YouTube Recommendations: Shameless Edition

I could talk about how YouTube and new media are a revolution in communication, but instead I'll try to summarize my favorite creators in one sentence.

Reviewers

FanboyFlicks: This subdued Canadian humorously describes terrible films, many of which you've probably never heard of.

I Hate Everything: Despite the dour British exterior, IHE manages to provide thoughtful criticism of questionable movies, video games, and cultural trends.

JonTronShow: One of my first loves of YouTube, JonTron has amassed a significant catalog of hilarious video game and film reviews with ever increasing production quality that make his uploads worth the wait.

ralphthemoviemaker: Ralph is a talented filmmaker with a sarcastic wit who reviews films, especially ones that deserve harsher criticism.

Sardonicast: This is a movie podcast with Ralph, IHE, and YMS that is too good for this world.

videogamedunkey: A remarkably creative video game reviewer that uses absurdism and satire to make his point far better than a literal review ever could.

YourMovieSucksDOTorg: The sharp witted YMS is the best movie reviewer I've seen, making incredibly entertaining and well-edited content from even the most terrible films.

Abrams' Star Trek: One Overshadowing Glitch

J. J. Abrams' Star Trek (2009) and Star Trek Into Darkness (2012) are full of stunning vistas and thrilling chases, but something about it leaves me unfulfilled. (Perspective: I've seen the entire Original Series and accompanying films, and large chunks of Next Gen, DS9, and Voyager.)

I can forgive the differences from the Original Series. This Star Trek is, after all, a reboot. Different timeline, presence of an extra Spock, absence of Vulcan, obligatory alien sex scenes, awkward Spock/Uhura romance - bring it on, Hollywood, I'm ready.

But the new Enterprise has a glitch I am unwilling to overlook: Kirk. Chris Pine does a great job portraying the little butthead that the new Kirk is, but the presence of this character in the Star Trek universe, even a rebooted one, presents some basic storytelling problems.

Miss me yet?

Doctor Who's Hammer

Feeling the urge to mock Doctor Who , that great British Science Fiction Fantasy Sitcom. Despite its uncommon popularity, much about the show remains a mystery to its watching public.

The Doctor (as he is always called; the show is too modern to use surnames) is an alien who is exactly like humans in every way except he can reincarnate without having to come back as a bug. "Time Lords" are lords of time that suck at controlling it, since they all died out except for the Doctor, which leaves a lot of questions about the intelligence of the race.

Any species which thought these hair styles a good idea couldn't have been on the right side of natural selection

The main villains in Doctor Who are cyborg woodchucks who threaten to eat the TARDIS, the Doctor's flying phone booth time machine. "Phone booths" were strange little buildings where people cloistered themselves to use cellphones that where tied to the ground. They were in fact used for this purpose before ever being drafted into service as time machines for wandering humanoid aliens.

The Doctor's primary weapon of defense is a screwdriver modified to do everything with no explanations or limitations. Little known to most fans, however, is that the Doctor originally wielded devices such as a Radical Wrench, a Japanese Jigsaw, a Dampened Drainplug, and a Wholesome Hammer.

"Pass me the Japanese Jigsaw, Miss Anna Beth Tyler-Moore-Smith! The universe depends upon it." 

- Early Doctor Who Quote

Every Doctor Who plot arch ever: The doctor acts like a 12-year-old and destroys the lives of all his companions. For someone as old as he is, he gets shown up by a lot of girls in their early 20s. Girls whose lives he shatters in revenge.

The Doctor isn't finished with his friends until he can leave them in convulsing grief or death

But the main problem with Doctor Who isn't the corny monsters, suspensions of logic, or hyperactive exposition. It's the gap between the show's quality and its fans' fanatical devotion. Firefly, anyone?

Is Braveheart the Best Film in the History of Film?

You know you've asked yourself this piercing question: Is Braveheart the best movie ever?

Fewer pastimes are so truly American as wallowing in Mel Gibson's ego. Last Friday, I had a chance to do just that with his classic film, Braveheart. It concerns Sir William Wallace and his fight against the English. As perfect as that sounds, Gibson allowed some shortcomings he could have avoided if he had let me screen his movie back in 1995. I was 5 years old at the time and would have been perfect to understand the full impact of Gibson's narrative.

It doesn't get more 90s than this

Firstly, Braveheart would have been a more successful film if it had captions telling you what emotions to feel. You know it's true: 

“Wallace’s wife is being senselessly slaughtered. Feel sad for Wallace.”
“War is brutal. You should feel a combination of thrill and horror. Observe the blood spurt from that man’s severed leg.”
“These peasants are mad at the government. They would rather die than live in bondage.”
“Look how grimy the heroes’ countenances appear. Warriors do not have time to bathe.”
“We totally could have managed a husband/wife relationship throughout a three hour film if we had wanted to.”

These types of subtitles would have enhanced (almost subliminally) the viewer's experience, leaving no one in doubt of the quality of this noble 90s epic.

As pumped as I was to hear how many “Squish” sound effects existed in the 1990s, it was hard to concentrate on the battle sounds when there were so many girly Englishmen traipsing around. Though every student of history knows that all Scotsmen have virile, deep voices, and all Englishmen are effeminate with high voices, it was not Gibson's best choice to cast the film so accurately. It detracts from the battle scenes.

And speaking of battle scenes: WHY CANT FIGHT SCENES B LONGER THEY R 2 SHORT. I felt so gypped. I mean, I'm sure that almost half the movie was something other than fighting. Mostly talking about fighting while staring at the English army. Really, Wallace? Really? Get your butt into battle. We don't want to hear you talk about Freedom and Kilts and Stuff. (I have to admit the kilts were cool, since we all know that Scotsmen wore kilts in the 13th century.)

Anyone with a name like Lord Mungo Murray would have to wear a kilt

Wallace, despite this flaw of not fighting enough, is truly awesome. The inclusion of a lead with no discernible character was a truly brilliant move on Gibson's part. It shows how even the most boring people can become heroes if all their peers blindly follow them for no apparent reason.

There are so many morals with modern impact in this film. Aside from the one enumerated, it wasn't until I watched Braveheart that I discovered that the current set of swear words was the norm during the late medieval era. I also didn't know that battle during this era looked like a confused Civil War reenactment from 1995.

One last gripe: Gibson got so close to eliminating all his female characters...but he didn't. Why? He got Wallace's wife killed off within half an hour, then he had to go and have a fling with the future Queen of England. What in the world? 

Wallace should have forsworn womanhood so we didn't have to watch him interact with a person who he saw as an equal. Unbecoming.

As for the queen, Wallace should have shipped her to Norway or she should have just knitted in the background of every scene in the English court. She could have gotten so much more knitting done if she hadn't messed with Wallace, which is truly a loss.

The bottom line with the ladies of the film is that it was damaging to have people with some sort of personality in the movie.

I'm afraid I left before the end, as my bedtime prohibited a contiguous viewing. That doesn't mean that I cannot affirm that Braveheart is the best film in the history of films that have men in kilts mooning the camera.

It's a winner.