Boy, this show was a roller coaster of good ideas, bad ideas, and hit-or-miss execution. I absolutely hated the first 2 episodes, to the point that I really didn't want to watch any more of the show. But my partner was liking it (I guess?) and she wanted to keep watching, so I watched it with her. I'm not sure if I'm happy that I stuck it out, or not. It does get a little bit better -- for a little bit -- but then it completely shits the bed.
I wasn't keen on the show being about children's minds being implanted into android bodies. Going on to treat them like a super hero team was one of the cringiest things I've ever seen in this franchise (and that includes Alien: Resurrection and Prometheus).
But then the show starts to get into the ethics, morality, and metaphysics of putting someone's consciousness into an android body (and other questions regarding trans-humanism), and the mind-body dilemma that is inherent to such an idea. Here Alien: Earth starts to get genuinely good. Are the androids really the same people? Are the original people dead? Are the androids property of the company that manufactured them? Does that company have the right to control what that android does? Does that company have the right to wipe parts of that android's memory, or change the android's personality, in order to fix a "glitch"?
Of course, all of these questions can be adequately explored without having the gimmick of implanting children's minds into the androids. The writers could just as easily have written a story about regular androids becoming sentient, and pose the exact same questions about whether they are "property" or "people". It's been done a billion times before in science fiction, so even though these are all interesting questions, it's nothing particularly new or innovative. I think the use of children was done to make the audience more sympathetic and "human-like", because the people in charge don't have any respect for the intelligence of their audience. It could also have been a decision made in order to justify the characters doing stupid, illogical things, but I'll get to that later.
At the same time, there are completely new aliens that have never been seen in this franchise before, that get a lot of screen time. There's a creepy, parasitic eyeball alien thing that is probably the single best idea that this entire show has going for it. It's gross and disturbing on a visceral level, but also the idea of it tunneling into your brain and taking control of your body is terrifying on an existential level. Honestly, an entire show (without the Alien title and branding) about that eyeball parasite probably could have been worth watching on its own. But Hollywood is averse to new IPs and can't make anything that doesn't have a recognizable brand attached to it -- again, because executives have no respect for the intelligence of their audiences.
Alien: Earth season 1, episode 1 - © Walt Disney, Hulu
Treating these cyborg children like a superhero team was so stupid.
[More]
a7ec7de7-6edf-4970-a2d1-199e2a7f575e|0|.0
Tags:Alien, Alien: Earth, Hulu, Disney, science fiction, horror, xenomorph, parasite, android, mind-body problem, Peter Pan, children, trans-humanism

There's a new Spider-Man cartoon on Disney Plus, and sadly, it is not a reboot or continuation of Spectacular Spider-Man, which, as far as I know, is still stuck in a frustrating legal limbo in which neither Disney nor Sony completely own its rights. Instead, what we have is a cartoon that couldn't decide whether it wanted to be a prequel to Spider-Man: Homecoming, or a completely new adaptation of the comics. It would be very easy for such a project to lack a strong sense of identity, and to have an incoherent plot that feels like parts of 2 different plots haphazardly stitched together. Thankfully, that isn't the case, and Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man actually comes out to be a pretty good Spider-Man cartoon.
It definitely still retains many aesthetic and narrative elements from its original conception as an MCU prequel. Aunt May is clearly based on Marissa Tomai's version of the character from the MCU. The Sokovia Accords and Superhero Registration Act are important parts of the show's backstory. And cameos by Doctor Strange, Iron Man, and others definitely feel like the MCU versions of those characters.
But this definitely isn't a prequel to the MCU's Spider-Man. First and foremost, the Sokovia Accords have already been put into place without Spider-Man being involved in the events of this story's version of Civil War, which is referenced several times. It also features a completely different cast of characters. There are no traces of characters like Ned Leeds, MJ, or Liz Allen. And it does feature characters like Norman and Harry Osborn, neither of whom have appeared (properly) in the MCU movies.
So this is a show that will definitely be familiar to people who have watched the MCU, but its lack of continuity with the MCU might turn die-hard MCU fans away.
Thankfully, I don't care if the show follows strict MCU continuity. All I care about is whether it's a good adaptation of Spider-Man. And it mostly is.
©: Walt Disney Co.
The connections to the live-action MCU are nebulous.
[More]
d8504f7b-48e4-4a86-8fb1-967f0c2f6458|1|5.0
Tags:Spider-Man, Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man, Marvel, Disney, Disney Plus, streaming, Peter Parker, Norman Osborn, Nico Minoru, Lonnie Lincoln, Tombstone, Scorpion, Otto Octavius, Doctor Strange
I am really struggling to see how the National Football League thinks that it's NFL+ subscription service is worth $30 - $80 a year. I tried a free trial of the app during the first week of the NFL regular season and was thoroughly disappointed by the service in almost every conceivable way.
First of all, just signing up for it is a pain in the ass because their payment provider, Cleeng takes forever to load. I had to refresh it several times and wait several minutes before I was finally able to actually activate the trial.
The NFL wants $30-$80 for its streaming service. Is it worth it? Spoiler: NO.
The real kicker is that I can only watch live games that are televised anyway, as well as in-market games. So I can watch the Raiders (because I live in Las Vegas), even though I hate the Raiders; but I can't watch the Bears unless they're on TV anyway. I don't have cable, but I do have a broadcast TV antennae, and an Amazon Prime subscription (which carries Thursday night games). I can already watch every game that NFL+ offers at no extra charge, with the sole exception of Monday night games on ESPN, because even though we have a Disney+ subscription that supposedly includes ESPN+, we can't actually watch any live sports on ESPN+ because the Disney subscription only covers the basic ESPN+ content, and live sports requires the premium ESPN+ subscription. So, without needing to write another review, ESPN+ is also a complete waste of money.
If I really want to watch a Monday night game, I can go to my parents' house and watch it. They have cable, and they live less than 2 miles away.
The only thing that NFL+ offers that has any value to me is the ability to watch replays of games. But that's a feature of the premium ($80) subscription, and isn't offered by the basic ($30) subscription, and it's not something that is likely to be particularly valuable to most casual NFL viewers. It's only potentially valuable to me because I make YouTube content about Madden and other football video games, and I often use NFL footage (under Fair Use) to demonstrate how those games get football right or (more often) wrong. Most people don't bother to watch replays of live sports. The appeal of sports is to watch it in the moment. Once the moment has passes, so has the appeal. People watch highlights after the fact, but not entire games. The only time I've ever watched re-broadcasts of NFL games was when I would watch replays of Bears preseason games on NFL Network in order to see how the backups play. I have no interest in watching re-broadcasts of regular season or playoff games, except in the context of using it in a YouTube video. And that also has limited value because I'm usually able to find the clips or highlights that I need for free on YouTube or from NFL or ESPN highlight and analysis shows.
[More]
9e4954f6-3a8b-4c9e-99b8-92f100728446|0|.0
Tags:NFL, NFL Plus, app, subscription, football, network TV, cable, ESPN, ESPN Plus, Amazon Prime, Disney Plus, Disney

One of my biggest complaints with Disney's Star Wars movies has been their complete lack of original ideas, and their complete unwillingness to move the Star Wars narrative forward. That's actually why I didn't think The Last Jedi was as bad as most people said it was. I mean, it wasn't "good" by any stretch of the imagination. The script was messy, the tone was uneven, and a lot of the movie's logic was fundamentally flawed. But I appreciated much of the bold thematic elements. The Last Jedi wanted desperately to move the franchise in new directions, and it actively mocked the previous film(s) (and the fanbase) for being too trapped in the past.
The rest of Disney's Star Wars movies haven't been so bold. The Force Awakens was a rehash of the original movie. Rogue One and Solo were both prequels that nobody asked for that both attempted to explain minutia that never needed explaining to begin with. I haven't seen Rise of Skywalker yet, but I'm hearing that it's an exceedingly dumb rehash of Return of the Jedi, and possibly the worst Star Wars movie since The Pantom Menace. And that's the "gentle" criticism that I'm hearing from people who were generally favorable towards Disney's treatment of Star Wars!
Suffice it to say, outside of the X-Wing and Armada tabletop games (which I love and still regularly play), I have become so jaded and sick of Star Wars that I didn't bat an eye at Disney's announcement of The Mandalorian. I just assumed that it was a prequel series about young Boba Fett that would continue the Star Wars trend of fixating on its past. I had no interest in watching the series, and I sure as hell was not going to pay a monthly subscription to Disney to watch it.
But I guess a free subscription to Disney Plus came with our Verizon phone plan, and my girlfriend was hearing some good word-of-mouth in the week after the first episode premiered, so we've been having stay-in date nights to watch it. I want to say, by the way, that I like this approach of releasing episodes of a streaming series on a fixed schedule, rather than dumping a whole season all at once. It facilitates water-cooler talk because everybody else is at the same point in the narrative that you are. You have time to digest the events of each episode and talk about them, and you are able to speculate with friends over what's going to happen next, because your friends don't know either! You'd think that streaming services like Netflix and Hulu would have figured this out with the success of HBO's Game of Thrones weekly release schedule, but they didn't. Disney learned. (and so did CBS).
The Mandalorian feels like it's actually pushing the Star Wars narrative forward.
... [More]
9af949f8-bcdc-48c6-8e4d-0265034ac0cf|1|5.0
Tags:The Mandalorian, Disney, Disney Plus, streaming television, Lucasfilm, Star Wars, Mandalorian, bounty hunter, Yoda, baby Yoda, child, the Force, Galactic Empire, New Republic, Christmas, toy
I'm late to this party. With Avengers: Endgame due out in the next couple weeks, I finally got around to seeing Captain Marvel. I had planned to see it with a friend the week after release, but illness and work got in the way, so we never made it out. Also, I just haven't been out to movies much since being blown away by Into the Spider-Verse -- seriously, it's out on home video and streaming, go watch it! There's a few other movies that I've been wanting to see, and I'm going to try really hard to not miss them in theaters. I'm really looking forward to Jordan Peele's new movie, Us, which I'm hoping to see this week or next. And apparently, DC's Shazam! might actually be good?!
But I finally had a weekend afternoon to myself, and decided to go to Captain Marvel, since my girlfriend didn't want to see it. As is par for the Marvel movies, it's good enough. Marvel has yet to produce a true flop, but I feel like Captain Marvel is a bit of a regression considering the studio's recent track record.
I like when the Marvel movies experiment with genre, but Captain Marvel remains a pretty standard fare origin story.
The big problem is that we're back to origin stories. Spider-Man: Homecoming smartly passed on re-re-telling the story of how Peter Parker became Spider-Man, and was all the better for it. Recent movies like Black Panther, Guardians vol. 2, and [especially] Infinity War, had moved beyond the dull origin stories and un-interesting, cookie-cutter villains to offer truly engaging and transcendent films. Captain Marvel kind of falls in with Doctor Strange as being a passable -- but ultimately skippable -- entry. At least it isn't as contradictory as Doctor Strange.
... [More]
a7c81d27-a998-4170-a911-a06da1288540|0|.0
Tags:Captain Marvel, Marvel Comics, Disney, Stan Lee, Avengers, Brie Larson, Samuel L Jackson, Nick Fury, Skrull, feminism, refugee, Blockbuster Video, 1990s, cat
|
| 12 | | | | | | | 60 | | 11 | | | | | | | 55 | | 10 | | | | | | | 50 | | 09 | | | | | | | 45 | | 08 | | | | | | | 40 | | 07 | | | | | | | 35 | | 06 | | | | | | | 30 | | 05 | | | | | | | 25 | | 04 | | | | | | | 20 | | 03 | | | | | | | 15 | | 02 | | | | | | | 10 | | 01 | | | | | | | 05 |
|