Man in the High Castle

After watching the TV show, I decided to read the original book: The Man in the High Castle by Philip K. Dick. And I must admit: I liked the TV show better. Though, the book does catch my attention.

Just like in the show, these characters live in an alternate world where Germany and Japan won World War II. The Nazis take everything in the states east of the Rocky Mountains, and the Japanese take the west. And the middle is a neutral zone where anything can happen.

I suppose I wanted the book to play out like the TV show. There are a few scenes that are basically identical (though in different places), but other than that the similarities cease. Even some of the characters are different and sometimes not as likable.

The book is more of a philosophical approach. It features a book within the book, called -- as you may guess -- "The Man in the High Castle." And many pages are devoted to different people reading from that book. What is strange is that this alternate-alternate world sounds a lot like ours, where Germany and Japan lost, but events in the 50s are different. In this way the book suffers a little from monologue syndrome (similar to the writings of Ayn Rand), featuring super-boring political what-if scenarios.

But there were some enjoyable parts. One moment in particular centers around a piece of poorly-created jewelry, where many agree that it has little artistic value, but is full of wu, which is some kind of raw emotion or aura from the person who made it -- someone suffering from the antagonistic world. So, we end up with something that has both no value and great value.

While all these thoughts were cool and all, I found the book difficult to want to pick up and read. I had to force myself. I was irritated with the book's cover (pictured above), which features three characters from the TV show, but one never appears in the book itself. Talk about deceptive marketing! And even a month after having finished reading it -- I still don't know what I was supposed to get out of it.

Some of the writing is inconsistent. Some sections are written with articles ("the", "an", etc.) dropped, as if Japanese are trying to speak English. And other times the articles are there. So, I wasn't sure what to think. Perhaps it needed another round of editing?

Though, on the other hand, I can't seem to quite stop thinking about the book. It kind of leaves everything wide open. You want to know what happens next, and you can almost guess. And there is no sequel. So, perhaps there's some magic in this book after all?

I'm glad I read it, though it took me forever. Perhaps I'll figure it out one day. If you're looking for something dense, philosophical, and thought provoking -- perhaps you should give this book a try. But I'll be honest. After reading it, I had to relax and pick up a page-turner.

The Batman: Is It Any Good?

I remember when news came out of yet another Batman reboot. (Or perhaps it's supposed to be part of the latest universe, but with a different actor for Batman? Can't tell.) And when I heard it was going to be Robert Pattison, my first reaction was -- ugh. Like many other fans, I asked, "Is Batman going to sparkle?"

But then when I heard it was actually good, I decided to give it a try. So, it was another trip to the local IMAX.

And yes -- it was on the most part good. It was like they took all the weaknesses of Pattison and turned them into strengths, and it actually worked. Instead of the playboy Bruce Wayne who's happy-go-lucky Bruce in the day and brooding Batman at night, we get the brooding Bruce and brooding Batman, which makes for a darker movie.

The main villain -- very scary in a different way, because it feels -- real. In the opening scene, he is looking through binoculars at a family getting ready for Halloween. And he's breathing hard. Cut to perhaps an hour later, the dad is alone in his study walking around and we see someone in the shadows all in black. At first I thought it might be Batman, but it's clearly an ad-hoc costume, and we see someone's eyes looking around creepily. And then he attacks -- so nope, not Batman.

Another development involves a very scary concept that has happened before and is likely to happen again in real life to some degree. Some good chills at that moment.

As the show continues, Batman encounters the Penguin, the Riddler, and other villains. And what is totally awesome -- they are not shown as campy caricatures, but rather as real down-to-earth gangsters. Even Batman is shown not to be invincible -- well, kinda.

I think there may be more violence in this movie compared to other incarnations. I hear that they started with a Rated R movie and took out scenes until it got down to PG-13. The one "PG-13" F-bomb was believable and somewhat organic. What remains seems to make for a fun action-filled movie.

Though, there are a couple of scenes that are slow and could have easily been edited for time.

My main complaint is -- well -- the music. It starts out pretty fun. There's an "Ave Maria" unaltered at the beginning -- a nice choice for the scene. And then throughout the movie there were a couple of variations -- sometimes major, and sometimes minor. And then -- it kept coming -- and again -- and again. It started becoming, "Okay, we get the idea."

The main Batman theme is cool at first, but then becomes very repetitive. We can do thirds in the bass! Yay! And then I started to notice that most of the chords were root-position chords and so many parallel fifths. I was disappointed to learn it was the work of Michael Giacchino, one of my faves.

In short, the music is probably perfect for the desired mood, but whatever you do -- don't analyze the music.

Danny Elfman's music remains my favorite Batman soundtrack.

But yeah -- I know most of you aren't going to analyze the music (though I do have a lot of musical friends). Go catch The Batman. Have fun. Enjoy a "realistic" Batman movie.

Double Feature: Free Guy and The Eternals

Today, I thought I'd do a double-feature: two small reviews. Often I'll watch a movie without reporting in, but I wanted to say a few things about these movies.

Man in the High Castle: TV

I can't figure out if I'm a fan of Philip K. Dick stories or whether I'm fan of movies based on his stories. I've only read a couple of his books, but seen several related movies and TV shows.

So, Man in the High Castle was required watching for me.

In Juliana Crain's world, the Nazis and the Japs win World War II. It's now in the early 1960s, and Juliana comes across mysterious silent films depicting the US winning the war. Viewers will recognize that it's actual footage from "our" universe. These films are collected by the Man in the High Castle -- whoever that is.

In this alternative war, the Nazis control everything to the east of the Rockies, and the Japs have everything to the west. The narrow band of land surrounding the Rockies is the Neutral Zone, which by treaty is not governed by Nazis nor Japs.

Hitler, himself, is still in charge in Berlin, but rumors are that he's nearing the end of his life, and most uprising contenders seem to desire war with Japan and its states. So, the upper leadership in Berlin is jockeying for position, the Nazi leadership in the Nazi States are also trying to stab each other in the back, and the Japanese leadership is trying to find a way to avoid war with the Nazis.

And whatever happens, the conquered Americans lose.

Well -- except for the resistance, who Juliana meets along the way.

Plus -- how are these videos appearing from some other universe?

Overall I thought it was executed rather well. The first two seasons were crazy good. The last two seasons were decent, still with good scenes, but less direction, and the season finale episode was terrible -- though everything mostly seems to come to a satisfactory end.

I always love the rebellions-rising-under-authoritarian-societies stories. Sometimes I wonder if we'll ever have to live out these scenarios (and sometimes it seems we get very close). So, this series really caught my attention.

It all seems to lead to a wonderful Season 2 finale, which feels like the end of a book.

And then Season 3 adds in some features that don't quite make sense -- trying to explore more of the sci-fi aspect. However, most of the original direction seemed to remain intact. 

Season 4 introduces an entirely new rebel group that we never saw in the first 3 seasons (kind of like what executives did to LOST in season 3). It was fun, but a jolt -- I wish these people had been with us the whole time, and not added as an after-thought.

The penultimate episode was excellent -- and I could almost suggest stopping there. Because the season finale doesn't seem to follow the direction of the rest of the show. It's like someone decided they wanted a specific ending so they could set up a certain person's last words -- which can certainly make one think -- but it wasn't actions I would have expected coming from the characters based on what had been established previously.

And the very last five minutes make no sense at all. Ugh. But it's easy to pretend it didn't happen. It didn't happen -- right? I still enjoyed the series as a whole. Many of the character arcs are wonderful (especially if you ignore the last episode).

One last complaint -- the writers definitely went out of their way to get the Nazi-killing-America shock value thing going. If you watch the trailer above, you can get a sense of it. Of course the Nazis wouldn't have everyone repeat a pledge saying "... and liberty for none." That's only intended to upset the watchers -- kind of clever, but not really.

Another example -- somewhere in there, a prominent Nazi watches a video of the Liberty Bell being melted down and changed into a large metal swastika. He says, "Excellent, excellent" with a big smile. And I'm thinking -- really? Getting excited over yet another swastika?

And yes -- there are swastikas everywhere. Having a party? Better have an ice sculpture of a swastika. And the only music you can play is German. A girl makes a cupcake? It's going to have swastika icing on top. I don't think in real life they would be quite so obsessed with the symbol. It was reminiscent of how the newer Doctor Who episodes like to depict Americans as people who always carry guns. Pew pew!

I also think it unfortunate to further ruin a religious symbol you can see on top of Buddhist temples. (It was interesting to see those symbols in South Korea knowing it wasn't Nazism, but I digress.)

As for accuracy in following the book -- I've only just now started reading the book -- of which I'll report in another month or so. But I can already see some differences. In the book, the Man in the High Castle produces books, not film (at least so far). There also seem to be plenty of characters added in the TV show, and a lot more added detail.

Either way -- I highly recommend this series. It does have a lot of unnecessary cussing (not in the book), but VidAngel can come to the rescue in that regard. It's only 40 episodes -- 10 in each season. Check it out!

The Expanse -- TV Review

Today I introduce to you one of the best TV series I've caught over the past decade -- a sci-fi epic that takes on the universe.

The Expanse is the TV series version of the popular book series (which is up to nine books -- and perhaps finished now?). The TV show spans the first six books in six seasons.

It begins with the stories of James Holden and Detective Miller. 

James is just your everyday XO on the Canterbury. His job is to extract ice from Saturn in order to deliver water to the colony in Ceres (yeah -- it's inside of the asteroid). But everything goes south when a group of fast and mysterious ships attack.

Meanwhile, in Ceres, Detective Miller picks up a job -- find a missing girl -- a seemingly easy task, but he runs into surprising amount of friction.

On top of this, we have a colony on Mars that wants to be independent. We have overpopulation on Earth where only the wealthy can live comfortably. The "Belters" are tired of being pushed around by "Inners" and so they have their own terrorist groups.

And yes -- it's all connected.

And the science is as real as I've seen in any shows. Just in the first episode, the producers go to great lengths to show a Coriolis effect on coffee as it's poured inside the spinning Ceres.

The original trailers attracted me to the show back in 2015. It looked a lot like the newer rendition of Battlestar Galactica, so I had to give it a try.

The first episode was very confusing, as I complained back then. This is because they introduce all of the main places across the solar system, so it's easy to get lost. Just remember: Earth, Mars, Ceres, Saturn, and a few places in between.

I was also disappointed because the trailer (above) led me to believe that Jonathan Banks (Breaking Bad) was going to be a regular character, but after the first episode it was clear that it was all a big lie -- kind of like Emilio Estevez in Mission: Impossible.

The first few episodes also felt like a space noir flick, like Outlander, but it was starting to get on the slow side for me and I was about to give up. It's definitely on the gritty side -- people living terrible lives, swearing, and so on. But it has Mormons -- so I stayed an extra episode or two just to see how they treated our peeps (kind-of okay, but still got some things wrong). And just as I was to quit, something big happened, introducing a cool horror element. It hooked me in for the rest of the six seasons.

You may have caught my review of the first book, and so far, I'm liking the TV version more than the book. Maybe because it feels more like a script than a literary novel. I'll continue reading through the series and see if the writing gets better. On the most part, the TV version kept most of its energy going to the end, though it seemed to decline slightly.

The first three seasons were released on SyFy and the last episode of the third season was by far my favorite of the whole bunch. I was disappointed when SyFy announced the cancellation -- especially when it had gotten to its strongest point. To make matters worse, SyFy did not have any new shows coming to replace it to catch my attention. (Should I mention that right now there isn't a single show that I'm watching on SyFy? They've certainly allowed themselves to go downhill.)

Jeff Bezos, himself, worked to obtain The Expanse for Amazon Prime. But I have to admit that the later episodes, while good, weren't as strong as during the SyFy era. There was a gigantic increase in F bombs, perhaps slightly more grit, slightly less consistent pacing, and a little more overacting by some of the characters. Yet, it was still the best show on TV.

BTW, for those concerned about the language, this show is available on VidAngel. I used it myself, as these characters aren't really the most organic cussers.

The show comes to a mostly satisfying conclusion at the end of Season 6, but I'll be honest -- I didn't know it was the series closer while I was watching it, and when it was over, I was still wanting more. I mean -- all these threads were being tied off, but many were left open, and yet the good guys were flying off into the sunset ... and I was like -- really? There were only 6 episodes in that last season and the last one felt rushed. I think it could have been stretched out effectively.

Some complain that the show was "cancelled" again, but this time it was planned, as Book 7 starts a couple of decades later with different people. There are rumblings of another series in the future to finish off the last three books, but evidently that story is very far reaching -- sounds expensive to produce. I hope someone can pull it off -- I'd watch it. Who knows? I may finish reading the whole series by then, though.

Anyway, overall it was a good experience. Good plot. Good characters. Believable special effects. Good music. Good science -- real science. A possible future, and none of that Star Trek, Star Wars made-up stuff. And lots of action.

I highly recommend it. All 6 seasons are on Amazon Prime -- give it a try.

The Wheel of Time: First Season

This past fall and winter has been one of my favorite TV seasons, featuring two of my favorite epics turned into long-running shows. First came Foundation on Apple TV+, and then came this -- Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time with Amazon Prime.

The first season is short -- only eight episodes, but it covers the whole first book: The Eye of the World.

In the small town of Two Rivers live five promising individuals: Egwene, Nynaeve, Rand, Perrin, and Mat. Everything is upended when Moiraine, an Aes Sedai with incredible power, visits the town looking for the prophesied Dragon Reborn, who may one day save the world. She knows that it's one of these individuals, but she doesn't know which one. That very night, dark forces invade the town and cause all of our protagonists to flee. Moiraine must guide them safely back to the White Tower, where the Dragon Reborn can be identified and helped to live to his or her potential.

Yeah -- it sounds a lot like The Fellowship of the Ring. Perhaps at first this show feels like it, but it quickly deviates. It is definitely more violent at times, and the protagonists aren't really cute little innocent hobbitses.

There is also a LOT more politics going on, which makes the book series (and the TV show) a lot more interesting in this respect. For example, Moiraine isn't just a nice Gandalf figure, but rather a lady with her own agenda. She not only wants to protect the Dragon Reborn -- she also wants to control him. The same goes for practically everyone in the show.

Is it fun? Sure -- yeah. The first episode is on the slow side as we're introduced to the characters, but then it quickly picks up. At times, it's hard to want to stop watching at the end of the episode.

Is it like the book? It's actually pretty close. In the case of Foundation, I noted how approximately 90% of the show is not in the first book, but the main principles are in there. I also complained that there was one glaring error that to me may be a sign that the writers may not have read Asimov's books, but they still put together a compelling first season.

In contrast, The Wheel of Time doesn't deviate much from the original content. Of course, it's drastically condensed, but practically every scene in the show appears in some shape or form in the first book -- none of this 90% new material phenomenon.

One example from the first episode: the TV show decides to have the trollocs ransack the entire town, but in the book it's more of a surgical strike with the intent of only identifying and retrieving the Dragon Reborn. It turns out that having the town ransacked helps to move the story along without losing too much of the original.

One eye-roll thing for me was the fact that Moiraine was seriously considering the possibility that a woman might be the Dragon Reborn, but by the end of the season, it should be clear from the mythology that not only does it have to be a man, but Moiraine would not even doubt that fact. But I let it go, because it does provide some added tension in the story. Some people call this "woke," but I don't care.

It also seems to bug others that the writers made one of the characters gay. I have to admit that I was taken by surprise. But in researching, I learned that the prequel book does indeed identify that character as being gay. And even the writing in the first book strongly suggests it as well.

I, personally, was most upset that Min (someone who shows up later) didn't get much screen time. She shows up considerably later than she does in the book, and not for long. I think the writers could have stretched things out to ten episodes to get in a few more scenes I would have liked to have seen.

One improvement: they seemed to have removed the one character that is arguably the weakest character in the whole book series. No complaints from me.

Several perfectionists are upset by these condensing choices, but I have to be honest -- if the writers stuck to the book exactly, it would have gone on for 23 episodes and no one would watch it because it would be so boring. Those who haven't read the books are unlikely to get annoyed by this.

As for me, I thoroughly enjoyed it, noted the differences, and moved on. They kept most of the important stuff intact, and it felt like the books. And don't forget ... they do have Brandon Sanderson and other Robert Jordan "experts" on their team. I'm excited for season 2 next year. And I hope they realize they can stretch it out to more episodes and get in a few more favorite scenes and still keep it interesting.

So -- give it a try. It's fun.

Foundation: The First Season

A couple of months ago, I provided a preview of this new show: Foundation, a television adaptation of Isaac Asimov's classic series. Now that the first season is done, I will give this update with very mild spoilers -- stuff that should be evident early on in the season.

Overall, I'm impressed, and I'm happy to hear that Season 2 has been green-lit. This first season covers the first two sections of the first book (also called Foundation), covering roughly the first 50 years of the 1000. It also hints at later happenings. If you would like a quick overview of the plot, you can check out my preview, but otherwise, I'm just going to keep on going.

As I stated before, the Emperor clones (Dawn, Day, and Dusk) are just not in the book at all. These people are 99% created in addition to what Asimov wrote. At one point I was concerned, but in the end, I don't think it detracted at all from the main story. It's because Goyer and company did a good job at keeping it interesting. As the Empire begins its decline, we can explore how they react -- should they believe Hari Seldon's predictions? Should they try to stop the decline? Should they ignore it? We watch as four generations of emperors progress, all reacting differently.

The events around Terminus are also mostly fabricated (that is, they are not in the book), and some main actors are in the wrong place, but I didn't mind too much. Some events did get some eye rolls, but on the most part it was interesting. The main thing that's supposed to happen -- the First Crisis -- pretty much happens as it's supposed to.

But there is one glaring error -- or maybe not an error -- that I think would anger many Asimov fans. I'm still hoping there's an explanation. Very early on, we learn that a robot has the ability to harm a human, or allow a human to be harmed. And I'm not understating this -- this is a VERY BIG ISSUE.

The Foundation series and the Robots series happen in the same universe, and all robots are instilled with the three Laws of Robotics:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

In the TV series, the robot explains that it must harm humans because it's ordered to do so. But wait just a minute, Dr. Eggman. The Second Law states that no one can order a robot to harm a human.

And I know -- Asimov fans know that there are a couple of exceptions to these laws -- under extenuating circumstances. It could be that this robot has a very good reason for hurting that person -- but I'll go ahead and let you know now -- this is NOT resolved in Season 1.

But hey -- I'm actually looking forward to Season 2. This is evidently one of these shows where it's best to sit back and relax, divorce it from the book, and enjoy it as its own entity. The parts that so happen to match the books are added bonuses. I strongly recommend this to anyone looking for a different and interesting perspective on the Foundation series.

Don't Look Up

Do you want to watch an end-of-the-world comedy satirizing the handling of the coronavirus in the United States while having gigantic words thrown at you? Then "Don't Look Up" from Netflix might be the movie for you. Then again, most people I know are so tired of the pandemic, so they probably wouldn't enjoy this movie. I suppose I was also a little tired of it, myself, but after having followed the pandemic like crazy this was required watching.

Warning: mild spoilers follow, but it's not like you don't already know what's going to happen.

A team of scientists discover a gigantic comet heading straight toward Earth. When they try to tell the world about it, they are largely ignored. Even the president is skeptical and slow to adapt their plan to divert its path. Already, this may sound strangely familiar -- how many in the US remained particularly skeptical about the coronavirus, and if you watch, you're likely to also recognize several parallels.

Overall it was somewhat enjoyable, but I thought it was a little too much over the top, soaking in its own self-righteousness. It hits some items directly on the mark, but then I got the sense that this movie really represents what liberals *think* of how conservatives handled the pandemic rather than the actual truth. It also conveniently omits some of the (smaller) roles liberals played in exacerbating the pandemic. Well -- except for a couple of scenes where the protagonists lose their cools and go psycho, losing their audience -- possibly intentionally capturing the strident overreactions of many on the left.

The music was somewhat fun to listen to, with some hints of Philip Glass.

Where the movie hits 

When the comet gets closer, people can see it in the sky. At first, people recognize it as a real threat and start taking it seriously. So, the "good guys" say, "All you have to do is Look Up." Immediately, the President (Meryl Streep) counters with a "Don't Look Up" campaign. 

This is of course parallel to the coronavirus data, of which when people see, they can see beyond a shadow of a doubt that the vaccines are working remarkably. But then others come along and obfuscate the data with errant numbers and saying, "Don't believe data from the source. It's all doctored by liberals for the sole purpose of taking political control." 

In a brief collage, we get to see several such conspiracy theories about the comet -- clearly paralleling the several common coronavirus conspiracy theories floating around today.

And my favorite: one guy is being interviewed. He's wearing a button with both Up and Down arrows. And he says, "Look Up, or Don't Look Up. We're all free to believe what we want, but why can't we just get along?" Don't you just hate those guys? I mean -- I'm all for mutual respect and having discussions, but if there's a planet-killer rock on its way, it's not going to care whether people look up or not.

Where the movie misses

They really get Republicans wrong. I suppose Meryl Streep is supposed to be Trump, but she said things I've never heard Republicans say -- such as "God thanks you" or invoking "Jesus Christ" rather than the generic "God." I do not believe I've heard a sitting president wish blessings only on people from their own party. I also do not believe in the lack of caring. Even Trump had concern and sadness as the pandemic progressed, and even today he is trying to persuade his followers to be vaccinated. I have also never heard anyone in any office give thanks to the White Man. (Of course I'm always open to examples of this in real life -- please send these examples my way if you come across any.)

And -- did the movie really need to have all the obscenities and nude scenes? The plot is PG-13 at most. I mainly mention this because this movie will have near zero power convincing conservative audiences. But then again, I don't think that was the purpose of this movie -- rather, it really is a self-righteous (yet mostly justified) "let's make fun of the Republicans" indulgence. 

BTW, this movie is covered by Vid Angel, the company that distributes "The Chosen." If you'd like to watch this movie with obscenities and nude scenes filtered out, then check it out.

I suppose many liberals would eat this stuff up, but no one is really learning anything from this movie. I hope this doesn't get some kind of misguided "Best Movie of the Year" award. It's technically a 2021 movie, so we may see shortly if it gets anything. It had its good moments, but it really wasn't that great of a movie on the whole.

There were some funny parts, and some successful gimmicks. And I personally thought the closing line was hilarious -- my kind of humor. If you survived my review, then give it a try.

Ode to 2021

2021 is over -- yay! And we survived. We had thought the coronavirus was going away, but then two notable mutations brought it back -- mainly among those who weren't prepared. But for me it's over, and I'm pushing ahead.

As far as blog writing is concerned, overall my output has increased slightly. 

The Econo-Mel went down in post counts after I stopped producing the weekly coronavirus updates -- and I just got bored with the whole Trump v. Biden thing. I figured my energies were better spent elsewhere (though I'll be back soon enough -- maybe some midterm coverage).

The Music of Mel got a couple more posts this year -- a 100% increase. Woot woot! I have plans to bring it back even more this next year.

The Mormon Mel had its biggest year -- breaking 2020's record. I've dropped the spiritual messages to just one a month, so I expect volume to drop, but I've introduced my new short story series and will continue pushing forward on other projects.

Always Be Better is my new blog -- opening strong with 30 posts. A lot of time went into this video/blog series. The sister video series is here. (The videos start off pretty rough at the start, but they get better.) This next year will see 20 more installments.

Last but not least, The Word of Mel had an increase (all reviews) -- but nowhere near what I used to do a decade ago.

My favorite posts from 2021:

The Adventures of Elder Elder and Elder Benjamin: The Lonely Man: the first of my new fiction stories based over 90% on actual experiences from my mission in South Korea. In this episode, I meet my new companion as we start five months of adventure together.

We Like Sheep: amidst the name calling -- sheep and sheeple, doesn't Christ ask us to be like sheep? And how can we be good sheep instead of following blindly?

The Drake Equation: If there are other civilizations in the universe, why have we not seen them? Could it be that most of them destroy themselves before they can be seen? And can we survive?

Changer Book: Gödel, Escher, Bach: This book on strange loops, brain maps, music, art, and Zen changed my life for good.

My Fifteen Minutes of Fame: A true story of how I beat the odds and experienced a real 15 minutes of fame.

Can the Republican Party Survive?: The Party appears to be showing signs of dying. Can they turn things around and remain a force? (Written in early February 2021, but still pertinent today.)

Now that 2022 is here -- it's onward and forward. This year I'm going to be working on wiser decision making. I can take the momentum that I built in 2021, focus it with better prioritization and execution to make more of a dent -- become more of an influence, and get that much closer to changing the world.

How did you do in 2021, and what do you see going forward?