I'll Give It My All...Tomorrow Vol. 1-2 (2010)

Japanese Slacker(s)
by Silence Do_nothing

     Despite not being keen on the horror genre, I will acknowledge that it has the advantage of only needing to get across a fraction of its characters' feelings to strongly move the audience emotionally. The most important criteria I look for in a creative work is that it makes me feel something (although I'm usually not seeking the sensation of revulsion). I don't know if it was intentional, but manga author Shunju Aono's dramedy I'll Give It My All...Tomorrow transfers its slacker characters' apathy to the reader.
     Forty year old single father Shizuo Oguro abruptly gives up his middle management career to "find himself." Much to the chagrin of his father Shiro, he finds himself only motivated to indulge in Playstation, comic books, and rubber costumed superhero shows. Upon taking a part time job at fast food establishment H Burgers, he befriends co-worker Ichinosawa, a twenty-something fellow slacker who hasn't found a passion for anything. Shiro isn't placated when his "D" in art class son decides to pursue manga professionally.
     Lacking plot, the story consists of Shizuo enduring ridicule over his perceived loser persona, but his situation is sympathetic enough (at least to one of similarly little ambition like myself) to undercut this. His biggest failing is not gutting out one more year at his office job to provide a secure income all the way up to his daughter's high school graduation, but he still presumably provided for her adequately the previous seventeen years. His reduction in earning power didn't deprive her of any necessities.
     His manga aspirations are mocked as childish and irresponsible, but given that he was able to secure multiple meetings with an editor from a major publishing house to critique his submissions, it shouldn't seem so harebrained. It's equally likely that he has a talent that was going to waste at his "real" job.
     Videogames and comic books aren't considered the most respectable fare for adults (I won't defend the rubber costumed superhero shows, unless, of course, it's the awesome Specterman), but they're harmless leisure pursuits. Admittedly, he also frequents a pub, but it's not as if he's an alcoholic, and, as appearances go, it wouldn't matter if he were, because it's much more socially acceptable for an adult to take part in destructive drinking than video games and comics (much to my annoyance).
     Shizuo and Ichinosawa's fast food employment is presented as an embarrassment, but I'll defend it on a couple grounds, the first being that, as someone who has worked fast food and other menial near minimum wage jobs, I agree with the belief that there is no shame in honest work. Shizuo working at H Burger while pursuing a creative vocation is no different than aspiring actors taking low paying day jobs to pay the bills as they try to make it in Hollywood.
     Scorn for this occupation doesn't serve the vast number of people who patronize these kinds of restaurants. It does no good to attach shame outside of actions we don't want done. I don't see how promoting someone's job as a joke helps instill a sense of pride (not that the uniforms help, either) or motivates him to provide better service. I would support the addition of a fast food employee to the faces of Mount Rushmore if it increased the chances of getting my order right.
     Even if Shizuo's actions aren't as defensible as I make them out to be, there's a part of me that thinks people are entitled to take it easy one year out of every forty-one. The only problem with that is that it will be all the way to at least the year 2700 before I can expunge my slacking debt.
     Shizuo is largely immune to people's disapproval of his lifestyle, nor do his actions cause others any great harm, so there isn't much dramatic impact to the story. It's lighthearted, but not very engaging. It wasn't until the last fourth of volume two that I felt anything for the characters, and that involved flashbacks of Ichinosawa and Shizuo dealing with a death in the family. The characters weren't entertaining enough on their own to do without noteworthy events surrounding them (a better take on apathetic characters would be the the 80s film River's Edge).
     Aonos's crude drawing style lends itself to humor, but it didn't live up to its potential. The gags weren't stupid or lame. It's just that their usual effect was to make me think "Oh, that's nice" rather than laugh. It was never as funny as the premise had made me hope.
     There were parts of I'll Give It My All...Tomorrow I would have liked to have seen expanded. Shizuo's manga-within-the-manga, featuring his own unathletic image as the hero, was kind of funny. It had potential as parody of the medium. The H Burgers setting was my favorite. I've wondered if the clips I've seen of super cheerful and smiling fast food workers in Japan, a contrast to the sullen atmosphere we expect at our fast food eateries (regardless of how unrealistically commercials portray them), were just for the camera, or if it is typical. I would like to see how the Japanese obsession with details combines with fast food culture. If there were an H Burgers spinoff, I'd give it a chance.
     I can't say the manga was bad, or boring. The lackadaisical atmosphere had a charm to it. But there wasn't enough to leave a strong impression of any kind.
     Maybe the real problem is that I've been engulfed in the slacker lifestyle too long to feel Shizuo's antics as sad or ridiculous. Oh well.

I'm busy trying to get my Civ III game back together

     I was not really happy with my post for The Debt (2011).  It didn't get done when it should have and I didn't give it the time necessary to make it worth the delay.  And now I'm spending a bunch of time trying to get a game that took me seven years to be what I wanted it to be (before it was destroyed by somebody thinking that not saving the files he was instructed to save when the OS was changed on the computer) and don't have time to write a proper post.
     But Civ III is still cool.  Don't think that everything needs to be new.  Civ III rocks because it threw open the gates and let the community create material and give it away.  There was no need to charge for what people were willing to create.

     I am nowhere near having all of the units reacquired.  That is a monumental task.  Then sounds need to be added, and glitches caught and fixed (there are so many typos in the .ini files that it just hurts to try to fix them all at once).  I spent about four hours today just downloading Leader Heads and buildings.  Anyway, this is how I am wasting some time right now.

Yes, somebody made the Hall of Justice for Civ III.  I am going to use it for my Wraith Archives.

 There are also Blood Bowl arenas.  This is the Evil one.  But Blood Bowl arenas!

And, for some reason there is a statue for the Cthulu Wonder.  Make way for your own dark overlord.

I get to finally use an actual Wizard's Tower for the Wizard's Tower improvement I put in the game back in 2004. 

I haven't played a game with the Eiffel Tower as a Wonder since Civ II.  But I didn't have a Wonder Splash this cool to use.

And few things make me feel better than knowing that I will, eventually, be able to play Civ III again with the Super Veritech Fighter from Robotech as a buildable unit.

The Debt (2011)

     There is a compelling story wedged into The Debt (2011), but I cannot come to say that it is delivered in a way to maintain interest or allow for the dramatic tension that should be there.  Part of the problem – or maybe even most of it – comes from director John Madden's choice to let the action and espionage remain thoroughly grounded in the realm of reality.  For a film that was not short on known actors or budget, it was a daring choice.  Unfortunately, it made the Mossad agents at the center of the story seem ill-prepared and amateurish – even more than the events of the story would suggest.
     Having not seen the 2007 original version of this movie, I cannot comment on how closely the remake hews to original plot points.  I will note that the manner in which the story is told does little to build dramatic tension.  While the cast is solid (somehow Sam Worthington keeps getting work, and that is something I cannot explain), there is such a disconnect between how the characters' looks and mannerisms in 1965 and 1997 that I had a difficult time convincing myself that they are supposed to be the same people.
     There are some really good moments in The Debt.  Jessica Chastain (as Rachel in 1965) portrays vulnerability and resolve in a quite compelling manner.  Actually, the scenes that showcase the vulnerability were so well constructed and acted as to make me decidedly uncomfortable in watching them.  Likewise, the attempted escape from East Berlin is quite entertaining.
     Still, I don't think there is enough in The Debt to make it worth recommending.  Maybe I did not take the proper approach in watching this movie.  But it felt more leaden than mature.  And even though the scope of the story should be large and inspiring, it played much smaller.  Ultimately, the impact and weight of the original mission doesn't seem to translate through in the English version.  Madden may have assumed that an audience will know how important the capture and trial of a Nazi war criminal is to Israelis as the nation was establishing itself, but he failed to bring that feeling to the screen.  And that is where I think The Debt failed the most.
     It is not a bad movie.  Nobody is likely to feel that their time has been wasted in watching it.  But I would suspect that most people who see it will wonder why it isn't much better than the end result.

Poetics (c. 335 BCE)

     It is more than a little disconcerting that what we have of two of Aristotle's seminal works – The Ethics (be it the Nicomachean or Eudemian version) and Poetics – have not survived as complete works, but rather as the assembled class notes that were subsequently used as the basis of the actual books.  This means that we, who didn't experience the direct teachings of Aristotle, do not get the benefit of the poetry of his language or the true insight of his thought.
     Poetics is perhaps one of the most celebrated texts in Western culture.  Should it be?  Probably.  It serves as the basis for critical interpretation of poetry (and prose, since Aristotle is essentially concerned with how to tell a compelling and meaningful story) and lays out the necessary elements to constructing a story.  The problem – for me – is that it is essentially an older version (and an incomplete one) of a text book.  I'm almost positive that there has been much work in the field of deconstructing the elements of a story, and that amongst them emerges a much more complete (and contemporary) picture of what it takes to effectively enact a plot or structure a tale in such a manner that it is consistent with the point envisioned by the author.
     Indeed, were it not for the lengthy and well written introduction to the text (by translator Malcolm Heath), I think I would have failed to appreciate much of what Aristotle was explaining.  What is more telling is that Aristotle correctly anticipates that the failures of structure are ones that can – and have – endured to the present.  Clearly, Aristotle was more than just paying attention to the poetry and plays of his day (and well before it); he found a way to properly appreciate them as an art form.
     I know that I am nowhere near well-versed in real criticism to truly appreciate what Aristotle accomplished with the Poetics (and yet I am arrogant enough to work in the medium on this blog).  It is doubly painful that his commentaries on comedies – as implied in the text – are completely missing from history.  But I am certainly glad I finally got around to reading this book.  Why it wasn't required for any of the theatre classes I had, I cannot answer.

Hannah (2011)

     I don't know what to make of director Joe Wright's Hanna (2011).  It is part hard-edge espionage thriller, part standard action fare, and part tweener (or maybe young adult) yarn about friendship and family.  It also calls upon established stars Cate Blanchett (as CIA maven Marissa Wiegler) and Eric Bana (as Hanna's father, Erik Heller) to adopt over-the-top accents for no real reason.  That is not to say that it is poorly made or unenjoyable.  Hanna is fine, but it probably could have been better if it had been more determined as to how it wanted to tell its story.
     I will say that Saoirse Ronan (Hanna) has the creepiest, most expressive blue eyes I have seen in recent cinema.  There is something otherworldly about them.  As such, they help sell the notion that Hanna is some government concocted being, not an ordinary human being.  Add in the odd education her "father" gives her in the remote, snowy woods of Finland, and Hanna may as well be an alien in human form set out amongst the people to complete her secret mission.
     Hanna works best when the government pursuit of their renegade assets gives way to the interactions between a vacationing British family and not-quite-properly adapted Hanna.  These scenes are lighter – almost breezy – but retain the hint of danger and suspense.  More than that, they show off the contrast between people who grow up as part of a society and those who can only mimic as much.  Unfortunately, these scenes are likely not what one is expecting from Hanna. 
     Blanchett and Bana are fine here, but their roles could have been easily handled by a number of mid-grade actors.  The history between Marissa and Erik isn't given enough weight in its presentation – and where it is shown, it strikes a harsh contrast against the lighter, comic scenes – and the resolution of it is most unsatisfactory.  There is a nice call back to end the film, but that, too, stands in contrast to how the story had been developing.
     I wouldn't steer anyone away from seeing Hanna – it is entertaining, if inconsistent.  But I would warn them to not expect it to be gritty or serious.  It is a bit of fantasy, a (perhaps ill-conceived) parable about the power of women who are coming of age and the risks of the adult world they must enter that throws a little government conspiracy into the mix. 

Dreamers (Original Text - Part Eleven) (1997)

     When I get around to rewriting this story (and I mean thoroughly rewriting it), I hope to avoid hammering a term into the readers heads like I unintentionally did here with "the group".  Can't be that lazy in my writing.  Fine for a first draft to get the idea out there (and all I really have is the rough draft), but it doesn't help if one wants their work to feel complete.
     Anyway, another incredibly short section. 

XI

     Nancy didn't like not getting together with the group, especially when it was everyone.  Still, she decided to follow through on her decision to explore a relationship with a man she knew and respected.  He wasn't from the group.  He probably wouldn't have much interest in the group.  It would be a shame to lose him because of the group.  Besides, Nancy could keep who she wanted from the group.  In the long run, she could deal with most of them being out of her life.
     Jason MacLeod was almost part of that subset.  He would have been if he wasn't going out with Melissa.  Nancy's discoveries about his sexual tastes, and the subsequent conversations they had engaged in had been enough to make her question the friendship he and she shared.  Well, that wasn't entirely true.  They were still friends, and they would probably stay friends for quite a while.  Nancy could, in Jason's terms, afford such a friendship.  She wasn't bound by work or school constraints.  She came from a family with less money than Vicki's, but unlike Vicki, Nancy wasn't encouraged to work.  Her parents liked giving her money.
     Not everybody was like that.  Not everybody was privileged or damned, and maybe more information should be had before she rushed to judgment on Jason.  He was, supposedly, in a faithful and satisfying relationship with Melissa.  He He had come so close to telling Melissa he loved her the night before.  There was a chance that he had said it at some point when Nancy was out of ear shot.  But he had spent the night on the couch, and Melissa slept in Jason's bedroom with Nancy.  It was a good thing because Nancy felt disoriented all night, and Nancy had something Jason was reluctant to call Night Terrors.
     Nancy wasn't out with the group, so she couldn't talk to anyone in it about how she was feeling.  She didn't want to draw her new interest into their ways, at least not as it stood.  Worst of all, she still wanted to know what had gotten her all rattled.  She instead decided to patiently wait for her man.  The patience helped.

Red State (2011)

     Kevin Smith's Red State (2011) stands as a near perfect example of how not to tell a story in film.  From its awkward imposed monologues to insert expository material to its inconsistent, schizophrenic emotional tone, to its thorough lack of any point or entertainment value as a whole, this movie is an unabashed disaster.  That is not to say that there have not been worse movies made, but I seriously doubt the directors of those have been as smug or self-satisfied as Smith seems to be with his own work.  If I were more generous, I could point out that Smith could have broken this into three separate films – each of which would have allowed for traditional storytelling or plot structure – and been better off for it.  His attempt to mash the disparate elements together comes off as amateurish and unimpressive; he should definitely be beyond the first by now.
     The sole bright point of the movie was the character of Cheyenne (Kerry Bishé), who has some depth and meaning beyond the leaden sermons and grindhouse style action sequences.  That writer-director Smith does not know what to do with the character – with any of the characters – may prove that Smith just isn't fit to be making films at this point.  Bishé stands out against the more established actors in being able to depict internal conflict without being obvious or dropping into caricature.  That may just be the writing, or Smith may have just decided that there only needed to be one role that really made the idea of conflicted loyalties and obligations well.  (I don't want to rag on Michael Angarano, an actor I usually enjoy, but he is not given enough to do – and what his character is allowed to do is often poorly shot – and his character feels thoroughly false.)
     There are many bad things I could write about this film, but what's the point?  It has the one bright spot.  Think of it as the cupcake in the pile of shit.  No matter how much you like cupcakes – and if you aren't starving – you aren't going for the one steeped in manure.  There isn't any social commentary here (though I'm sure Smith thinks there is).  It isn't the "actor's catnip" he thinks it is – who would want to be a part of something like this? – and it isn't going to matter in the space of a year.  All Red State did for me was convince me that Smith has no voice past Clerks II (2006).