on his behalf. Jamie and Murtagh meet the “Bonnie Prince” in a bordello and while the three talk it becomes apparent that Charles is little more than a petulant boy who wants his throne back. Jamie tries to convince the Pretender to the Throne that the Scottish tribes are in disarray, unable to agree on “the colour of the sky.”
Stuart, though, takes no heed of Jamie’s warning saying that his own divine right is undeniable. He is convinced that the Scottish tribes will unite around him because he is an extension of God’s divine will. In addition to not heeding any of Jamie’s advice, Charles charges him with the task of meeting with the French Finance Minister at King Louis XV’s Court to soften him up to the Jacobite Cause. Their meeting over, Charles takes his leave of the two Scots in order to pursue his favourite pastime, whoring–truly, a sage and holy man. Murtagh reminds Jamie that it’s not too late to kill him.
Claire, intent upon getting Jamie into Court in order to butter up the French Finance Minister, pays a visit to her friend Louise de La Tour (Claire Sermonne) in the middle of a very revealing waxing session. Claire is able to secure an invitation to Court and also meet Mary Hawkins (Rosie Day), a young woman de La Tour is chaperoning before she gets married off to a much older man with warts on his face. Claire remembers the name “Mary Hawkins” from somewhere but can’t quite put her finger on where.
Claire’s wasn’t the lowest neckline at Louis XV’s Court
That night Claire reveals not only the fact that she secured an invitation to King Louis’s Court for Jamie, herself, and Murtagh but also the fact that, after being inspired by de La Tour, she is now hairless below the waist. Jamie is quite intrigued and it seems for a few moments that Claire’s change of grooming may just be the change the Frasers need to get their sex life started again. That hope is short-lived, though. After just a bit of kissing, Jamie experiences flashbacks to his brutal rape at the hands of “Black Jack” Randall, making Claire’s painful sacrifice a source of frustration more than anything else.
So it’s off to the Court of King Louis XV for Claire, Jamie, and Murtagh. Claire meets some resistance on her way out the door, though, because of her dress’s plunging neckline. Jamie is concerned that Claire’s dress will be considered scandalous but Claire’s tenacity wins the day and the three set off in their carriage.
The zany action starts pretty quickly at Court. The French Finance Minister, Joseph Duverney (Marc Duret), under a false impression from Louise de La Tour, believes that Claire is sexually interested in him. After a pronounced rebuff from Claire and a toss in the river from Jamie, though, this misunderstanding is quickly set straight. Luckily, Duverney wants to keep the whole misunderstanding a secret from his own wife and seeks, ironically, to ingratiate himself to Jamie.
King Louis XV, everyone!
The audience was also subject to one of the strangest bits featured on Outlander so far, namely Jamie’s witnessing of King Louis XV’s “dressing,” which involved not only the King’s getting dressed but also his trying to take a Royal Crap. The King’s advisors, all gathered around the “throne,” offer advice, “Relax!” “Bear down!” Jamie’s advice, though, seems to be the key: eat porridge. This odd scene allowed Jamie to ingratiate himself with King Louis XV (Lionel Lingelser) and offer some comic relief, but over the top doesn’t even begin to describe it.
“Not in Scotland Anymore” offered one final bit of drama when Claire and company ran into the Duke of Sandringham (Simon Callow), whom they met last season in an attempt to file a complaint against “Black Jack” Randall. He apologizes for his inability to have the complaint filed, telling the three that Randall had prevented him. In an attempt to keep things civil, Claire suggests that Murtagh and Jamie go and talk with Duverney: the Duke remarks that Claire is adept at finding powerful allies through any means and introduces her to his attendant Alexander Randall, brother of “Black Jack.” Aside from Claire’s conflicting feelings about Alex’s courtship of the young Mary Hawkins, Claire also learns from Alex that his brother is still alive, having only suffered some minor injuries during their last en-cow-nter in season one. “Not in Scotland Anymore” ends with Claire trying to decide whether or not to tell Jamie of this news.
“Not in Scotland Anymore” – My Critique
“Not in Scotland Anymore” helped get a couple of balls rolling in terms of the plot but did so in a drawn-out way. The majority of the episode dealt in character development and setting up Outlander’s new setting. I think it’s good that the audience sees some of the effects of Jamie’s PTSD, not glossing over the long-term effects of rape in order to keep the show’s titillation factor up.
I was also happy to learn that “Black Jack” Randall, the real villain of the show, wasn’t unceremoniously trampled by a herd of cattle. A story is only as good as its villain is awful and conniving, and you can’t get much worse than “Black Jack.”
I was a bit distracted by the opulence of King Louis XV’s Court. And, though I imagine that “Not in Scotland Anymore” showed a relatively accurate depiction of a typical night there, this was such an active setting that it took over. The scene depicting the Royal Constipation was as ridiculous as I hope the show gets. The historical accuracy of having to witness a monarch trying to take a dump notwithstanding, this was a bit too much comic relief for me, reminding me of the nigh-unwatchable first-season episode that depicted Claire roaming the Scottish countryside singing her own version of “Boogie Woogie Bugle Boy” set to traditional Scottish folk lyrics in order to locate a kidnapped Jamie.
Martin Scorsese knows 1970’s New York; Mick Jagger knows rock and roll; Terence Winter knows drama. So expectations were high when these three guys came together to produce Vinyl, HBO’s new show about a struggling New York City record company in 1973. Season one is officially in the books, so we can finally go back, look at it as a whole (which is usually necessary with these premium cable dramas), and ask, “was it worth watching?”
First things first, this soundtrack is amazing; whoever put it together deserves an award. It’s hands down the best part of the entire show (much like music was the best part of the 70’s), and it enhances the viewing experience as a whole. The tracks blend seamlessly into the story, and are the perfect mix of rock, funk, pop, and everything else that the decade had to offer. And if you’re thinking, “there’s no way the soundtrack can be that good,” go listen to the official Vinyl playlist on Spotify and prepare to eat crow.
In that same vein, the plot itself is best when it focuses on the music element. Bobby Cannavale plays Richie Finestra, head of the struggling American Century Records. At the start of the season, American Century is about to be bought out by a German conglomerate, much to the pleasure of Richie’s partner played by Ray Romano, J. C. MacKenzie, and P. J. Byrne. But Richie backs out at the last minute, having had a drug fueled epiphany and believing that he can save the company by refocusing on music that makes people feel alive. The rest of the season focuses mainly on this endeavor, and the roller coaster ride that it is for everyone involved.
The story of Richie and American Century rocks (…get it?). It’s a backstage tour of the music industry during its craziest and most interesting era, featuring portrayals of icons like Alice Cooper and David Bowie, as well as fictional bands like The Nasty Bits (whose frontman is played by Mick Jagger’s son James). It’s captivating storytelling bolstered by outstanding music. Simply put, Vinyl is at its best when focusing on Richie and what he does to bring his company back from the brink.
Unfortunately, the show strays into various subplots that just don’t resonate as strongly, and that brings the whole show down. These side stories definitely serve a purpose: they’re there to flesh out the supporting characters like Richie’s wife Devon, an ex-Warhol girl who’s dreadfully unfulfilled by her new life as a suburban housewife. There’s nothing inherently wrong with trying to build upon auxiliary characters; in fact it’s encouraged. But these stories ultimately go nowhere and leave the viewer feeling as unfulfilled as Mrs. Finestra.
Maybe these plotlines will be expanded upon next season, but no one would complain if they were abandoned completely. It actually felt like the writers recognized the flaws themselves, because some of these subplots were resolved very abruptly. For instance, one character is revealed to be fudging numbers to skim money for himself, and it looked like it was going to be a major issue within the overall story. But it’s barely mentioned again before being wrapped up in an extremely brief conversation between this character and Richie. In fact, all of the side stories except for one seem to fade away by the season finale and all that’s left is the music. It’s as if the production team recognized their mistakes and realigned their vision halfway through the season.
Yet, with all of the problems that the story has, the actors do their best to make up for it. Olivia Wilde is wonderfully heartbreaking as Devon, which is probably why it’s so disappointing that her story fizzles out the way it does. That pretty much applies to all of the supporting characters; regardless of how poorly their individual story is being told, no actor phones in their performance. And if Richie is the most interesting part of the show, it’s only because Bobby Cannavale plays him that way. Cannavale is great in this role the same way that James Gandolfini was as Tony Soprano and Bryan Cranston was as Walter White. He takes a terribly flawed character, one that you should really hate for the terrible choices that they make, and makes you both love and hate him. You don’t need to root for him to succeed, but you’re interested enough to see how his story unfolds.
The show’s production design also bears mentioning as it goes a long way to provide authenticity. It really does transport the viewer to 1973, and it oozes with the grit and grime of the city at that time. Even the cinematography adds to that feeling; the footage looks like it was shot on old film instead of digital. The overall design is simply another factor that would’ve led to the program’s success had the story not run astray (and it would have been a much bigger success).
Vinyl had a lot of potential going into this first season, and it still has plenty of potential moving forward. There truly is a great show in there somewhere just waiting to burst out, and it will be interesting to see wherethe story goes in light of Terence Winter’s departure as showrunner. Hopefully the production team learns from its own show’s protagonist and refocuses on the music.
—
Game of Thrones takes back its time slot from Vinyl starting next Sunday, April 24th at 9pm on HBO.
Though Michael Shannon never quite convinces as “The King,” Elvis & Nixon works as a quirky and ultimately fascinating study of two powerful and complicated personalities. It’s well-written and at times very funny, which is all the more impressive considering neither of the two stellar performers in the lead roles allow their performances to sink into the well-worn caricatures with which Elvis Presley and Richard Nixon are forever associated with.
Shannon delivers a memorable and earnest depiction, though he never physically disappears into the character
Kevin Spacey simply nails the essence and presence of Nixon
Meticulously detailed production design brings believability to the absurdity of the story
What’s it about?
Set on a December day in 1970, the film follows Elvis as he endeavors to convince the President of the United States to in effect deputize him so that he can help turn the tide against the ills he sees plaguing America. He hopes Nixon (played by Kevin Spacey) will grant him “Federal Agent-at-large” status, so that he can use his celebrity status as the ultimate cover in order to infiltrate and bring down communists, drug dealers, and other nefarious agents of counterculture.
To help make the meeting happen and keep it a secret from those in his usual inner circle who might try to stop him, Elvis turns to longtime friend and associate Jerry Schilling (Alex Pettyfer, Magic Mike). Though he sees clearly the absurdity of what his friend is proposing, he also sees just how serious Presley is about it, and that’s enough for him to temporarily put his own life on hold in order to help the King one last time.
Of course, the powers that be in the White House see that same absurdity, as well. But Nixon aide Bud Krogh (Colin Hanks, “Life in Pieces”) and special assistant to the President Dwight Chapin (Evan Peters, “American Horror Story”, X-Men: Days of Future Past) also see an opportunity to impress voters Nixon has never effectively reached. After all, who didn’t love Elvis in 1970’s America?
Thus the stage is set for one of the most famous and improbable White House photo ops of all time. It’s a meeting of two men whose reputations and public personas outwardly grant the impression that they couldn’t possibly get along. That seeming incompatibility helps make what happens once Elvis and Nixon get to talking in the Oval Office all the more surprising and entertaining.
The character, if not the look, of “The King”
Though Shannon the actor never fully disappears into Elvis the character in Elvis & Nixon, he does very fine work in terms of bringing to life Presley’s complicated and at times mercurial personality. Shannon’s Elvis is a thoughtful, sometimes troubled man who is aware of and disheartened by how people see him as a product or an icon rather than a person.
At the same time, however, for all his insight into how the outside world perceives him, this Elvis, who watches world events unfold from Graceland’s lavishly appointed “TV Room,” is also possessed of the narcissism truly befitting a king. Shannon delivers an Elvis who sees no absurdity whatsoever in his pursuit of a federal badge, and likewise sees no logical reason why the President and the U.S. government might refuse him. It all makes perfect sense to him – why shouldn’t it make sense to anyone else?
Spacey simply superb
In comparison, Spacey gets far less screen time in Elvis & Nixon – reportedly, he completed shooting his scenes in a week. But the screen time he does get he makes the most of, bringing to life a Nixon that should at once be familiar to audiences, at least in the broad strokes.
Spacey’s Nixon is foul-mouthed, ossified in terms of his beliefs regarding youth culture and the media, and possessed of a startling insecurity in terms of his physical looks and presence. He firmly of the belief that he doesn’t get enough credit for all he has accomplished without the good looks and fortunes of birth afforded to others. That chip on his hunched shoulders informs his every word and awkward gesture, the perfect contrast to Elvis’s smooth and charismatic manner. As he usually does in just about everything, even those “You’re Type E” E-Trade commercials, Spacey makes all that nuance look easy.
Supporting cast, production pitch perfect
Though his character, fittingly, goes without mention in the film’s title, Alex Pettyfer’s portrayal of Jerry Schilling serves as an effective counterpoint to Shannon’s Elvis as much as Spacey’s Nixon does. Pettyfer delivers an understated yet consistently sympathetic depiction of Schilling, whose loyalty and affection for his childhood friend allowed him a unique perspective on the man behind the sunglasses, scarves and capes, to not lose sight of that man in spite of the legend that others came to accept as the “real” Elvis.
Colin Hanks, Evan Peters, and Johnny Knoxville round out the cast of Elvis & Nixon, and each have opportunities to inject additional humor into the film thanks to the roles their characters played in the events of that fateful day at the White House. The production itself impresses, as well – Elvis aficionados should especially be pleased at the attention to detail both in the replica costumes and the Graceland TV Room, a visual treat featured in one of the film’s first scenes.
Worth seeing?
If it’s available to see in your area, Elvis & Nixon is absolutely worth 87 minutes of your time and investment at the box office. It’s smart, funny, and lovingly crafted by a talented cast and director (Liza Johnson, Return, Hateship Loveship) who take a pop culture footnote in American history and turn it into a compelling film.
Elvis & Nixon
Starring Michael Shannon, Kevin Spacey, Alex Pettyfer, Johnny Knoxville, Colin Hanks, Evan Peters, Sky Ferreira, Tracy Letts, Tate Donovan, and Ashley Benson. Directed by Liza Johnson.
Running Time: 87 minutes
Rated R for some language.
In the next couple of weeks two of my most anticipated events of 2016 will take place: the NFL draft and the release of Captain America: Civil War.
Both events share the common theme of picking sides. In the NFL leaders pick their players, while in Civil War the players pick their team.
As I was thinking about this an idea struck me like lightning from Thor’s hammer: what if Iron Man and Captain America could choose their teams?
Now we’re going to get an answer with the first ever Civil War Draft:Team Cap vs. Team Iron Man. My fellow Monkeys Fighting Robots writer Kyle Lewallen will head up Team Iron Man, I’ll take over Team Cap.
THE RULES
Captain America and Iron Man have already been assigned to their respected teams making them ineligible to be drafted.
The draft will go ten rounds (no snake draft here). Each team picking the heroes they’d want fighting by their side to go into battle Civil War style.
Only characters that have appeared in the MCU or will appear this year can be drafted. That makes Doctor Strange, Black Panther, Spider-Man eligible while Captain Marvel and Iron Fist are not.
No villains. Sorry Loki.
We made a deal, one of us got to pick which team leader we wanted, while the other got the first pick. Kyle chose to be Team Iron Man, so Captain America and I will make the first selection.
I think that’s it.
We’ll hold the draft on Twitter using the Monkeys Fighting Robots twitter handle (@monkeys_robots) on Sunday, April 24th around 7 p.m. EST. We’ll use the hashtag #CivilWarDraft and let you know who’s picking by using the #TeamIronMan and #TeamCap hashtags.
We’ll follow the draft up with a post breaking down our selections. Then we’ll ask some of our fellow Monkeys Fighting Robot writers to weigh in on which team they think would win the battle. You’ll get to review our teams as well.
Back in 1992, a hand full of creators left Marvel and DC Comics to form the independent comic book label Image Comics. A lot has changed over the past 24 years, but Rob Liefeld and Erik Larsen are still not a fan of micromanagement. The two had strong words for DC Comics’ ‘Rebirth’ and DC Comics Co-Publisher Dan Didio.
Larsen and Liefeld had a lengthy Twitter exchange over the weekend and finished the conversation pulling no punches with the above tweets.
“There’s stupid and then there’s DC stupid,” said Larsen.
“What has Dan Didio contributed to comics history? What’s his milestone marker?” said Liefeld.
DC Comics ‘Rebirth’ is reported to take two years to unfold and relaunch the DC Universe. Geoff Johns and Didio claim that this will not be a reboot. According to Bleeding Cool, Johns has been working in conjunction with all writers tasked with a ‘Rebirth’ title to seed storylines and plot points.
Do you think DC’s ‘Rebirth’ with stifle creativity over the next two years?
I have such a problem w/this…there would be no Beta Ray Bill, Punisher, Elektra, Deadpool, Cable w/these conditions https://t.co/ZUK0CjjtKw
Disney released the first official photo of ‘Pete’s Dragon’ Friday afternoon. This image shows the scale of the dragon to Pete, played by Oakes Fegley.
“We explored pink, just to see what would happen. From the get-go, the aesthetic was always to make everything feel as handmade as possible, including effects. To really have it feel like a blur between a very grounded realistic world and a world in which a big green dragon that can turn invisible can exist,” director David Lowery tells Entertainment Weekly.
A reimagining of Disney’s cherished family film, “Pete’s Dragon” is the adventure of an orphaned boy named Pete and his best friend Elliott, who just so happens to be a dragon. “Pete’s Dragon” stars Bryce Dallas Howard (“Jurassic World”), Oakes Fegley (“This is Where I Leave You”), Wes Bentley (“The Hunger Games”), Karl Urban (“Star Trek”), Oona Laurence (“Southpaw”) and Oscar® winner Robert Redford (“Captain America: The Winter Soldier”). The film, which is directed by David Lowery (“Ain’t Them Bodies Saints”), is written by Lowery & Toby Halbrooks based on a story by Seton I. Miller and S.S. Field and produced by Jim Whitaker, p.g.a. (“The Finest Hours,” “Friday Night Lights”), with Barrie M. Osborne (“The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring,” “The Great Gatsby”) serving as executive producer.
For years, old wood carver Mr. Meacham (Robert Redford) has delighted local children with his tales of the fierce dragon that resides deep in the woods of the Pacific Northwest. To his daughter, Grace (Bryce Dallas Howard), who works as a forest ranger, these stories are little more than tall tales…until she meets Pete (Oakes Fegley). Pete is a mysterious 10-year-old with no family and no home who claims to live in the woods with a giant, green dragon named Elliott. And from Pete’s descriptions, Elliott seems remarkably similar to the dragon from Mr. Meacham’s stories. With the help of Natalie (Oona Laurence), an 11-year-old girl whose father Jack (Wes Bentley) owns the local lumber mill, Grace sets out to determine where Pete came from, where he belongs, and the truth about this dragon. Disney’s “Pete’s Dragon” opens in U.S. theaters on August 12, 2016.
Following up an perfect episode is hard. The worst thing a series could possible do is do a clip show to really insult the fans by having the next thing after a phenomenal episode be something a studio does in an effort to cut corners. In this episode though, it’s mostly exposition to open up the world a bit as a new element is introduced into the story.
Rewriting the past a bit (most people know this as a Retcon), it’s revealed people are able to manifest their own Stand power by being shot with an ancient bow and arrow which belonged to the witch Enya, Dio’s trusted helper. Thanks to this new element, anyone who is shot with it (and doesn’t die) can get their own powers and become a nuisance to Josuke and his friends. This means serial killer Angelo is just the start of a new batch of super powered individuals with crazy abilities we will see this season.
A pair of antagonists are also introduced but it’s obvious from the opening one of them is going to be joining Josuke and becoming his buddy to help with later enemies so it’s hard to become worried about the consequences. Still, this series always has insane story lines and people producing incredible powers to keep things going so even on a duller episode, it’s still very entertaining. This one just has the unfortunate luck of being the follow up to one of the best single anime episodes in a long time. Also, it is a two parter so hopefully more action will be coming in the second half as Josuke has to rescue Koichi who just got hit with the power granting arrow. Cross your fingers it doesn’t kill him so he help Josuke fight. Hmm, a short guy whose best friends with the overpowered main character in a fighting anime? Sounds familiar.
Jojo’s Bizarre Adventure: Diamond is Unbreakable is streaming at Crunchyroll.
If you’re an information geek like myself, you tend to find yourself stumbling upon the most accidental yet brilliant connections to the most random of topics at the most inappropriate times. My recent epiphany moment happened during my Humanities II class this week while learning about 17th century Baroque artists, specifically with Peter Paul Rubens “Saturn Devouring His Son”. Ok, big deal? Some weird mythology painting whatever. Then upon further research came the even stranger, yet familiar imagery from Francisco Goya. Although derived from the 19th century in the Romantic Spanish era in art, it has been said that they both originate from the Greek myth of the Titan Cronus… Wait a minute! That’s why it looked so familiar, ATTACK ON TITAN!!! Could all of this possibly be related?
Upon one of the first articles I found regarding the similarities, DailyDot.com was bold enough to state:
“To understand where Attack on Titan’s monsters originate, we need to look to 19th-century Spain, where the artist Francisco Goya painted symbolic representations of the atrocities of war in the form of gory and eerie images of mythological giants. Goya’s series of Titan paintings inspired both the art and the animation behind Attack on Titan, as well as its English name.”
Very interesting, but where exactly is the proof? I don’t see the creator or producer attached to any of this statement, nor did I find any links on the site. With my brain being nowhere at ease with that particular answer, or with any of the other similar sounding articles, it was time to start digging up some interviews from the creator of the Attack on Titan manga, Hajime Isayama.
In 2012 in an interview with MTV, Hajime Isayama stated that his ideas for the stories spawned from what he calls a “Super Enlightenment Time” which is that half-awake period before hitting the deeper stages of sleep. Upon questioning why the particular use of giants for the central theme, he personally thought giants were just gross in general. When asked if any models were used for the Titan creatures he did not reference any paintings or mythology, but rather used real life martial artists for the body inspiration of the Titans.
“For the Titan version of Eren, I use martial artist Yshin Okami’s body as a model. My ideal is the physique of a middleweight mixed martial artist. I only use the shape of the body as a model”
A later 2013 interview Isayama explained to the Asahi Shimbun (a well-known Japanese Daily Newspaper), that an unpleasant encounter with a customer grabbing the collar of his shirt inspired the Titan creature development. The helpless feeling of not being able to rightfully voice out to in this situation gave birth to these terrifyingly remorseless destructive Titan monsters. However the unattractive illustrated creature design for the Titans was something natural to Isayama. In an interview with Brutus Magazine in 2014, he explained that even as a child he found himself drawing ugly things and it just sort of followed him through adulthood.
According to a 2015 interview with BBC, Hajime Isayama first got the idea for Attack on Titan from an alien based computer game. He felt that depicting the cruelty of monsters devouring man was an intriguing concept. Isayama believes that growing up on a farm was a huge influence for this dark imagery, especially with the normalization of living creatures eating other fellow living creatures for the simple act of pure survival.
While there are plausible arguments to research the deeper meaning behind Saturn symbolism, I don’t see any concrete proof from the creators that all 4 concepts are directly related. Even from an interview with George Wada, the producer of the Attack on Titan TV series, he explained to Anime News Network that Hajime Isayama’s concept of the wall around the city was directly influenced by Japanese culture, especially people becoming very “isolated and enclosed.” With the combination of how strongly effected Isayama was from the guy grabbing his shirt and using mixed martial artist structure for the more advanced Titan creature design, I could more so see the correlation the Japanese nation’s influences vs any other. Although I would like to believe that I was onto something, and dive into endless fellow fan inspired theories, I will have to swallow my pride for now and hope for further evidence to surface from the creators. (╯︵╰,)
Basically everyone has to introduce themselves at the most embarrassing level all while receiving shock treatment, along with other dangerous consequences, every time they don’t get to the hardest thing for them to say. In the end everyone reveals the deepest part of themselves that they didn’t want to share.
Review
So last episode a lot of people were complaining how the characters were all introduced but none of them were really developed as characters all that much. There was a lot of exposition dumping and other than the art design and scenario, the script didn’t seem that inspired. I for one liked this since they felt more like real people who don’t shout their ideals as soon as they’re introduced. Anime has a bad habit of this and I was happy that Kiznaiver avoided doing that. When you think about a show basically about our character and how it clashes with others, it makes sense that we wouldn’t reveal or even hint stuff like that in first meetings. Also it warrants the question if we are even aware of those things in the first place.
Kiznaiver sort of follows suit in this episode with giving everyone’s defining character reveal and forcing them to reveal it sooner than any anime would ever dream of. Normally shows would hold onto these character reveals until late in the show once you’ve understood them. Kiznaiver is proposing that to learn to understand them you need to know the true things they don’t wanna share first. Again, I wouldn’t call this true but I think it’s an interesting idea to explore. Which is why I’m watching Kiznaiver in the first place. There are a lot of cool ideas and emotional concepts to explore, but again the question needs to be asked. What is it in service of and if it’s any good. Can Kiznaiver survive on more than amazing visuals and its premise?
I’d say this episode was better than the last solely on the fact that there is a bigger interaction and a lot of forced tension. Having it be forced may seem like cheating because the characters are literally given no other choice but to admit these things super early on. Tenga even brings this up, quoting how they’re skipping several character steps and just getting to the good stuff. It works though, and will probably work for the show as a whole in the long run. This overly forced and rushed character reveals hints at what Kiznaiver has for an end game. Meaning that there is something more emotionally distancing ourselves, other than pain and our worst secrets we keep from everyone. Everyone is already on a path of discovery, even if they don’t know it yet, to find those answers. I’m ready to see where these characters go given the key things they revealed so early on in the game. It’s like they revealed everything you would see at the end of a movie. Now Kiznaiver is going beyond the movie and exploring what happens after those end credits. Which is another cool concept to add-on.
While this concept may seem good, we still have no idea how this will fit into the narrative. At this point I don’t see it happening other than an “obstacle of the week” format where each characters trial is introduced with a special scenario for that episode. This poses a problem seeing the only reveals I cared about were Nico’s confession of her fake uniqueness/rich family, and Maki revealing that she’s killed someone. The others really don’t make me want to explore them just yet. Which is a big problem when your narrative depends on the pure exploration of these characters from the onset. I don’t want to wait around for episodes to get some clarity for people I don’t care about. That’s fine when the narrative is engaging enough, but that’s also yet to be seen as well. Kiznaiver is still a load of questions whether is comes down to having potential for being a great show. Even though the concepts are super interesting, they need to fit into a package that actually means something for the show itself. We haven’t really seen that yet. However I’m hopeful that given the concepts and that cold open with all the grown-ups, there will be an anchor of a plot to hold Kiznaiver together in the long run before it runs out of steam.
