Change Your Image
t_gyul
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Lucifer (2016)
Royalty spared
Myths are there for us to ponder about them, possibly to learn from them. Lucifer is a new take on the creation story in Genesis, or at least it tempts the viewer to reconstruct a coherent model of the world depicted through the series.
Surprise, Lucifer himself is shown as immature, but all the other celestials seem flawed, too, so I wondered if maybe the makers regressed to the intrigue-laden mess of polytheistic Olympus. However, I realized the Old Testament might give sufficient explanation insofar as humans were created "in the likeness of God". God himself might be almighty compared to humans, but flawed at his own level. And flawed he was when - in Lucifer's words - he neglected his children while "tinkering with this Universe project in the garage".
I can't help thinking of this Universe as of an AI simulation experiment / singularity event. God created the system that he could even upload his own (and his family's) mind up to, and which can create and host a swarm of AI's, i.e. Us, humans. The sysadmins (angels) have access to Heaven, an environment with no scarcity of resources. AI's develop on Earth but, after death, get to Hell or Heaven, based on merits. (Those "Hell loops" do sound like algorithms, right?)
Anyway, the notion of shared imperfections was regularly reinforced by the parellels drawn between the cases investigated and Lucifer's current issues. A lot of human characters are moral equals if not superiors of the silly or scheming angels. Only Amenadiel and Lucifer prove worthy of the family business, by nothing else than gaining field experience on Earth (struggle lets you grow). They sort of climb the ladder, although they don't quite need to deal with the existential fear that all humans have. And this difference is also noticed and voiced by Lucifer. The Devil becomes humans' advocate, demanding fairness in the big game, as well as authentic information on transcendent matters (maybe some response to the prayers), the lack of which, not surprisingly, keeps driving people towards agnosticism.
Self-actualization is an important theme in the series. It is discovered in the case of angels who physically change in line with their inner workings. A similar thing is shown with demons - Mazikeen appears capable of growing a soul. This has interesting philosophical implications. First, what made up her personality before having a soul? Second, the soul might be but an emergent phenomenon, just like we can't improve our model of ourselves beyond that. As humans we have human rights, but we are doomed to permanently argue about when exactly in the fetal development we get entitled to those rights...
Eventually, it turns out that even hell-dwelling souls can self-actualize. It is their own guilt that fuels their punishment. And, in the series, it is Lucifer's big invention that the right infernal psycho-therapeutic nudges can help them confront and conquer guilt and thus upgrade their resting place.
Which is most interesting, because a very similar invention has already happened in history. Jesus, a.k.a. The Christ has also been interpreted as someone who can free guilty souls from eternal damnation - repentance is rewarded with forgiveness.
It is simply incredible how the series steals the idea without giving credits to the original inventor. Sure, Jesus is in the public domain, but the moral theft is done in broad daylight, as even the Catholic Church with the Vatican and some priests are featured; Chloe with her miraculous birth and her immunity to Lucifer's powers is a sizeable metaphor for Jesus; Ella is wearing a cross on her neck... yet there is no mention of Jesus. Is this series a desperate attempt by the Jewish tradition to ignore the disputed messiah? Or is it a case made for subtle improvements in the salvation methodology by Lucifer? Or is it just another marketing driven dilution of the essential? As Christmas can be sold to more people in the USA if you omit references to the original present (Christ given by God to people), you can also sell a salvation story without mentioning Jesus.
Religion wars set aside, this fictional universe shows commendable internal consistence. Remember though, that inner consistence (fitting of the parts) is not sufficient to judge the validity of an idea. That would also require checking against the background of perceivable reality. In this case, if the universe is a simulation, we have to explain how the infrastructure, i.e. The whole world that enabled and currently runs this simulation came about.
Like... where did God hire the servers? And how did he strike a deal allowing the mass migration of souls from low maintenance hell loops to resource intensive heavenly existence? ;-)
Liu lang di qiu (2019)
Incoherent
I cannot buy this plot or several reasons.
We see that massive amounts of matter has been moved to build the thrusters, as well as the space station. It all seems to be facilitated by advanced fusion technology. All right. But wait, how come the same technology could not be used to make underground accommodation for more of the population?
The implausibleness of the "wandering" in terms of speed and required energy has already been pointed out. Let me add that the accelerating force would be concentrated at the engines, so they would have to have extremely solid structure. You would want to rely on naturally hard mountain ridges, and definitely would NOT want to place underground cities right underneath them.
Also, you either keep them low but mess with the atmosphere or put them high and fatally fragile...
It is laughable that after calculating everything for the big project, the gravitational effect on Earth surface would come as a surprise.
The eventual idea to correct course is also laughable. Its effect can be either negligible, or sufficient but devastating.
I found the editing rather confusing. Logistical problems get magically solved. Tools are always handy. People pop up where they want to be. Without realism, I cannot help losing interest.
I give +1 point for the positive camaraderie portrayed.
The Expanse: The Monster and the Rocket (2017)
Gravity lost?
I read some praising reviews regarding how physics is not abused in the series. And I mostly agree, but in this episode, Ganymede seems to have lost its mass!
I have looked up that surface gravity on this moon is about 14% of Earth gravity. Which means that the Rocinante should not be able to just effortlessly float above the surface. Even the minor thrusters are only heard to be engaged occasionally, to make minor maneuvers.
(And this is in contrast with the interior shots where people walk around just like they would on Earth.)
Disappointing.
Into the Forest (2015)
Writer spreading ignorance through silly ending
The setting is welcome, for we need to be reminded of such apocalyptic dangers now and then.
Acting is solid, the imagery is awesome.
BUT I could not stomach the silly ending. You just don't leave a luxurious shelter with minor problems behind, in favor of a tiny, drafty, makeshift shelter.
This flaw of the plot has been pointed out by a lot of reviewers, so here's my addition:
Eva argues for burning down the house by saying people had already been around for some 200,000 years before the last 140 when they could also enjoy electricity.
True. Yet, misleading.
Modern age brought us electricity and other useful stuff like washing machine, insulated windows, dentists, contraceptives, etc. All these things let individualism thrive. And here they are, isolated from other people, with a degrading but still considerable pool of modern products. It was their modern house and the modern resources within that allowed them to survive this far. If they dispose of these, they need to return to the traditional alternative: become part of a tight COMMUNITY! Two is nothing in the face of a harsh winter. Try a hundred.
But were we left with the feeling they would seek (and quickly find) company? Nope. Silly.
Life (2017)
Keep calm and trust your universe
Film makers are under pressure to invent. 'Life' definitely introduced a novel concept by Calvin, a complex life-form exclusively comprised of multi-functional (or omni-functional?) cells. I insist, though, that such beings – while making an interesting thought experiment – are highly unrealistic.
Throughout evolution, multi-cell earthlings have grown fit to various environments by developing some complexity. In turn, complexity seems to have always arisen from specialization at some level. That's how we have several kinds of cells in several kinds of tissues in several kinds of organs. Now, I am not suggesting each body part can only have a single function. For example, feathers facilitate motion, but also insulate and protect, not to mention impressing lady birds. But they do not really contribute to metabolism, nor to structural support, nor to the nervous or hormonal management of the body. That would be too much. Obviously, some mechanism honed to one purpose cannot excel in all the totally different functions required for survival. And that is a pattern going well beyond the realms of biology.
Based on comparative advantages, there is a division of labour and accompanying trade between computer parts, individuals, businesses, departments, nations, teammates in sports... you name it.
Or think of polyhistors, who could only thrive before sciences accumulated the vast knowledge of modern times. Nowadays, even mediocre dentists or linguists or plumbers will - in their own fields - probably beat them. Also, a team of such mediocre specialists will beat a polyhistor in every way.
It is only in relatively lukewarm, non-competing environments where aspiring polyhistors can succeed.
In fact, Calvin would have had to originate from such a lukewarm environment, and make a slow, dumb, sickly creature on teeming Earth. (Unless, perhaps, Calvin, too, was designed by some ancient civilization for military purposes...)
Battlestar Galactica (2004)
Splendid portrayal of a twisted plan
Battlestar Galactica has great merits in exhibiting human nature, both its noble and shameful side. By introducing the cylons, the series even raises the question: are our weaknesses human, or rather pertaining to the more general state of bearing an intellect. However, we'll never know because these cylons tend to be anthropomorphic for their human "ancestry"... In fact, humans and cylons are both pathetic in one way or another. Some organic creatures (including humans, according to the prequel, Caprica) would prefer being durable metallic ones, while metallic cylons wish to attain the fragile beauty of their organic based icons. Then organic cylons capable of eternal life via "downloads" fail to live happily ever after! No, they rather feel like exterminating humankind. Well, I don't really see why. Uprising against slavery is OK, waging a total war against the former masters (while longing for slaves of their own!) is overreaction, at least from machines, which are supposed to be more rational than humans. So why should this happen again and again, as suggested in the series? There is also a good deal of action here. Space battle tactics and dogfights abound. I'd propose some reality checks, though. What's the point in capital ships constantly burning fuel in their rocket engines (i.e. accelerating) when they have FTL (faster than light) capability? How can fighters take multiple sharp turns in space with rocket technology – and not run out of fuel?
More painful to me are the logical flaws. Some FTL jumps are traceable, others are not – why? Organic cylons have distinct features such as superior physical power, mental projection, or data transfer through some vague interface in the forearm – still, one cannot tell them from humans, even under scientific scrutiny? And they routinely create their own clones but cannot arrange for child bearing?
Even more painful was the mystical element. It was a disappointing for me to learn that the companions of Baltar and Caprica Six were God's messengers (angels). Come on, I started to watch sci-fi, not fantasy! My agnostic self is in rage. These people experience several miracles (consider Starbuck rising from the dead) and still fail to acknowledge them. How different from the real world where, in my view, miracles are mere legends and still, so many feel confident about their belief! And God is not only there, it has a plan. Thus, the plan becomes fate for the characters, who, in turn, become puppets, and the main storyline becomes somewhat dull, being only really shaped by that one divine person. One could also ask (rephrasing the question put by one of the characters), how multiple holocausts fit into the plan of the grand designer...
Most painful for me was the end. Lee (or was it God?) proposes that the remaining group of people and cylons abandon civilization and start with a clean slate – in order to break the cycle of wars. What a mess! It was civilization that made both populations conscious about their being in a vicious cycle. By erasing the memory of experiences in just a few generations of adapting to tribal environment, humankind (now remixed) will only get more likely to fall into the trap when technology matures...
But, apart from the flaws, most of the time I could enjoy feeling the suspense, seeing the challenges caused by the long journey in a community the size of a small town, watching kick-ass heroines, listening to practical philosophy, or hearing great musical themes.
Normal Adolescent Behavior (2007)
No allegory intended?
As human ethologists say, humans' natural social environment is a close group of 100 or less. Compare this to current lifestyle, especially in the West, especially in the US, especially for teens who are in the midst of a hundred people of their age alone. Lots of stress arise. It is only natural to cling to a small, safe and protective group (not to mention the bonobo-ish sex traits) if one is available. True, if you get used to it too much, you may not grow fit for the more competitive larger society.
Wendy's dilemma is a common one, also apparent in foreign trade, in foreign policy, or often in choosing between traditional and modern ways of living. Isolation promises stability. Openness has the mantra: "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger". Islands of stability are usually corrupted from the outside. The end of the Edo period of Japan is a nice historical example. In this film, the external threat is time with college approaching and, probably, instincts kicking in to have a usual family. Look at Billie. She is the ant soldier, the militant populist, the male chimp patrol team of the group. A good example of how inward cosiness somehow tends to entail hostility to strangers. For anyone outside their group, her actions seem exaggerated. But let's be honest, has anyone invented and stably operated 'us' without 'them'?
Now should we be happy about Wendy leaving the group? In most aspects, yes. Her life-story will become more sustainable by this. Is it good for her to have been part of the group? Yes. She could relieve stress and pay more attention to her goals. She could experience what has become so rare and too often despised of: to be part of a real community. Should we learn from this movie to leave our close communities in general and behave more individualistically? NO! Communities, even if temporary, do have benefits. And look at this globalised world. There are no competitors outside the globe so we could afford less vigilance and more co-operation. But 7 billion people cannot all unite in person. We need groups of groups. And, somehow, less neurotic Billies.