Portal 2

I played through this game's single player mode on PS3 around when it came out earlier this year, but because of the issues Sony had getting PSN back online, by the time I was able to get the game online (and activate my free PC copy), my friends who also bought the game had already played the co-op, and I wanted to experience it the first time with someone else who hadn't seen the solutions before either. I ended up waiting until this weekend, when another friend finally bought it and we blasted through the mode in one day. All it did was cement my position that Portal 2 is my favorite game from this generation, one of the best games ever, and also probably the funniest.

In a lot of ways Portal 2 is just more of Portal, but when Portal was already one of the most acclaimed and interesting games to come out in years, that's not really a bad thing. The sequel returns you to the same general environment of Aperture's underground laboratories, but expands on their scope exponentially in multiple directions. A lot of time has passed since the first game, and you get to explore the facility's entire history, from when it was first created deep at the bottom of a mine, and moving forward through time as they built newer and more advanced additions on top of the old ones. Part of the series' fun is the vaguely sinister nature of the environment, which is enjoyably disrupted by the games' sense of humor but still detectable through little areas you stumble upon, and the second game really explores this, creating one of the most intriguing locations ever in a game, both from an art and gameplay perspective. You frequently go between sterile, carefully managed testing chambers and the industrial decay that surrounds them, a juxtaposition reflected by every aspect of the game. The frequent changes in the feel of whatever area you're in at the time keeps things constantly fresh, and along with the clever gameplay and fantastic humor, you have a single player campaign that is longer, deeper, and ultimately more satisfying than the original's.

 There's definitely a detectable shift in the general puzzle design between games. Besides replacing bouncing energy cores with laser beams, all of the discrete elements from the original return, along with several new ones, such as energy-based bridges that can be redirected with portals and various kinds of gels that alter the properties of the surfaces in the environment. The increased number of variables to work with is accompanied by a shift away from experimentation and acrobatics in the puzzles, as solutions are generally more constrained to prevent overwhelming the player with all the possibilities inherent to the new elements and require less physical skill with the controller, letting players instead focus on thinking through the proper way to address all the obstacles present. I can see why some players might regret the slight loss in freedom this represents, but I thought the puzzles were extremely well-designed and constantly thrilling to solve, a feeling I don't think will go away that quickly on periodic revisits.

And as I already briefly mentioned a couple times, the writing and voice acting are fantastic. Valve has always done a great job of having a player experience a story through the act of playing a game, though in recent years their games have gotten more and more dialogue-heavy, usually to great comedic effect, and Portal 2 is possibly the culmination of that effort. GLaDOS was already wickedly funny in the first game, and having her be only one of a few characters in the game was a great idea. The two most significant new characters are Wheatley, a bumbling robotic friend who helps introduce you back into the world of Portal, and Cave Johnson, the founder of Aperture who had been mentioned previously in content from outside the original game and who lives on in a series of recordings in the facility's lower levels. Wheatley is played very well (and often ad-libbed) by The Office co-creator Stephen Merchant, and Cave is voiced by J.K. Simmons, who is consistently one of the most affable presences in Hollywood and does a great job as well. Johnson's dialogue is necessarily limited to solitary rants, but frequently GLaDOS and Wheatley are able to play off each other to great comical effect. It's all really memorable material without falling into the Internet meme pit that bits from the first game like all the cake-talk did. As always the script does a good job of creating a setting and telling a simple but interesting plot without having to directly explain it to you, and the ending is one of the single most gripping and unexpected things I've seen in a game.

And that co-op mode was worth the wait, as well. Just the inherent possibilities of what having two sets of portals instead of one is exciting, and I was glad to see the game fully capitalize on that potential. More portals means more complex set-ups, but even beyond that, having two sets of eyes and two brains working together on a problem means Valve could design tougher challenges, knowing that they had more freedom to try truly off-the-wall stuff and could expect players to roll with it. With the Left 4 Dead series they found an intriguing way to force players in a shooter to work together in order to survive, and they continue to have success here in making a unique experience out of cooperation. With the two player characters being easily-reconstructed robots there's a perfect opportunity to encourage experimentation and the occasional bit of messing with your buddy as you know there's no true consequence for a bad idea and the challenge is in figuring out the puzzle, not avoiding death. They also felt the freedom to bring back some of the more skill-based concepts like momentum, and find ways to combine elements that never interacted in the more straight-laced single player, like the previously mentioned bridges and gels. It's also just another showcase for GLaDOS, as she gleefully scolds the two robots and tries to set them against each other while they work towards whatever she feels like making them do.

All this and I haven't mentioned the yet-again entertaining and insightful developer commentary, the great use of music (not just in the background during dramatic moments, but also as a gameplay clue with the various new toys), the clever use of trophies/achievements and title cards, and the fact that they're still finding ways to make the Source engine impressive seven years later. Valve is easily one of my favorite game developers, and they seem to only cement that further with each new release. It's a testament to what they do that despite the continued radio silence on anything related to Half-Life, I find myself only intrigued by what's possible in the future rather than truly disappointed.

Up in the Air

Jason Reitman is now three for three with me when it comes to make films that are both very funny, and touching or moving on at least some level. He's back to directing his own screenplay here, although it's again based on a book, though one that doesn't seem easy to translate to the screen. It's about a man played by George Clooney who travels all over the country all year long firing people for companies who don't want to get their hands dirty doing it themselves. He spends most of his days getting yelled at and pleaded with by all of the people he breaks the bad news to, and has developed a highly optimized system and unusually disconnected philosophy of living, where he feels no real attachment to anything where he lives when not traveling or even his family, and merely goes about his job, sleeping with the occasional fellow traveler and racking up millions of frequent flier miles.

The scenes showing him go about his routine are slickly filmed and edited, and the role fits Clooney like a glove, a little smarmy and arrogant but not unlikable. But of course that's not the whole movie, as things start to change when two women entire his lives. The first is a talented new colleague played by Anna Kendrick who has come up with a way to use the internet instead of flying everywhere to do their jobs, which could eventually phase out the travel aspect of his job completely. The second is an attractive fellow frequent flier played by Vera Farmiga, who's interesting enough that he eventually develops deeper feelings toward than just wanting to get her in bed. The three all got nominated for Oscars, and they're all fairly outstanding in the film. Clooney gets closer to both women over the course of the story, and they both help him grow as a person, and at least attempt to get something more out of his life. Jason Bateman is also good as Clooney's boss, and there's plenty of small appearances by recognizable, solid comic actors like Danny McBride and J.K. Simmons that add flavor to the scenes they're in.

I can see an argument that Up in the Air is style over substance, and that it's capitalizing on the bad economy and job market to appeal to people emotionally. But I thought that stuff made all the scenes of the characters working have more weight and importance, and I can't help but wonder why people wouldn't want to see such a well crafted and produced film. Right from the stylish and classy opening credits, the film is just impeccably put together, and immensely satisfying and enjoyable from start to finish. I guess I can see how one would think Jason Reitman's style is just a touch too polished, too spot on, not experimental enough. But I think people might not give him enough credit for just being good at getting the little things right. The cast and their performances are great, the script is tight as a drum, and the film has a lot of powerful moments without hitting you over the head with them. Little stuff here and there that adds up over time to a film that is at no time annoying or boring or nonsensical. It all fits together into a movie that I have a hard time seeing anybody call their favorite, but that very few should have difficulty liking. And I liked it a lot.

I Love You, Man

You might guess this is another Apatow movie, but it's really just another of the several that have successfully modeled themselves after his revival of the R-rated comedy this past decade. It's actually not that similar stylistically in a lot of ways, although it's hard deny a bit of influence. The cast is pretty great, with all sorts of talent, both familiar and up and coming sprinkled throughout. The pedigree of the writer and director isn't fantastic, but they managed a solid hit with this. Paul Rudd is maybe a bit off-type, playing a guy who gets along with women and is a great boyfriend but never really connected deeply with another guy. After proposing to Rashida Jones, he realizes he doesn't even have a decent candidate for his best man, so he starts going on "man dates" looking for a friend. It's a cute idea, reversing the normal focus of a romantic comedy, and it sort of is the pinnacle of the bromance sub-genre. Eventually he meets Jason Segel, the two hit it off, and then there's the standard formula of growing friendship, troubles, and reconciliation right before the end (if you think that's a spoiler then you obviously have never seen a motion picture before).

So a lot of it is just Paul and Jason hanging out together, and Paul briefly seeing other guys played by a bunch of recognizable faces. Some of the better smaller parts are Andy Samberg and J.K. Simmons as his gay brother and dad respectively, and Jon Favreau as the dick husband of one of Jones' best friends, played by Jaime Pressly. A lot of the humor is fairly typical of modern comedy, although there were some unique bits that were pretty good. Throughout the movie Rudd can't help but try to come up with clever phrases in an attempt to sound cool and failing utterly, with each bomb funnier than the last. The best might have been "totes magotes" in place of totally, but it's hard to say. Certain things like Segel's "return the favor" engagement party toast were gold, and even something that could have seemed uninspired like the Lou Ferrigno part were saved by touches like the matter of fact the way others treat him with reverence. It's not a particularly groundbreaking movie and I'm not sure if I'll remember much of it a year from now, but as a simple funny movie it succeeds fairly well.

Characters of the Decade: Part 2

The first list was pretty heavy on animation, but this one mixes up the media a bit more and also features humans who aren't white males.

J. Jonah Jameson
J.K. Simmons - Spider-Man series


"Meat! I'll send you a nice box of Christmas meat. It's the best I can do, get out of here."

Honestly, this was the most exciting thing to see be brought to life in the first Spider-Man movie. Has there been a better comic relief character in the last decade of action movies? I can't think of one. Simmons has a unique asshole charisma that he can make work for seemingly any character, and this was the first time a lot of the world got to see it. While I don't think they quite nailed Peter Parker's personality, the personification of his most consistent detractor went off without a hitch.

Omar Little
Michael K. Williams - The Wire


"I got the shotgun. You got the briefcase. It's all in the game though, right?"

I could name wonderful characters from this show all day if I wanted. Omar isn't necessarily my favorite, but he certainly tends to stick out more than the others. In the world where everyone seems to have an affiliation, he's pretty much out there on his own besides a revolving door of accomplices, playing the dangerous game of robbing criminals. A sort of perverse modern day Robin Hood who keeps it all for himself. While the majority of the show's cast is great because it seems so real, Marlo is great because he's a legend in his own time. Nothing quite clears the streets of Baltimore like hearing the call "Omar comin'!"

Yorick Brown
Y: The Last Man


"In the words of Thomas Jefferson... that's bullshit."

Being the last man on Earth is a large weight to carry, and luckily Yorick's up to the task. It's definitely an unusual situation for a person to be in, and he manages with the right combination of heroism and hopelessness to make him a definite protagonist but still very vulnerable and in need of the health. He makes his share of mistakes, but through the whole story he never loses his sense of humor or humanity. And while I wasn't a big fan of the epilogue, the conclusion of his personal journey was pretty perfect.

Captain Malcolm Reynolds
Nathan Fillion - Firefly franchise


"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

Another case where I could almost name anyone in the cast and justify putting them here, but as the leader of the crew Mal always stuck out. A true outlaw smuggler with a heart of gold in the tradition of Han Solo, Mal is perhaps an even better version. He does what it takes to get by, with lethal force if necessary, but in the end has what's ultimately good always on his mind. He's a bit inconsistent, sticking with his principles in some cases but running if it makes sense in others. But that's part of what makes him likable. He's unpredictable, funny, and a pleasure to watch command a ship.

Brock Samson
Patrick Warburton - The Venture Bros.


"Hank, seriously. When I get my license back I'm allowed to kill you."

It speaks to the show's quality that the recent half season was still totally great even with Brock being elsewhere for most of the episodes, but he's definitely the most fun character to see do his thing. He's the ultimate death machine, a badass with an actual license to kill and unending willingness to use it. But even when he's not on a rampage he's a lot of fun. His familial relationship with his unorthodox family, unexpected extracurricular interests, and uncommon understanding of the insane cartoon world he lives in are all big parts to the character and how he stays interesting beyond going on murder sprees.

Caleb
Nathan Fillion - Buffy the Vampire Slayer


"What can I say? I work in mysterious ways. Also some fairly straightforward ones."

And here's Fillion again already, fresh off Firefly's cancellation. I could watch him in almost anything, with his unending supply of sarcastic nice guy charisma. But this is the only time I've seen him play a true villain, and damn if he isn't good at that too. Caleb doesn't have a ton of screen time, but he's probably my favorite bad guy in a series that prided itself on strong antagonists. With a single push of a finger (well, thumb) he secured his place in infamy, and there's just something about his religious background, rampant misogyny and disarming accent that make him a lot more terrifying than any vampire or demon Joss Whedon could conjure.

George Oscar Bluth
Will Arnett - Arrested Development


"No, Michael, that's not my trick. It's my illusion!"

Arrested Development is basically the definition of a great ensemble comedy cast, but GOB was basically in a league of his own. I'm sort of getting the feeling at this point that this is the only character Arnett actually plays, but damn if it isn't an entertaining one, and it works all the better here with his unusual interests, perspective, and motives. The show was absolutely littered with transcendent moments, and GOB had more than his fair share.

Oh Dae-su
Choi Min-sik - Oldboy


"Anyone here with an AB blood type, raise your hand."

If you watch this movie again, Oh Dae-su isn't even recognizable in the first scene as some drunk at a police station. 15 years alone in a room will change anybody, but Min-sik totally sold hit in his complete transformation into who he'll be for the rest of the movie. The thing that drew me to finally seeing it was a particular action scene, but that's not really what the character's about. It's about what unbelievable circumstances can do to a man, but how at his core there's still the same guy who can still be hurt, no matter how hard his exterior's gotten. And while his final decision is somewhat mortifying, in a way I can't blame him.

Colonel Saul Tigh
Michael Hogan - Battlestar Galactica


"So take your piety and your moralizing and your high minded principles and stick them some place safe... I've got a war to fight."

Tigh is an interesting case, as a pretty good character who didn't become great until circumstances forced him to. He was always an entertaining cranky old guy with a strong sense of duty and a bit of a drinking problem, but when he's thrust into the position of leading a resistance movement by any means necessary, he really starts to shine. Ugliness is what makes pretty much any of the Battlestar characters interesting, and his decisions under stress are as hideous as they come. Of course he changes quite a bit in another way later, and it just adds to his depth as he just tries to come to grips with it all. Most of the show's cast is sort of hard to like, but Tigh was actually easy in a strange sort of way.

Illyria
Amy Acker - Angel


"I wish to do more violence."

Illyria's here half because of the character, and half because it was so mind blowing to see cute, neurotic Acker transform into the embodiment of pure, sentient power. It's really a surprising amount of range, and she pulls it off without a hitch. It's definitely a good character too, one of the few in the whole setting to subvert the normal expectations for the appearance of what's basically a newly awakened, vengeful god. One of the greatest shames in the show's cancellation is not seeing more of her. I guess I could read the comics, but it won't be the same without Acker's performance.

Al Swearengen
Ian McShane - Deadwood


"I wouldn't trust a man who wouldn't try to steal a little."

If you look up "tour de force" in the dictionary, you'll see a definition that accurately describes what Ian McShane did for three years on Deadwood. The show was more theatrical than cinematic in the stateliness and brilliance of its dialogue, and nobody presented it as well as he did. I think I would watch a show that was just him giving speeches to an empty room. That wasn't all there was to the character either, as he was equal parts hilarious and terrifying as he fought for control of the town he helped build. Absolute dynamite the entire time.

Brick Tamland
Steve Carell - Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy


"Yeah, there were horses, and a man on fire, and I killed a guy with a trident."

One of the few supporting appearances in a comedy that basically stole the whole film and launched a career. Carell was funny on The Daily Show and The 40-Year-Old Virgin and The Office certainly helped, but I think Anchorman is when people everywhere thought to themselves, "Man, this guy's funny." Honestly, of all the movie's funny bits, Bricks are pretty base and low brow, but still humorous and important to the continuing development of what's considered funny in mass popular culture.

Continued tomorrow.

Thank You for Smoking

Thank You for Smoking is a unique, very funny movie with an outstanding cast. Smoking is a very touchy subject, but the film covers a lot of the nonsense that goes on with the anti-smoking movement without being insensitive to its dangers. Little tangent here, but every single campaign I've seen against cigarettes has been annoying and ineffective. If you've ever seen a commercial from New York's fairly recent series of commercials, you'll know what I mean. They try and shock you into quitting with grotesque imagery and fear mongering in a way that I find more offensive than if a smoker came up to me and blew smoke right into my face. Anyway, Eckhart plays a spokesman for a tobacco lobby who goes on TV and pokes holes in the poor arguments against the product he represents and generally wins at life, at least until the plot gets more serious near the middle. There's a bunch of different characters and subplots he jumps between, and the movie is pretty consistently and enjoyably paced.

After watching Juno, it's nice to see Reitman has some flexibility with the kind of comedy he can handle. Smoking is more mature and explicit, but never gets too base in the content and has a similar sense of intelligent humor. It's not quite the heartwarming film that Juno was, but it was put together just as well. I'm not sure how much of the script came from the book it was based on, but it's really just fun to watch how Eckhart faces each obstacle. I'm finding myself with not much to say here, other than almost every single speaking part was played by someone I know the name of or at least recognize, and that seemed almost odd but was also kind of cool. Really good film.

Burn After Reading

As far as movies by the Coen brothers go, Burn After Reading is merely in the middle of the road. Fortunately, it's such a damn good road that saying it's in the middle is hardly a knock. I didn't love it as much as their best work, but I've only come to appreciate it more since I've watched it, and it's not nearly as close to bad as say, The Ladykillers. It's a unique addition to their body of work, mixing the humor of their sillier movies with the very frank violence of their serious films. It's sort of a satire of espionage thrillers, but also not really. It's pretty short, but also takes a while to really get going. The plot's a pretty tightly coiled knot by the end, although I kind of wished there was some more convolutions to really take it all the way. I feel like it could have been great with a tighter script, but as it is, it's still pretty good.

Production-wise, it's as good as the Coens have ever been. The score is bombastic and completely over the top for the content, adding to the satirical vibe. It's their first film without their usual cinematographer in a long time, but they don't miss a beat, with plenty of wonderfully shot moments, especially the ones at the CIA headquarters. There's some really cool zoom shots that show the location, and I love the way the camera follows people's feet as they walk from room to room. The CIA scenes in general are great, with JK Simmons hilarious as usual as the man in charge of the incident, and the coda where they talk about what happened sums up the movie perfectly. The cast is their biggest yet, with Oscar winners George Clooney, Frances McDormand, and Tilda Swinton, and nominees Brad Pitt and John Malkovich. They all play their roles very well. Swinton's character seemed more pointless than the others, and Malkovich's dialogue wasn't as funny as it tried to be, but they still fit appropriately into the story. Pitt was great as a moronic gym instructor, and I ended up wishing the movie had more of him. McDormand and Clooney are in a lot of their movies, which makes sense for Frances since she's married to Joel, and they're great again in parts written for them.

After a good amount of time introducing the characters and how they know each other, the story begins when Pitt and McDormand find what they believe is Malkovich's "secret CIA shit" and try to ransom it back to him, and then a bunch of crazy things happen that result in some characters dead, some on the run, and some intact. The CIA is paying attention, but even they're not sure what's happening and don't seem to care too much. They're pretty much in the same position as the audience, wondering what the point is. It's kinda gutsy to make a movie with no point, but in a way that IS the point, and the way they go about showing it is pretty great. It's pretty funny too, and I'm looking forward to watching it again more than No Country for Old Men, so take that for it's worth. They're already filming their next movie, which has a cast of unknowns instead of one of stars, so we'll see what happens.

PS: I just noticed that this is the second review of a Coen movie in a row that I've derided The Ladykillers, which I didn't intend to do. It's really not a terrible movie, it's just definitely not what you should watch if you want to see what they're about.

Juno

Part clever indie teen comedy, part real drama about pregancy and love, Juno is a great movie. The script is really pretty terrific, and almost the whole cast carries it well. Some of the lines can seem a little strange or out of place, but it's not another Napoleon Dynamite, it's a smart, funny movie with a good heart. Ellen Page is very good as the titular Juno, a not-quite-so normal teenager who finds out she's been impregnated by awkward classmate Paulie Bleeker, played well by Michael Cera. I'm not sure if his character was actually supposed to be strange or not, but it seemed to work with the movie. Juno eventually decides to give the kid up for adoption and finds a nice couple, but things might not be quite what she thought.

Some people would get turned off by the whole quirky vibe, but it didn't bother me. The only aspect I didn't like was the soundtrack, full of poorly played music that wasn't that bad, it just didn't seem to add anything at all. It's very funny throughout, with good dialogue that never gets uncreative or resorts to childish jokes. As the plot actually develops, it gets pretty interesting, as you actually feel for the characters and when they mess up, you actually have feelings about it. The entire cast does a great job with it, and the conclusion comes a little fast but worked for me. I expected to probably like this movie, maybe not that much, but I came out really loving it.

Spider-Man 3

Hmm. Spider-Man is my favorite super hero. I used to read some of his comics as a kid. I didn't know what was really going on, since the big story lines were spread over four books every month and I only read one. I still really liked the character though. Spider-Man is easily related to by a lot of people, because he isn't perfect. He starts out as a nerdy kid in high school. He has to deal with normal problems while fighting super villains who want to kill him. His entire career as a crime-fighter started when he made a mistake that led to his uncle's death. He's interesting because of his flaws as much as his ability to do good.

I loved both of the first two movies. I thought they were an excellent combination of story, character, humor, creative action scenes, and awesome special effects. My expectations were high for the third movie, but some things about the previews tempered them a bit. Three villains? The first two movies both did very well with just one. They were interesting because they weren't just pure evil, they had connections with Peter Parker and sympathetic in some ways. I'm fine with Harry succumbing and turning into the second coming of the Green Goblin, even if it seemed a bit soon with so many villains unexplored of yet. Sandman is pretty cool I guess, though I never saw him in a comic. But making him Uncle Ben's killer? What the hell? Part of what made Ben's death interesting and so important to Peter was that it was just a normal criminal that killed him who Peter could have stopped. That shame is what causes Peter to be who he is. The movie handles this situation somewhat satisfactorily, but it's still irritating. Seeing the black suit in the trailer, my thoughts immediately went to Venom. Obviously, you can't bring the symbiote to earth without Venom appearing eventually. My question was whether he would figure prominently in the story, or, as I hoped, merely be all set up for a sequel. It became clear though, eventually, that he would be fully featured as a third enemy. Why bring him into it, when Venom is so popular among fans that he could easily hold an entire movie, and you've already made preparations for Lizard to appear eventually?

It seemed overloaded, and maybe it was. Sam Raimi still does a pretty admirable job of handling all the threads, even if the plot ends up being a bit convoluted because of it. What irked me more than the excess of bad guys was the continued romantic problems Peter faces with Mary Jane. I thought the situation was pretty much set. They were together, she knew who he was, and it seemed all right. Whenever I read the comics, she was always there as a strong character supporting Peter when he struggled. She had her own things to do, but they had a strong relationship and lived happily. After I stopped reading they split up for a while, but since had made up and are happy again. Why over-complicate things when you already have this much stuff to juggle? It's fine for her to have something to do, but more friction is not what the movie needed.

Peter with the black suit was interesting. He gradually becomes more and more of a dick during the movie, but it was played more for laughs than actual story tension. It corrected itself when it needed too, but I thought that pretty much the entire thing could have been better if it was treated more seriously. It's funny to see Tobey Maguire dance like an idiot who thinks he's cool, but is it actually good for the film? No. That aspect of the movie just didn't work for me. Fortunately, the ship is righted in time for the final act. I won't say what happens, but in addition to being pretty damn fun to watch, the final conflict brings together all of the separate elements and concludes almost all of them in a way that eased most of my misgivings and made me appreciate the movie a lot more than I might have otherwise. I guess all's well that ends well. I liked Spider-Man 3, not as much as the first two films, but enough to recommend it to anyone who has any interest. We know there will be more Spider-Man movies, but we don't know who will be directing and starring in them. If Sam, Tobey, and Kirstin come back for the fourth, I'd be happy, as long as they reign it back in a bit. If they don't, then I'll come away from the first trilogy satisfied with what took place and how they handled it.