![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
matt_zimmerAlso reviews for the latest episodes of Star Trek: Lower Deck, Marvel's Spider-Man: Maximum Venom, and Power Rangers Beast Morphers, as well as the latest issue of Batman: The Adventures Continue and the book The Golden Compass.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "Camp Cretaceous"
I don't like everything, but as far as Pilots for a kids' cartoon go, it was solid.
The downside is that all of the kids besides Darius are unlikable and annoying. I get they are feeding into archetypes to set each kid apart, but I don't approve of fiction doing that, and I don't believe fiction NEEDS to do that to differentiate characters. This is how a sloppy writer does character development. This means one of two things: Either the writing on this show is gonna megasuck, or the writers are underwriting the characters because they don't want kids in the audience to get too attached to them. The second thing isn't great, but because the rest of the episode besides the characters was good, I'm leaning towards the cast being horror movie expendable. I'm not saying all or most of the cast is going to die. But me hating all of them besides Darius makes it a crapshoot who does and doesn't get eaten.
Legit thrills and scares in the episode. I find the human designs somewhat creepy, which is understandable because it's CGI on a budget. But it feels very cinematic too, and when the Jurassic Park theme starts playing as the dinosaurs are lumbering below it stops mattering to me that this is a cartoon.
Brooklyn saying Darius and Kenji were showing her what toxic masculinity looked like got a big laugh from me. Weirdly, nothing in the franchise since Jeff Goldblum and Laura Dern in the first movie has really gotten me to laugh, so I noticed that for the rare pleasure it was. For the record, that is the precise type of joke more kids shows should be telling. And it is not lost on me this is the first kids show I've ever seen tell that type of joke. Or at least telling it in a funny and unobtrusive manner.
I seem to recal the raptor skulls being used as whistles to control the raptors from the third movie, but it's been awhile. And that plot idea was dumb even then.
I liked the first episode at any rate. As far as kiddie Jurassic World stuff goes, it beats the LEGO cartoons by a mile. ****.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "Secrets"
If Darius and Kenji HAD gotten kicked out at the end of the episode it would have served them right. Sneaking off WHILE they were doing punishment for that exact error actually ticked me off a bit.
It's a shame they didn't get B.D. Wong back for Dr. Wu.
Wu seems a lot more vain and self-serving here than in the films, although he always seemed vaguely sinister and slimy there too.
Classic Jurassic Park espionage at the end. It could be argued things wouldn't have gone pear-shaped in the first movie if not for human greed and deception. Here we go again.
Not as good as the first episode. ***1/2.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "The Cattle Drive"
We have a problem.
It's a big problem and it concerns me. It could be a show-wrecker. It hasn't quite gotten that far yet (although it DID wreck THIS episode) but it easily could.
All of the characters are far too stupid, annoying, and unlikable. It's like every kid is Bryce Dallas Howard running away from a T-Rex in high heels. It's okay to put one Bryce Dallas Howard in ONE movie. Six of them in an entire TV series? That's concerning.
Maybe I shouldn't be including Darius in that, but Dave the counselor is annoying too, so that math evens out either way.
This specific hindrance hasn't really weakened the bigger episodes of the show so far. But it seems to be a MAJOR drawback for filler episodes. I just hope those are rare this season. The obnoxious characters are making them unbearable. *.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "Things Fall Apart"
First real-life casualties on the show. They weren't gory or really shown, but they made things real for the kids.
This was not a filler episode at all. Therefore most of the characters being annoying didn't hurt it in the least. It was great.
Darius is somebody I like, and I found the scenes with his father very moving mostly due to Keston John's voice performance. John also knocked my socks off as Hordak on the She-Ra remake, and it's very difficult to believe he isn't some huge well-known "serious" actor, but probably just some underpaid voice-guy who works for scale. He doesn't even have his own Wikipedia page. And he's amazing.
I have to say the implication of making necklaces out of teeth are actually quite unpleasant. For that reason alone that scene was not as heartwarming as it should have been.
But it was still the best episode so far. ****1/2.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "Happy Birthday, Eddie!"
If ANYONE deserved a birthday that unhappy, it was Eddie. Call that karma, or if you're the dinosaur, just desserts.
Very exciting and thrilling episode. This is what I wanted the show to be from the start. However the show sort of wisely reasoned it would be better to get us to this point step by step. It doesn't make some of the earlier shaky episodes less shaky, but I'm glad their shakiness is paying off at least.
The timing of the car crash ending was perfect. It doesn't matter that I saw it coming. That is how the episode SHOULD have ended and it did.
It was a pretty great episode in general. *****.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "Welcome To Jurassic World"
Hi, I'm Matt. This evening, I will be here to patiently explain for the millionth time why The Surprise Betrayal Trope Never, EVER Works (Special Kids Show Edition!).
I'm not even gonna bother to review the episode. That seems almost besides the point. This show did a couple of interesting twists to try and Make The Surprise Betrayal Work. But The Surprise Betrayal NEVER Works.
To start off this essay (I can't rightly call the following an actual review) I should talk about why The Surprise Betrayal Trope Never Works on adult-oriented programs. It's done its fair share of shocks for audience members, but I never respond to it, EVER, and the more I see it, the more I don't think it's because the show in question did it badly. It's that It Simply Never Works. The problem with adult shows using the trope is that is seems like a great juicy shocker of a cliffhanger to get people gabbing over the watercooler the next day. But the truth is it always destroys a dynamic on the show that DID work in the long term, for brief shock value in the short term, and the audience has to now live with the show being destroyed, because the writers couldn't think of an interesting idea other than to destroy their own show. Neat.
For kids shows they do the opposite idea, and always use a lighter touch. The Betrayer In Question Has Their Reasons, and is often remorseful, and the their former friends unforgiving despite that fact. And while I appreciate them being unwilling to destroy the show, it's like "What's the point?" If you can betray your friends and not actually be a bad guy, what's the lesson there for the audience? Why should I care?
And I think this is the real reason the show made most of the characters disposable stereotypes. I had foolishly and naively assumed that was done to make the characters easier cannon fodder for the dinosaurs. It was actually done to make them easier cannon fodder for The Surprise Betrayal Trope. But I Really Don't Care, Do You?
It Never EVER Works. When Yaz is on the pontoon and says "I did not think this through," I was like, "That is a PERFECT metaphor for not only this episode and this show, but every time a writer foolishly uses the trope hoping to mine nonexistent dramatic gold out of it." Instead "There's Turds In Them Thar Hills!". Doesn't stop writers from trying to mine them. They are all Stephen Colbert's father. But I also don't have to either take it seriously when they do that, or give them the benefit of the doubt when they do.
I got a LOT of online resistance to my increasingly negative reviews of Tangled: The Series' last season. And whether you agree with me that the show went out poorly or not, I have a serious hard time picturing a fan actually thinking Cassandra's betrayal actually HELPED anything, or made anything better, or said anything interesting about either the trope in general, or the characters in particular. I was warned over and over again "The show is amazing, it knows what it's doing, it will surprise you." But it actually couldn't. Because The Trope Never Works.
Jurassic World decided to Nerf the trope even further than MOST kiddie stuff by making all the characters on the show unlikable, so the betrayal might not matter so much to some viewers (particularly boys not particularly interested in a potential boring lesbian romance). I give it credit for trying that. That's a new angle. I never considering a show making a surprise betrayal between characters nobody liked. But no. It Still Never Works. And It Never Will.
Sigh. Where was I? Get offa my lawn. I have a cloud to yell at. *.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "Last Day Of Camp"
I feel better that that's a cliffhanger, and not an actual resolved ending, don't you?
I think there is a synonym for "monorail" in Latin that literally means "Machine Of The Gods."
I have to talk about the episode's false note. And it was such a major thing to me that I'm not sure I can give the episode a passing grade.
Let me briefly details my thoughts on people and life and death situations. I do not believe everyone sees them the same way. I believe there are some soldiers in wars who see the faces of the people they killed in their dreams every night and it haunts them to their dying day. There are other soldiers who believe it was either them or themself and sleep like a baby for the rest of their lives. Fiction stubbornly tells us the former situation is the "correct" perspective, and society sees it that way too. I don't. I think something like that is an opinion (like politics) that nobody who goes through it will ever agree on, and that's fine. It's not up to me or the rest of fiction to tell people how to process that when we haven't gone through it ourselves. It's not up to us to judge. It feels wrong to me for fiction to dictate the proper way for people to feel about life or death struggles when almost none of the writers are veterans, or have been placed in a dangerous situation. I think the only reason Torchwood's Russell T Davies might have been qualified to take the wrong-seeming stances on the subject he did, is because just based upon his writing output, it wouldn't shock me at all if he were a secret serial killer. But I otherwise don't personally judge veterans who sleep like babies harshly in my heart.
Back to unusual opinions about survival: Basically, if the show had one of the kids (probably Yaz) decide "No, we're not really friends, we have nothing in common, we'll never see other again," I wouldn't like it, and it wouldn't feel narratively satisfying, but it would be plausible. But for FIVE of them to think that? It not only strikes me as unlike the experience of other survivors of life and death experiences, it also flies in the face of everything kids believe about each other when they make friends at camp.
Life and death struggles bond people quickly in a way nothing else does. And kids attach themselves to new friends harder and faster than adults could ever remember how they used to (outside of, of course, life-threatening situations). To have BOTH things be true would mean these kids would basically be planning the rest of their lives together as friends forever, and including Bumpy in the dream. They'd be dreaming of living on a tropical island together for the rest of their lives, replete with monkey butlers. It's only after they were separated for a few days that they would sort of realize they weren't really friends. That's not something they'd ever believe WHILE they were together, much less WHILE the adventure is still happening.
I don't believe fiction is obligated to show everyone's truth about trauma is the same as everyone else's. It's something fiction does to the point of parody, and I don't approve of it. But there are certain characteristics about most people and how they view trauma that are USUALLY true for MOST people. It is a totally false note that five of the six kids believe the unusual thing. Heck, it would be unusual if ONE of them did. They're kids. They believe they can do anything. That moment was NOT the moment they'd realize they have nothing in common.
I liked the rest of the episode, but that false note was sort of anchored as the dramatic centerpiece of the episode, so I can't very well give it a passing grade. **1/2.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "End Of The Line"
Very surprised at the open ending. I don't object to it per se, but Netflix LOVES randomly canceling stuff with great ratings that happens to be expensive to produce, so it doesn't seem very prudent either.
I'm glad Ben is alive but on some level I would have admired the show if they had gone through with it and killed him off.
And now to talk about the suspense of the episode. Suspense is this franchise's bread and butter, and there was a point halfway through the episode where it just lost me and I stopped being excited. Why?
The kids were TOO freaking lucky. They were getting TOO many crazy unlikely breaks. So it stops being "Can they escape" and just turns into random, noisy, cr*p happening. There is no purpose to a suspense story with that many unlikely lucky breaks. It completely took me out of it and I checked out in caring whether the kids would survive. Because at this point the show obviously decided they would, and I didn't see things any differently.
Tora walking away rather than continuing to confront the kids WAS a cool moment, especially because it is very true to life for nature. On nature shows the cheetah either catches the antelope or it escapes. Nat Geo never shows footage of the Cheetah believing the antelope is more trouble than it's worth and skulking off, but that probably happens all the time in the wild. In a life or death struggle, the predator DOES take its own survival into account. It would be fighting every instinct in biology if they didn't.
Yaz says "Nobody in this park thought anything through." Yasmina seems to be the character they have say utterly true and surprisingly deep things, usually having a double meaning that also negatively describes the franchise at large. I like it.
I had mildly favorable impression of that, gutted tension or not. At least until Netflix decides to cancel the show out of the blue, and I'll be annoyed instead. ***1/2.
Star Trek: Lower Decks "Veritas"
I loved the way Q was portrayed. Aside from being awesome because they got John De Lancie back, I liked that Q shenanigans have sort of become something the entire fleet knows the proper way to deal with. Well, maybe not how to win the crazy games. But the crew, particularly Mariner seems to get Q's tests aren't actually malevolent and are partly done in the spirit of fun. Q's games used to be a LOT more lethal in the first two seasons of Next Generation, but his shtick sort of became more and more benign as Picard and later Janeway's good influence wore off on him.
Kurtwood Smith is another Star Trek staple. He had previously appeared in different alien roles in Star Trek VI, Deep Space Nine, and Voyager.
Apparently the only thing to do on Earth is hang around in Vineyards and Soul Food restaurants. What's hysterical about that joke is those two settings are pretty much the best looks we got at 24th Century Earth civilian life on the three original sequel series.
I don't even know or remember who Roga Daynar is. Advantage Khan.
The horrid fan dance from Star Trek V can never get enough shade thrown at it. Here, let this show help.
I think the problem with humans on Star Trek always telling other aliens how virtuous and far they have come is that some aliens are dumb enough to believe them. All of Picard's speeches essentially boiled down to propaganda, and racist propaganda at that, if you read between the lines. One of the reasons I adore Star Trek: Picard is because Picard has gotten to a stage in his life where humanity isn't automatically the beacon of virtue he sold it as on Next Gen. And the reason Star Trek: Picard works is because even if Jean-Luc no longer speaks that way about humanity or the Federation, he still has strong convictions about what the right thing IS, and what humanity SHOULD be doing. And I like the idea that humans always describing themselves as capable and the best of the best finally bit them in the butt on this show at least.
There was two other things besides Q I loved in the episode. The first thing is something I think a Star Trek series should have done before now, especially on the Original Series. James T Kirk is not what I'd ever describe as a patient person. But I love that Boimler and his friends call out the alien "party" for as confusing and misleading as it was. Why is it up to the HUMANS on the show to always understand everybody else? Don't other species have an obligation on that front to keep the peace? Why does Starfleet have to coddle aliens who speak in riddles and behave in an utterly crazy, irrational manner? I found Boimler's outrage cathartic and something I wish Kirk had been allowed to scream at the confusing groups of aliens who spoke only in riddles and then got mad at and starting killing his crew because they didn't understand them.
The second thing I noticed and loved is something I love specifically because it means I get and understand Star Trek, and even comedy, better than many of the critics of this show do. I have seen multiple complaints about the profanity on the show being bleeped, and people being outraged that because this is airs on a streaming service it should not be "censored". It was speculated that the profanity on Picard raised such a backlash that CBS All Access quickly decided to censor Star Trek going forward. And I had to hold my tongue on a LOT of different message boards I've frequented. But the show bleeping the swears you can't say on broadcast television wasn't censorship. It's because the show is a comedy and bleeps are funnier. They always were. That's why Arrested Development still used them on Netflix, and why Family Guy's uncut DVDs are usually about a tenth as funny as what was allowed on Fox and Adult Swim. And when they did the whole bit with the classified parts of the flashback using a different bleep than the swears, it's proof that not only was I right that this was an artistic decision on the writer's part that had nothing to do with network notes or censorship, but it also means I understand comedy a LOT better than many Star Trek fans do. Because that was freaking hilarious.
I loved the episode. ****1/2.
Marvel's Spider-Man: Maximum Venom "Generations"
That was a television production that existed. For 44 entire minutes. Yes it did.
Let's see. Where to begin?
Technically, I suppose I loved it. That's not something I'm proud to admit (the episode was very flawed and stupid in places) but I am easier to please than many of my harsher reviews of stuff would suggest. This episode achieved a bare minimum standard of pure satisfaction. Take note haters of my reviews: This is essentially my low bar for a guilty pleasure. Anything even slightly worse, I'm gonna rag on it mercilessly.
To be sure, there was a LOT of stuff to rag on. When after the explosion at the school Connors tells the kids to get back to class I was like, "I will never like or respect this show." Half the building just fell down. Fire engines and police aren't called? If anything was worth sending the entire school home early for, it's half the building falling down. I was like "I will never forgive you, Marvel's Spider-Man."
And then they actually did a bit I have been DYING to see in fiction, and all was forgiven. One of the stupid tropes in cartoons is the hero figuring out the password to the locked door by discovering which keypads had fingerprints on them. That is an utterly useless discovery for the reason the show said. Just knowing which buttons to press doesn't tell you in which order to press them, or even how many times you need to. And instead of this show being as dumb as Batman: The Animated Series, it's suddenly smarter than it about that one thing. The DNA being the lock unopener was genius too, although I might crossly point out Gwen didn't actually take of her glove the second time she used it, so the show doesn't get full points for it.
Here is the reason I was able to come back from the kids being sent back to class: It's a failure in the story rather than in the characters. Black Panther's Quest was terribly written too, but that was because the characters themselves were so dumb and / or tiresome. And this bad thing happened just the once this episode, and Hawkeye and T'Challa were nonstop awful, and never shut it off. I'll forgive this show after all.
If upon being licked by a Venom Symbiote either T'Challa or Clint said, "Joke's on you, I'm just getting over a cold," I might not have hated that show unreservedly. You can't hate any show unreservedly with a line like that in it. It's just not possible.
Jackal is good crazy. Goblin is bad crazy. What's the difference? Jackal refuses to monologue to Spidey about his actual plans and leaves him to die. He's dumb enough to leave the death unattended (which is a total Batman '66 move) but in fairness to him, staying would have actually killed him too. Jackal is only defeated when he takes the time to monologue his crazy plan to Gwen long enough for Miles to save her (almost incidentally in fact).
Goblin's craziness is like Nth-level bad crazy. He's so pathetic after he's beaten solely because he had built himself and his plan up so much in that long, crazy monologue, explaining everything like it was going out of style, and as if nobody else had places to be. If he hadn't done that, he could have ended the episode saying, "Whatevs, loser," as the cops take him away with his head held high, while he's giving Peter the finger. Instead when his plan comes so EASILY crashing down instead, it's like, "You are dumb and embarrassing. Peter deserves smarter and more worthy enemies.".
He correctly points out that Peter's strength is his support system. So he creates a team to take it down. Without ever bothering to make that team into a support system for himself to begin with.
Case in point: Swarm is a loser. Swarm is an idiot. He's fighting the very person he's trying to save and almost killed him numerous times. Norman thought somebody like THAT would make a reliable ally? Especially when villains are unmasking hero identities left and right? Seriously?
Similarly, I cannot believe he decided to burn Connors when he did. He hadn't actually won yet. And he could have correctly pointed out that a temporary cure is better than nothing, and still had him on the hook for that. Instead he blows that asset for no reason because he needs to gloat. Dumb, ineffective villain is dumb and ineffective.
I don't think John DiMaggio gets enough credit for how flawlessly he mimics Mark Hamill's performance as the Joker for the Jackal. Truthfully, maybe some scorn is due for it too. But if and when Hamill croaks, and there is a future DCAU project without him, I want DiMaggio voicing Timmverse Joker instead of Troy Baker.
And there was an aspect to the episode I loved and hated in equal measure. Does it count as The Surprise Betrayal Trope if it's a person we JUST met this episode? Yes? No? Well, it still didn't work. And then it's revealed it's the Chameleon and The Surprise Betrayal Trope Worked For The First Time EVER In Television History After All! Except then it's not actual betrayal so The Curse Of The Surprise Betrayal Trope Never Working remains unbroken. I think. Truthfully, I'm a little confused as to whether it actually worked or not. Maybe? Go Team Whut!
I groaned at Connors telling Peter he was no longer allowed to be Spider-Man on campus. I was like, "How cute. You still think you're gonna be principle when this is all over." Apparently Jackal and Normal aren't the only crazy people on the show.
So yes, those 44 minutes of time in my life just passed right by. They were good minutes and never hurt anybody. And I do not actually mourn their passing because I don't feel they were wasted. At least not completely. I'm mean, seriously, Connors. Send the kids home after the building falls down. For crying out loud. ****.
Power Rangers Beast Morphers "Intruder Alert!"
That was tiresome. To be fair, I DID do a lot of TV binging last night, and I didn't see this at my freshest. But still, but overall impression of when it was over was to be glad it was.
Not to say there wasn't an individual element or two that worked. Ryjax as a villain has an annoying accent and voice, but the rhino design is cool, and he is cleverer than all of the other bad guys, so I don't find him useless either. So not EVERYTHING sucked.
You know the alien was a good guy because the Rangers couldn't understand him. If he were a villain the show would have had him monologuing about how evil he is instantly. This show is NOT subtle about stuff like that. The way you know he isn't a bad guy is because that isn't the first thing he declares upon meeting them.
Return of the Puddies. To be honest, if they weren't going to bother to show that super cheap but weirdly cool disintegrating visual effect the show used back in 1994 when they were killed, they might as well have not even bothered bringing them back at all. For me that was their entire selling point. Like the vampire dustings un Buffy, despite being super cheap to produce, those deaths LOOKED really cool. I really wanted to see that corny effect again.
The worst thing in the episode was the show asking the audience to laugh at Ben and Betty slipping on the marbles and falling down. Has no parent EVER called the show out for the amount of pure fat shaming it repeatedly engages in? Because 25 years (and counting) later, it STILL does it. Are you telling me NOBODY'S made a stink? EVER? I don't buy it. After all people have been complaining the show is stupid and badly written since its inception, and they've never bothered to fix that either.
I'm glad that's over. My night of binging did NOT end on a high note. *1/2.
Batman: The Adventures Continue "The Darker Knight"
That was kind of repulsive.
Batman kicking Nora's corpse wasn't merely adding insult to injury. It was just plain injury. Truly disgusted with that idea.
It's a little early but I think I can declare this revival a dud. **.
The Golden Compass by Philip Pullman
For most sci-fi or fantasy franchises based on a book, I have read the book first and base my judgment on the adaptation on that. For His Dark Materials I saw the first season of the TV show first. It was a very interesting and unusual experience to view the franchise in the order that I did. As of this review, I've seen the season once, and read the book once. I like the season more. But what's interesting is the reasons I like the series and book are different and yet complimentary to each other.
Most screen adaptations are lesser than the source material because they have to truncate stuff to fit the length of a movie, and they often change things to make them easier to "read" on a screen that a book has the luxury of being able to describe to you. What interests me about His Dark Materials: Season One is how different it is than the book and how absolutely faithful it is at the same time. I think both the series and the book have their own unique selling points and things each does better than the other. I like the series slightly better, but I mean that as no slam on the book whatsoever. Unlike most adaptations, the series and book may have their own strengths they play to, but I don't think either has a weakness the other managed to avoid. Instead both projects compliment each other. And I like having seen and read both projects because they make the story larger than either project made it out to be singly.
For the series, since it IS faithful to a relatively shortish book, instead of creating scenes of filler for Lyra to extend her journey, the show instead explores the Universe through different characters we rarely get a perspective from, because every scene in the book either has Lyra in it, or is entirely about her. The series opens up the Universe in a way the book could not, simply because it has an extended runtime. The genius is that (so far at least) none of that extra stuff contradicts what is shown in the book, and instead gives context to a lot of the mysteries the book doesn't address at this stage of the game.
And the book is great because it gave me context to the show I had no way of knowing. For instance, the taboo that it is vulgar and unthinkable to touch another person's Daemon makes several scenes in the series, including some not depicted in the book, even more outright horrific there in hindsight for me than they were without me knowing that at the time. Similarly, I do not have to wait for season two to discover Lyra's new feelings for her previously admired father Asriel. She hates him and wants to kill him. Also, the show (admittedly wisely) played it a bit coy as to whether Mrs. Coulter actually was starting to bring Lyra over to her side once she saved her life from the Gobblers' cutting procedure. Lyra's disdain for Coulter is evident in the book and never changes once she learns what she is.
The book did a better thing than the series in one respect, but I can't conceive of a way the show could have made it work, so I don't begrudge them skipping it. There is a point where Iorick the bear tells Lyra bears cannot be tricked. I thought that was a silly "Master Race" brag similar to the prideful boasts espoused by various smug Klingons on Star Trek. In fact when Lyra reveals she has tricked Iofur to Iorick there after all, I thought that Iorick saying Iofur wasn't really a bear was the No True Scotsman Fallacy at its most blatant. But both things are true in the book. At one point Iorick spars with Lyra there, and she gets increasingly frustrated she can't ever trick him, or power through his moves with her stick. He essentially proves to Lyra and the reader bears can't be tricked, and shows his math right there. And Iofur is shown in the book as being even more obsessed with becoming human than he was on the show. It basically boils down to the idea that Lyra tricked him because he was viewing her promises through the lens of human greed and foolishness, rather than bear wisdom and cunning. But I can't think of a believable way the show could have done that parry scene explicitly enough for that idea to both play out to the viewer, and not blow the season's entire budget at the same time.
Another thing I like about the show is that it takes a MUCH lighter touch in several things. I don't like seeing Lyra smoke and get drunk in the book at her age so I like that the show omits that. Similarly, while I sort of see the reasoning of Lyra refusing to look away from Iorick brutally killing Iofur in the book because she owed him that much, it's way too graphic to see a little girl turn around and witness it, and seeing her closed eyes and imagining what is happening is scary enough for the kids in the audience. And frankly what happens in the book is shockingly gory. Here, Iorick rips open Iofur ribs and eats his heart raw. While that WOULD be a perfectly fine scene on any OTHER HBO show, if the network is importing this from The BBC to get into the family TV game, I'll take the PG-13 version, thank you very much.
I should probably point out that Philip Pullman is a great writer. J.K. Rowling knows how to create a great story. But she's a bad writer. It's not just the characters who have clunky dialogue in Harry Potter, it's the Narrator who tells things from Harry Potter's perspective as well.
In fact this book puts Harry Potter to shame in a very big way, that I should be disappointed that Rowling did because she's a woman, and she claims to be a feminist. But Pullman doesn't do physical descriptions of the characters' faces. All of Harry initial impressions of characters are always based on their superficial attractiveness. That always bothered me a little, but nobody else complained, so I thought it was just me. But whenever Harry would describe a Slytherin female classmate he just met as "a hard-faced girl" I'd cringe. Perhaps the very reason Rowling indulges in that kind of superficial observation is BECAUSE she's a woman. But I don't think it's healthy, and I don't think it's a good thing to teach children. And if you make up what the characters look like mostly in your own mind, you can cast Lin-Manuel Miranda as Texan Lee Scoresby and it's totally okay! Harry's superficial sizing up of strangers was not only a bad thing to portray to kids reading the books. I'm sure it might also have boxed in some future casting for the movies.
What I especially like about Pullman's writing style is that he doesn't explain anything. After a SUPER brief tutorial about Universe-setting as a prologue that lasts a few sentences at most, he launches right into the story, as if daemons are the most natural thing in the world, and expects the reader to eventually catch on and catch up. Again, the selling point of the TV series is that it makes things crystal clear, but I appreciate the writing of the book for the ambiguity it gives the story to the reader, and it's told as if by an unnamed narrator from THAT Universe, and describes phrases and ideas that would sound natural in a book written in THAT world. That is a gift. That is not a gift Rowling has, and it's not even a gift Tolkien had. The Lord Of The Rings is a great story, and it made three great movies, but the narrative of the book is utterly dry and boring. Pullman not only has interesting things happening, he tells them in an interesting way. It's very impressive for that reason.
If you haven't read this book OR seen the series, I don't really think there is a preference for the correct order to view them. Which is a very new experience for me and kind of a bit of a refreshing one too. I like the idea that both projects tell a fuller story when viewed as a whole instead of singly. That's tight. ****1/2.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "Camp Cretaceous"
I don't like everything, but as far as Pilots for a kids' cartoon go, it was solid.
The downside is that all of the kids besides Darius are unlikable and annoying. I get they are feeding into archetypes to set each kid apart, but I don't approve of fiction doing that, and I don't believe fiction NEEDS to do that to differentiate characters. This is how a sloppy writer does character development. This means one of two things: Either the writing on this show is gonna megasuck, or the writers are underwriting the characters because they don't want kids in the audience to get too attached to them. The second thing isn't great, but because the rest of the episode besides the characters was good, I'm leaning towards the cast being horror movie expendable. I'm not saying all or most of the cast is going to die. But me hating all of them besides Darius makes it a crapshoot who does and doesn't get eaten.
Legit thrills and scares in the episode. I find the human designs somewhat creepy, which is understandable because it's CGI on a budget. But it feels very cinematic too, and when the Jurassic Park theme starts playing as the dinosaurs are lumbering below it stops mattering to me that this is a cartoon.
Brooklyn saying Darius and Kenji were showing her what toxic masculinity looked like got a big laugh from me. Weirdly, nothing in the franchise since Jeff Goldblum and Laura Dern in the first movie has really gotten me to laugh, so I noticed that for the rare pleasure it was. For the record, that is the precise type of joke more kids shows should be telling. And it is not lost on me this is the first kids show I've ever seen tell that type of joke. Or at least telling it in a funny and unobtrusive manner.
I seem to recal the raptor skulls being used as whistles to control the raptors from the third movie, but it's been awhile. And that plot idea was dumb even then.
I liked the first episode at any rate. As far as kiddie Jurassic World stuff goes, it beats the LEGO cartoons by a mile. ****.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "Secrets"
If Darius and Kenji HAD gotten kicked out at the end of the episode it would have served them right. Sneaking off WHILE they were doing punishment for that exact error actually ticked me off a bit.
It's a shame they didn't get B.D. Wong back for Dr. Wu.
Wu seems a lot more vain and self-serving here than in the films, although he always seemed vaguely sinister and slimy there too.
Classic Jurassic Park espionage at the end. It could be argued things wouldn't have gone pear-shaped in the first movie if not for human greed and deception. Here we go again.
Not as good as the first episode. ***1/2.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "The Cattle Drive"
We have a problem.
It's a big problem and it concerns me. It could be a show-wrecker. It hasn't quite gotten that far yet (although it DID wreck THIS episode) but it easily could.
All of the characters are far too stupid, annoying, and unlikable. It's like every kid is Bryce Dallas Howard running away from a T-Rex in high heels. It's okay to put one Bryce Dallas Howard in ONE movie. Six of them in an entire TV series? That's concerning.
Maybe I shouldn't be including Darius in that, but Dave the counselor is annoying too, so that math evens out either way.
This specific hindrance hasn't really weakened the bigger episodes of the show so far. But it seems to be a MAJOR drawback for filler episodes. I just hope those are rare this season. The obnoxious characters are making them unbearable. *.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "Things Fall Apart"
First real-life casualties on the show. They weren't gory or really shown, but they made things real for the kids.
This was not a filler episode at all. Therefore most of the characters being annoying didn't hurt it in the least. It was great.
Darius is somebody I like, and I found the scenes with his father very moving mostly due to Keston John's voice performance. John also knocked my socks off as Hordak on the She-Ra remake, and it's very difficult to believe he isn't some huge well-known "serious" actor, but probably just some underpaid voice-guy who works for scale. He doesn't even have his own Wikipedia page. And he's amazing.
I have to say the implication of making necklaces out of teeth are actually quite unpleasant. For that reason alone that scene was not as heartwarming as it should have been.
But it was still the best episode so far. ****1/2.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "Happy Birthday, Eddie!"
If ANYONE deserved a birthday that unhappy, it was Eddie. Call that karma, or if you're the dinosaur, just desserts.
Very exciting and thrilling episode. This is what I wanted the show to be from the start. However the show sort of wisely reasoned it would be better to get us to this point step by step. It doesn't make some of the earlier shaky episodes less shaky, but I'm glad their shakiness is paying off at least.
The timing of the car crash ending was perfect. It doesn't matter that I saw it coming. That is how the episode SHOULD have ended and it did.
It was a pretty great episode in general. *****.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "Welcome To Jurassic World"
Hi, I'm Matt. This evening, I will be here to patiently explain for the millionth time why The Surprise Betrayal Trope Never, EVER Works (Special Kids Show Edition!).
I'm not even gonna bother to review the episode. That seems almost besides the point. This show did a couple of interesting twists to try and Make The Surprise Betrayal Work. But The Surprise Betrayal NEVER Works.
To start off this essay (I can't rightly call the following an actual review) I should talk about why The Surprise Betrayal Trope Never Works on adult-oriented programs. It's done its fair share of shocks for audience members, but I never respond to it, EVER, and the more I see it, the more I don't think it's because the show in question did it badly. It's that It Simply Never Works. The problem with adult shows using the trope is that is seems like a great juicy shocker of a cliffhanger to get people gabbing over the watercooler the next day. But the truth is it always destroys a dynamic on the show that DID work in the long term, for brief shock value in the short term, and the audience has to now live with the show being destroyed, because the writers couldn't think of an interesting idea other than to destroy their own show. Neat.
For kids shows they do the opposite idea, and always use a lighter touch. The Betrayer In Question Has Their Reasons, and is often remorseful, and the their former friends unforgiving despite that fact. And while I appreciate them being unwilling to destroy the show, it's like "What's the point?" If you can betray your friends and not actually be a bad guy, what's the lesson there for the audience? Why should I care?
And I think this is the real reason the show made most of the characters disposable stereotypes. I had foolishly and naively assumed that was done to make the characters easier cannon fodder for the dinosaurs. It was actually done to make them easier cannon fodder for The Surprise Betrayal Trope. But I Really Don't Care, Do You?
It Never EVER Works. When Yaz is on the pontoon and says "I did not think this through," I was like, "That is a PERFECT metaphor for not only this episode and this show, but every time a writer foolishly uses the trope hoping to mine nonexistent dramatic gold out of it." Instead "There's Turds In Them Thar Hills!". Doesn't stop writers from trying to mine them. They are all Stephen Colbert's father. But I also don't have to either take it seriously when they do that, or give them the benefit of the doubt when they do.
I got a LOT of online resistance to my increasingly negative reviews of Tangled: The Series' last season. And whether you agree with me that the show went out poorly or not, I have a serious hard time picturing a fan actually thinking Cassandra's betrayal actually HELPED anything, or made anything better, or said anything interesting about either the trope in general, or the characters in particular. I was warned over and over again "The show is amazing, it knows what it's doing, it will surprise you." But it actually couldn't. Because The Trope Never Works.
Jurassic World decided to Nerf the trope even further than MOST kiddie stuff by making all the characters on the show unlikable, so the betrayal might not matter so much to some viewers (particularly boys not particularly interested in a potential boring lesbian romance). I give it credit for trying that. That's a new angle. I never considering a show making a surprise betrayal between characters nobody liked. But no. It Still Never Works. And It Never Will.
Sigh. Where was I? Get offa my lawn. I have a cloud to yell at. *.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "Last Day Of Camp"
I feel better that that's a cliffhanger, and not an actual resolved ending, don't you?
I think there is a synonym for "monorail" in Latin that literally means "Machine Of The Gods."
I have to talk about the episode's false note. And it was such a major thing to me that I'm not sure I can give the episode a passing grade.
Let me briefly details my thoughts on people and life and death situations. I do not believe everyone sees them the same way. I believe there are some soldiers in wars who see the faces of the people they killed in their dreams every night and it haunts them to their dying day. There are other soldiers who believe it was either them or themself and sleep like a baby for the rest of their lives. Fiction stubbornly tells us the former situation is the "correct" perspective, and society sees it that way too. I don't. I think something like that is an opinion (like politics) that nobody who goes through it will ever agree on, and that's fine. It's not up to me or the rest of fiction to tell people how to process that when we haven't gone through it ourselves. It's not up to us to judge. It feels wrong to me for fiction to dictate the proper way for people to feel about life or death struggles when almost none of the writers are veterans, or have been placed in a dangerous situation. I think the only reason Torchwood's Russell T Davies might have been qualified to take the wrong-seeming stances on the subject he did, is because just based upon his writing output, it wouldn't shock me at all if he were a secret serial killer. But I otherwise don't personally judge veterans who sleep like babies harshly in my heart.
Back to unusual opinions about survival: Basically, if the show had one of the kids (probably Yaz) decide "No, we're not really friends, we have nothing in common, we'll never see other again," I wouldn't like it, and it wouldn't feel narratively satisfying, but it would be plausible. But for FIVE of them to think that? It not only strikes me as unlike the experience of other survivors of life and death experiences, it also flies in the face of everything kids believe about each other when they make friends at camp.
Life and death struggles bond people quickly in a way nothing else does. And kids attach themselves to new friends harder and faster than adults could ever remember how they used to (outside of, of course, life-threatening situations). To have BOTH things be true would mean these kids would basically be planning the rest of their lives together as friends forever, and including Bumpy in the dream. They'd be dreaming of living on a tropical island together for the rest of their lives, replete with monkey butlers. It's only after they were separated for a few days that they would sort of realize they weren't really friends. That's not something they'd ever believe WHILE they were together, much less WHILE the adventure is still happening.
I don't believe fiction is obligated to show everyone's truth about trauma is the same as everyone else's. It's something fiction does to the point of parody, and I don't approve of it. But there are certain characteristics about most people and how they view trauma that are USUALLY true for MOST people. It is a totally false note that five of the six kids believe the unusual thing. Heck, it would be unusual if ONE of them did. They're kids. They believe they can do anything. That moment was NOT the moment they'd realize they have nothing in common.
I liked the rest of the episode, but that false note was sort of anchored as the dramatic centerpiece of the episode, so I can't very well give it a passing grade. **1/2.
Jurassic World: Camp Cretaceous "End Of The Line"
Very surprised at the open ending. I don't object to it per se, but Netflix LOVES randomly canceling stuff with great ratings that happens to be expensive to produce, so it doesn't seem very prudent either.
I'm glad Ben is alive but on some level I would have admired the show if they had gone through with it and killed him off.
And now to talk about the suspense of the episode. Suspense is this franchise's bread and butter, and there was a point halfway through the episode where it just lost me and I stopped being excited. Why?
The kids were TOO freaking lucky. They were getting TOO many crazy unlikely breaks. So it stops being "Can they escape" and just turns into random, noisy, cr*p happening. There is no purpose to a suspense story with that many unlikely lucky breaks. It completely took me out of it and I checked out in caring whether the kids would survive. Because at this point the show obviously decided they would, and I didn't see things any differently.
Tora walking away rather than continuing to confront the kids WAS a cool moment, especially because it is very true to life for nature. On nature shows the cheetah either catches the antelope or it escapes. Nat Geo never shows footage of the Cheetah believing the antelope is more trouble than it's worth and skulking off, but that probably happens all the time in the wild. In a life or death struggle, the predator DOES take its own survival into account. It would be fighting every instinct in biology if they didn't.
Yaz says "Nobody in this park thought anything through." Yasmina seems to be the character they have say utterly true and surprisingly deep things, usually having a double meaning that also negatively describes the franchise at large. I like it.
I had mildly favorable impression of that, gutted tension or not. At least until Netflix decides to cancel the show out of the blue, and I'll be annoyed instead. ***1/2.
Star Trek: Lower Decks "Veritas"
I loved the way Q was portrayed. Aside from being awesome because they got John De Lancie back, I liked that Q shenanigans have sort of become something the entire fleet knows the proper way to deal with. Well, maybe not how to win the crazy games. But the crew, particularly Mariner seems to get Q's tests aren't actually malevolent and are partly done in the spirit of fun. Q's games used to be a LOT more lethal in the first two seasons of Next Generation, but his shtick sort of became more and more benign as Picard and later Janeway's good influence wore off on him.
Kurtwood Smith is another Star Trek staple. He had previously appeared in different alien roles in Star Trek VI, Deep Space Nine, and Voyager.
Apparently the only thing to do on Earth is hang around in Vineyards and Soul Food restaurants. What's hysterical about that joke is those two settings are pretty much the best looks we got at 24th Century Earth civilian life on the three original sequel series.
I don't even know or remember who Roga Daynar is. Advantage Khan.
The horrid fan dance from Star Trek V can never get enough shade thrown at it. Here, let this show help.
I think the problem with humans on Star Trek always telling other aliens how virtuous and far they have come is that some aliens are dumb enough to believe them. All of Picard's speeches essentially boiled down to propaganda, and racist propaganda at that, if you read between the lines. One of the reasons I adore Star Trek: Picard is because Picard has gotten to a stage in his life where humanity isn't automatically the beacon of virtue he sold it as on Next Gen. And the reason Star Trek: Picard works is because even if Jean-Luc no longer speaks that way about humanity or the Federation, he still has strong convictions about what the right thing IS, and what humanity SHOULD be doing. And I like the idea that humans always describing themselves as capable and the best of the best finally bit them in the butt on this show at least.
There was two other things besides Q I loved in the episode. The first thing is something I think a Star Trek series should have done before now, especially on the Original Series. James T Kirk is not what I'd ever describe as a patient person. But I love that Boimler and his friends call out the alien "party" for as confusing and misleading as it was. Why is it up to the HUMANS on the show to always understand everybody else? Don't other species have an obligation on that front to keep the peace? Why does Starfleet have to coddle aliens who speak in riddles and behave in an utterly crazy, irrational manner? I found Boimler's outrage cathartic and something I wish Kirk had been allowed to scream at the confusing groups of aliens who spoke only in riddles and then got mad at and starting killing his crew because they didn't understand them.
The second thing I noticed and loved is something I love specifically because it means I get and understand Star Trek, and even comedy, better than many of the critics of this show do. I have seen multiple complaints about the profanity on the show being bleeped, and people being outraged that because this is airs on a streaming service it should not be "censored". It was speculated that the profanity on Picard raised such a backlash that CBS All Access quickly decided to censor Star Trek going forward. And I had to hold my tongue on a LOT of different message boards I've frequented. But the show bleeping the swears you can't say on broadcast television wasn't censorship. It's because the show is a comedy and bleeps are funnier. They always were. That's why Arrested Development still used them on Netflix, and why Family Guy's uncut DVDs are usually about a tenth as funny as what was allowed on Fox and Adult Swim. And when they did the whole bit with the classified parts of the flashback using a different bleep than the swears, it's proof that not only was I right that this was an artistic decision on the writer's part that had nothing to do with network notes or censorship, but it also means I understand comedy a LOT better than many Star Trek fans do. Because that was freaking hilarious.
I loved the episode. ****1/2.
Marvel's Spider-Man: Maximum Venom "Generations"
That was a television production that existed. For 44 entire minutes. Yes it did.
Let's see. Where to begin?
Technically, I suppose I loved it. That's not something I'm proud to admit (the episode was very flawed and stupid in places) but I am easier to please than many of my harsher reviews of stuff would suggest. This episode achieved a bare minimum standard of pure satisfaction. Take note haters of my reviews: This is essentially my low bar for a guilty pleasure. Anything even slightly worse, I'm gonna rag on it mercilessly.
To be sure, there was a LOT of stuff to rag on. When after the explosion at the school Connors tells the kids to get back to class I was like, "I will never like or respect this show." Half the building just fell down. Fire engines and police aren't called? If anything was worth sending the entire school home early for, it's half the building falling down. I was like "I will never forgive you, Marvel's Spider-Man."
And then they actually did a bit I have been DYING to see in fiction, and all was forgiven. One of the stupid tropes in cartoons is the hero figuring out the password to the locked door by discovering which keypads had fingerprints on them. That is an utterly useless discovery for the reason the show said. Just knowing which buttons to press doesn't tell you in which order to press them, or even how many times you need to. And instead of this show being as dumb as Batman: The Animated Series, it's suddenly smarter than it about that one thing. The DNA being the lock unopener was genius too, although I might crossly point out Gwen didn't actually take of her glove the second time she used it, so the show doesn't get full points for it.
Here is the reason I was able to come back from the kids being sent back to class: It's a failure in the story rather than in the characters. Black Panther's Quest was terribly written too, but that was because the characters themselves were so dumb and / or tiresome. And this bad thing happened just the once this episode, and Hawkeye and T'Challa were nonstop awful, and never shut it off. I'll forgive this show after all.
If upon being licked by a Venom Symbiote either T'Challa or Clint said, "Joke's on you, I'm just getting over a cold," I might not have hated that show unreservedly. You can't hate any show unreservedly with a line like that in it. It's just not possible.
Jackal is good crazy. Goblin is bad crazy. What's the difference? Jackal refuses to monologue to Spidey about his actual plans and leaves him to die. He's dumb enough to leave the death unattended (which is a total Batman '66 move) but in fairness to him, staying would have actually killed him too. Jackal is only defeated when he takes the time to monologue his crazy plan to Gwen long enough for Miles to save her (almost incidentally in fact).
Goblin's craziness is like Nth-level bad crazy. He's so pathetic after he's beaten solely because he had built himself and his plan up so much in that long, crazy monologue, explaining everything like it was going out of style, and as if nobody else had places to be. If he hadn't done that, he could have ended the episode saying, "Whatevs, loser," as the cops take him away with his head held high, while he's giving Peter the finger. Instead when his plan comes so EASILY crashing down instead, it's like, "You are dumb and embarrassing. Peter deserves smarter and more worthy enemies.".
He correctly points out that Peter's strength is his support system. So he creates a team to take it down. Without ever bothering to make that team into a support system for himself to begin with.
Case in point: Swarm is a loser. Swarm is an idiot. He's fighting the very person he's trying to save and almost killed him numerous times. Norman thought somebody like THAT would make a reliable ally? Especially when villains are unmasking hero identities left and right? Seriously?
Similarly, I cannot believe he decided to burn Connors when he did. He hadn't actually won yet. And he could have correctly pointed out that a temporary cure is better than nothing, and still had him on the hook for that. Instead he blows that asset for no reason because he needs to gloat. Dumb, ineffective villain is dumb and ineffective.
I don't think John DiMaggio gets enough credit for how flawlessly he mimics Mark Hamill's performance as the Joker for the Jackal. Truthfully, maybe some scorn is due for it too. But if and when Hamill croaks, and there is a future DCAU project without him, I want DiMaggio voicing Timmverse Joker instead of Troy Baker.
And there was an aspect to the episode I loved and hated in equal measure. Does it count as The Surprise Betrayal Trope if it's a person we JUST met this episode? Yes? No? Well, it still didn't work. And then it's revealed it's the Chameleon and The Surprise Betrayal Trope Worked For The First Time EVER In Television History After All! Except then it's not actual betrayal so The Curse Of The Surprise Betrayal Trope Never Working remains unbroken. I think. Truthfully, I'm a little confused as to whether it actually worked or not. Maybe? Go Team Whut!
I groaned at Connors telling Peter he was no longer allowed to be Spider-Man on campus. I was like, "How cute. You still think you're gonna be principle when this is all over." Apparently Jackal and Normal aren't the only crazy people on the show.
So yes, those 44 minutes of time in my life just passed right by. They were good minutes and never hurt anybody. And I do not actually mourn their passing because I don't feel they were wasted. At least not completely. I'm mean, seriously, Connors. Send the kids home after the building falls down. For crying out loud. ****.
Power Rangers Beast Morphers "Intruder Alert!"
That was tiresome. To be fair, I DID do a lot of TV binging last night, and I didn't see this at my freshest. But still, but overall impression of when it was over was to be glad it was.
Not to say there wasn't an individual element or two that worked. Ryjax as a villain has an annoying accent and voice, but the rhino design is cool, and he is cleverer than all of the other bad guys, so I don't find him useless either. So not EVERYTHING sucked.
You know the alien was a good guy because the Rangers couldn't understand him. If he were a villain the show would have had him monologuing about how evil he is instantly. This show is NOT subtle about stuff like that. The way you know he isn't a bad guy is because that isn't the first thing he declares upon meeting them.
Return of the Puddies. To be honest, if they weren't going to bother to show that super cheap but weirdly cool disintegrating visual effect the show used back in 1994 when they were killed, they might as well have not even bothered bringing them back at all. For me that was their entire selling point. Like the vampire dustings un Buffy, despite being super cheap to produce, those deaths LOOKED really cool. I really wanted to see that corny effect again.
The worst thing in the episode was the show asking the audience to laugh at Ben and Betty slipping on the marbles and falling down. Has no parent EVER called the show out for the amount of pure fat shaming it repeatedly engages in? Because 25 years (and counting) later, it STILL does it. Are you telling me NOBODY'S made a stink? EVER? I don't buy it. After all people have been complaining the show is stupid and badly written since its inception, and they've never bothered to fix that either.
I'm glad that's over. My night of binging did NOT end on a high note. *1/2.
Batman: The Adventures Continue "The Darker Knight"
That was kind of repulsive.
Batman kicking Nora's corpse wasn't merely adding insult to injury. It was just plain injury. Truly disgusted with that idea.
It's a little early but I think I can declare this revival a dud. **.
The Golden Compass by Philip Pullman
For most sci-fi or fantasy franchises based on a book, I have read the book first and base my judgment on the adaptation on that. For His Dark Materials I saw the first season of the TV show first. It was a very interesting and unusual experience to view the franchise in the order that I did. As of this review, I've seen the season once, and read the book once. I like the season more. But what's interesting is the reasons I like the series and book are different and yet complimentary to each other.
Most screen adaptations are lesser than the source material because they have to truncate stuff to fit the length of a movie, and they often change things to make them easier to "read" on a screen that a book has the luxury of being able to describe to you. What interests me about His Dark Materials: Season One is how different it is than the book and how absolutely faithful it is at the same time. I think both the series and the book have their own unique selling points and things each does better than the other. I like the series slightly better, but I mean that as no slam on the book whatsoever. Unlike most adaptations, the series and book may have their own strengths they play to, but I don't think either has a weakness the other managed to avoid. Instead both projects compliment each other. And I like having seen and read both projects because they make the story larger than either project made it out to be singly.
For the series, since it IS faithful to a relatively shortish book, instead of creating scenes of filler for Lyra to extend her journey, the show instead explores the Universe through different characters we rarely get a perspective from, because every scene in the book either has Lyra in it, or is entirely about her. The series opens up the Universe in a way the book could not, simply because it has an extended runtime. The genius is that (so far at least) none of that extra stuff contradicts what is shown in the book, and instead gives context to a lot of the mysteries the book doesn't address at this stage of the game.
And the book is great because it gave me context to the show I had no way of knowing. For instance, the taboo that it is vulgar and unthinkable to touch another person's Daemon makes several scenes in the series, including some not depicted in the book, even more outright horrific there in hindsight for me than they were without me knowing that at the time. Similarly, I do not have to wait for season two to discover Lyra's new feelings for her previously admired father Asriel. She hates him and wants to kill him. Also, the show (admittedly wisely) played it a bit coy as to whether Mrs. Coulter actually was starting to bring Lyra over to her side once she saved her life from the Gobblers' cutting procedure. Lyra's disdain for Coulter is evident in the book and never changes once she learns what she is.
The book did a better thing than the series in one respect, but I can't conceive of a way the show could have made it work, so I don't begrudge them skipping it. There is a point where Iorick the bear tells Lyra bears cannot be tricked. I thought that was a silly "Master Race" brag similar to the prideful boasts espoused by various smug Klingons on Star Trek. In fact when Lyra reveals she has tricked Iofur to Iorick there after all, I thought that Iorick saying Iofur wasn't really a bear was the No True Scotsman Fallacy at its most blatant. But both things are true in the book. At one point Iorick spars with Lyra there, and she gets increasingly frustrated she can't ever trick him, or power through his moves with her stick. He essentially proves to Lyra and the reader bears can't be tricked, and shows his math right there. And Iofur is shown in the book as being even more obsessed with becoming human than he was on the show. It basically boils down to the idea that Lyra tricked him because he was viewing her promises through the lens of human greed and foolishness, rather than bear wisdom and cunning. But I can't think of a believable way the show could have done that parry scene explicitly enough for that idea to both play out to the viewer, and not blow the season's entire budget at the same time.
Another thing I like about the show is that it takes a MUCH lighter touch in several things. I don't like seeing Lyra smoke and get drunk in the book at her age so I like that the show omits that. Similarly, while I sort of see the reasoning of Lyra refusing to look away from Iorick brutally killing Iofur in the book because she owed him that much, it's way too graphic to see a little girl turn around and witness it, and seeing her closed eyes and imagining what is happening is scary enough for the kids in the audience. And frankly what happens in the book is shockingly gory. Here, Iorick rips open Iofur ribs and eats his heart raw. While that WOULD be a perfectly fine scene on any OTHER HBO show, if the network is importing this from The BBC to get into the family TV game, I'll take the PG-13 version, thank you very much.
I should probably point out that Philip Pullman is a great writer. J.K. Rowling knows how to create a great story. But she's a bad writer. It's not just the characters who have clunky dialogue in Harry Potter, it's the Narrator who tells things from Harry Potter's perspective as well.
In fact this book puts Harry Potter to shame in a very big way, that I should be disappointed that Rowling did because she's a woman, and she claims to be a feminist. But Pullman doesn't do physical descriptions of the characters' faces. All of Harry initial impressions of characters are always based on their superficial attractiveness. That always bothered me a little, but nobody else complained, so I thought it was just me. But whenever Harry would describe a Slytherin female classmate he just met as "a hard-faced girl" I'd cringe. Perhaps the very reason Rowling indulges in that kind of superficial observation is BECAUSE she's a woman. But I don't think it's healthy, and I don't think it's a good thing to teach children. And if you make up what the characters look like mostly in your own mind, you can cast Lin-Manuel Miranda as Texan Lee Scoresby and it's totally okay! Harry's superficial sizing up of strangers was not only a bad thing to portray to kids reading the books. I'm sure it might also have boxed in some future casting for the movies.
What I especially like about Pullman's writing style is that he doesn't explain anything. After a SUPER brief tutorial about Universe-setting as a prologue that lasts a few sentences at most, he launches right into the story, as if daemons are the most natural thing in the world, and expects the reader to eventually catch on and catch up. Again, the selling point of the TV series is that it makes things crystal clear, but I appreciate the writing of the book for the ambiguity it gives the story to the reader, and it's told as if by an unnamed narrator from THAT Universe, and describes phrases and ideas that would sound natural in a book written in THAT world. That is a gift. That is not a gift Rowling has, and it's not even a gift Tolkien had. The Lord Of The Rings is a great story, and it made three great movies, but the narrative of the book is utterly dry and boring. Pullman not only has interesting things happening, he tells them in an interesting way. It's very impressive for that reason.
If you haven't read this book OR seen the series, I don't really think there is a preference for the correct order to view them. Which is a very new experience for me and kind of a bit of a refreshing one too. I like the idea that both projects tell a fuller story when viewed as a whole instead of singly. That's tight. ****1/2.
