Michael Christopher Cole

What I Want to See: Trollhunters

Published on December 2, 2017November 17, 2020 by Michael Christopher Cole1 Comment

You might not have heard of Dreamworks’ animated show Trollhunters on Netflix. Until I talked to Paul about potentially writing about it on here, I wasn’t aware of anyone I knew who had watched it, other than myself. But it’s a great show, and I cannot recommend it enough. I started watching it, because I wanted to watch something that would keep my son’s attention (he was 9 months old when we began season 1) but wasn’t so inane that I would go blank behind the eyes. So, when I saw the poster on Netflix, and it boasted that it was created by Guillermo del Toro (director of Hellboy 1 & 2, Pan’s Labyrinth, and Pacific Rim) I thought it might be a good fit for us.

Trollhunters, is an action adventure cartoon that I think pretty much all ages can enjoy. It tells the story of Jim Lake Jr. who becomes the first human ever to become a trollhunter, when the previous trollhunter is killed in action. (These aren’t really spoilers as it’s kind of all revealed in the first 5 minutes of episode one.) Jim is in high school, and much like other YA fiction, he is thrust into a world that mixes his normal growing up troubles with life and death stakes. In this way, it’s not too original, but it is fun!

Trollhunters, thrives in it’s characters. Jim is less steadfast than a typical Harry Potter kind of protagonist, but is a more believable teen for it, and it makes the call to responsibility even more impressive. Toby, his best friend, plays on the typical scared side-kick trope, while at the same time being a total bad-ass, which shines through in his ability to help out with Jim’s training, and his own desire to do the right thing. Blinky and AAARRRGGHH!!! (that’s how IMDb spells it) are my two favorite characters, because they are the trolls who are tasked with helping Jim to become the trollhunter that the good troll community needs him to be. Blinky is voiced by Kelsey Grammer, and it is endlessly amusing to hear him read lines that seem so silly, with such gravitas.

So, what do I want to see with Trollhunters? Well, in order to answer that, I need to explain something. Jim, is voiced by Anton Yelchin, who died in an accident more than a year ago. Yelchin had finished recording season one by the time he died, but until recently, I hadn’t realized that he had also recorded (not sure if it’s complete or there is some patchwork with another actor) season two.

Yelchin does a great job voicing Jim, but I don’t think he has to be the voice. That is where I come to my point. I’m glad we get two seasons of Anton Yelchin, but I really hope, that Trollhunters is going where it naturally would have, had Yelchin lived. His death was tragic, and I don’t mean that in a disrespectful way, but as far as the story is concerned, I don’t want it to shift to reflect his death.

It’s something that many TV shows, and movies have to deal with, this idea that if someone dies, they have to figure out how to move on with their story, and unfortunately it seems to rarely work out well. When Heath Ledger died for example, he was working on the Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus, and in order to finish the movie, they recast with Jude Law, Johnny Depp, and Colin Farrell. Because of the nature of the story, it didn’t seem to have too significant of an effect on the movie (which seemed like it may have been a mess regardless) but look at the other posthumous Ledger movie, The Dark Knight. Sure, Ledger had finished The Dark Knight, and so that movie remains untarnished by the flaws of a mid production death, but as a franchise, what would the third film have been had Ledger lived? It’s something I’ve wondered since before The Dark Knight Rises was released.

The point is this, Anton Yelchin is great in this role, but ultimately, we don’t have a Ledger situation, where recasting seems sacrilegious, we have a voice over of a teenage character, and there are a lot of ways of adjusting to a new actor, without being disrespectful to Yelchin, and without having to shift the storyline, or the tone of the story.

Check out Trollhunters on Netflix if you watch the first episode, you’ll get the feel for the show, and I think you’ll fall in love with it! Season two comes out on December 15.

What I Want to Happen: Pixar

Published on November 12, 2017November 17, 2020 by Michael Christopher Cole1 Comment

I’m a big fan of Pixar’s films. When Toy Story came out, I was 11 years-old, and I’ve kind of grown up with them. What’s been nice, about growing up with Pixar, is that they had such an amazing record (still have a good record). After Toy Story came A Bug’s Life, and Toy Story 2, neither of which was as deep as Toy Story, but certainly weren’t vapid either. After Monster’s Inc., and Finding Nemo was The Incredibles, and it lived up to the name. I was twenty years old, and watching Pixar do the unofficial version of Fantastic Four that we have still yet to get, but totally deserve.

After The Incredibles, we got Cars. Now, Cars is an article all in itself, but to try to quickly summarize what I have to say about Cars is: I personally think it’s the weakest Pixar original (it’s a total knock off of Doc Hollywood) which pains me, because George Carlin is one of my favorite comedians/celebrities of all time and he voiced Fillmore; it is the pivot point film between a Disney/Pixar partnership, and Disney owning Pixar, and was used as part of the negotiations; and so while I think it’s the weakest, in a lot of ways I still think it’s better than a lot of other films, and it’s important.

After the pivot of Cars, a reinvigorated Pixar went into what I think was their renaissance creating Ratatouille, WALL-E, Up, and Toy Story 3 (the latter 2 were nominated for Best Picture Oscars, the former each getting Best Screenplay nominations). These 4 films, should definitely be mentioned when discussing the best animated films of all time.

Then after the renaissance came the other shoe. Part of Pixar’s agreement with Disney, was that they would create sequels to their most successful box-office films. After Toy Story 3, we got Cars 2. Now personally, I think Cars 2 is better than most will give it credit for, but it is certainly a departure from the depth of the four preceding films. We’ve since got Brave (an attempt at a deep dive which falls a little flat), Monster’s University (a serviceable prequel), Inside Out (the only foray into greatness since TS3), The Good Dinosaur (akin to the A Bug’s Life, in it’s fine but doesn’t match the glory of the prior film), then Finding Dory (again, it’s a serviceable sequel, but nothing special) and Cars 3 (I haven’t seen it yet).

The reason that I wanted to do this article, is that in couple of weeks Pixar is going to release their next film, which will be an original, entitled Coco. I really hope Coco is good, but I’m worried, because it looks like Pixar’s amalgamation of two recent animated films Kubo and the Two Strings mixed with The Book of Life. Now, I’m sure it is not a knock-off of those two films, but I hope it’s dissimilar enough. I want to see them really be creative and deep again, and this may have the potential, but I’m nervous. The film’s done though, so I want to talk about the future past Coco.

Pixar has five films they’re currently working on, but only 2 have been officially announced; The Incredibles 2, and Toy Story 4. Personally, I don’t want too many sequels from Pixar, since their strength has really been in originals, the exception of course being the Toy Story films, so while I thought TS3 wrapped things up nicely, I’m keeping a very open mind on this. As for the Incredibles 2, the original warranted a sequel more than any other Pixar original, and the first came at the beginning of the superhero era in film, so to check in with the family now with how the genre has changed is exciting.

But ultimately, I want more originals. One of the things that really has been great about the Pixar films that have been amazing were 2 things, originality, and character connection. I think people have misread the formula, I think they see Toy Story and think “kids like toys, lets make a movie about toys” or “kids like animals and adventure, let’s make a movie about animals and adventure (Up),” but the reason why we really fell in love with those movies is that Woody learns that he has to share Andy’s love, or that Ellie got to live the adventure she always wanted, and Carl finally did too. (BTW, I’m tearing up just thinking about Carl and Ellie, can you say that about any other 5 minute relationship in film history?)

If Coco for all of it’s “Dia de Muerta” makeup, which totally does look cool, doesn’t have some strong clinching emotional connection, it’s going to fall flat. That’s what I want to see, I want them to be the master manipulators that we all know they can be, and tug on our heartstrings. This is less likely to happen in sequels, because it seems to be something forged in the examination of new characters, although each Toy Story movie so far has managed it, that’s because each time the relationship with Andy, the Buzz and Woody relationship, and the relationship with their purpose in life altered to examine it. I hope the 4th manages to continue this, I hope that The Incredibles turns from Bob’s insecurity about domestic life, and how he loves his wife and kids, to him now knowing who he is again, being able to guide them more. I guess don’t have a clue what direction I want the Incredibles to head in, but I don’t want rehashing of the same basic emotional connections the way that I think some of their lesser sequels have.

Ultimately, I suppose the sequels aren’t going to stop, but let’s take ratio which seems to be a little more than half of the recent movies have been sequels, and flip it. Do sequels that are organic, but not necessarily just because they sell well. Pixar currently has an amazing legacy in the making, and I think there is a lot of promise assuming they make some adjustments. Look at their parent company Disney’s legacy. Disney, love them or hate them, has had an incredible run for 80+ years, and although there have been some lulls, ultimately they’re doing great. But one thing they do, they have places to put their lesser sequels. Sure, they’ll make the Cinderella 10: Back In The Saddle, but it’s straight to video. This is the way to make cash-grab movies, and not tarnish your legacy.

Lastly, I want to say, I’m going to continue to see every Pixar film until they have thoroughly defeated my spirit, and I don’t think they’re even close yet. Their worst film is still better than most, I just want to see them return to being better than EVERYONE.

Written by Michael Cole

Star Wars Retrospective (Part 2): Episode II Attack Of The Clones

Published on November 1, 2017November 17, 2020 by Michael Christopher Cole3 Comments

Hi, everyone

Our 7 part series looking back on the Star Wars Saga continues with Star Wars Episode II Attack Of The Clones. Today’s article is written by long time Star Wars fan and World’s Best Media contributor Michael Cole. I asked Mike to write up the Episode II article specifically because I remember years ago Mike saying how he thought this scene was cool.

That may just be some bullshit memory of a conversation we never had, but Mike’s article is a good read anyway!

-Paul

Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones written by Michael Cole

I am of a unique generation of Star Wars fans. The original fans, even those who were very young in 1977, were already full-grown adults when the prequels started coming out. There is also a generation of kids for whom the prequels are their first taste of Star Wars. Between these two generations is mine, I was 14 when the Phantom Menace came out in 1999, and not quite 21 when Revenge of the Sith came out in 2005. One’s stance on the prequels seems to be largely dictated based on the viewer’s age upon their release, the older crowd seems to hate them, the younger crowd enjoyed them. So I think that I have a relatively unique viewpoint of the prequels.
Attack of the Clones is often considered the worst of all 7 saga films. I don’t agree, my own personal least favorite is Revenge of the Sith. What I want to do in this look back on Attack of the Clones, is focus on the positive. There are plenty of negatives, but there are a lot of positives that almost never get mentioned.

First, and this has nothing to do with the film itself, but a personal memory that I enjoy, is actually going to see the movie. When I went and saw Phantom Menace, I went alone, because I had no friends, when I went and saw Revenge of the Sith, I went with my two best friends, but for Attack of the Clones, I went with the largest crowd I think I’ve ever gone to a movie with. It was opening night and I went with a ton of people from school (I was a junior in high school at the time). As the lights went down, and the screen said “A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away…” someone yelled “aww, I’ve seen this one already,” got up and walked out (I’m relatively sure he immediately walked back in, but I was too fixated on the screen to really pay attention). Regardless of the film itself, it was one of the best movie going experiences of my life.
Now, to the quality of the film. Like I said before, there is plenty of stuff that you’ve probably heard about that doesn’t work in this film, but rarely do you hear about the positives. We’ve only had one saga film since the prequels, and so perhaps this isn’t a fair statement, but the prequels when compared to The Force Awakens, are much more creative. The Force Awakens was a good film, but it doesn’t reinvent the wheel. In the prequels we saw a lot of expansion of the universe, we saw exciting set pieces and action sequences (and not a single Death Star!)

There are two things that I think stand out about the Attack of the Clones, first of all, we got to see an epic multi-Jedi battle in a gladiator style arena. The original trilogy had been somewhat limited as to what they were able to show with lightsaber battles due to their really not being anymore Jedi, but this wasn’t a problem for the prequels. We got to see the Jedi Council fly in, and kick some ass in a colosseum.

The next great thing about this film, is that for the first time in 4 movies, we got to see Yoda fight in a lightsaber battle. Looking back, little ball of a Jedi Master bouncing around Count Dooku in a cave may not be as impressive , but on opening night? That was the greatest thing I had ever seen!

Another highlight was the speeder chase through the ‘streets’ of Coruscant. Not completely original, but new and exciting in a Star Wars film. With Anakin jumping out of the car and landing levels below onto another car. This was a very Star Wars version of similar scenes from movies like The Fifth Element and Blade Runner. Even with his wooden line delivery, Hayden Christenson seemed pretty badass (for those first few minutes). You also began to see what Anakin and Obi-Wan’s relationship was like. Which brings me to my next point…

Finally, since the original Star Wars had come out, we knew to some extent that Obi-Wan had been Darth Vader’s (or Anakin Skywalker’s) teacher, and really this is the only film we get to see that dynamic. Hayden Christenson doesn’t really carry his share of the ‘chemistry,’ but Ewan MacGregor does. MacGregor’s performance shows us how close the two characters had been, which really adds layers to their reunion in A New Hope.

This is far from a perfect film. But I don’t think it deserves to be remembered as the worst Star Wars movie. I would argue that ultimately it suffers most, from the trilogy’s real problem. Which is that the whole films are never more than the sum of their parts. Some of those parts are really good, unfortunately they’re brought down by the ‘other’ parts.
May the Force be with you!

What I’d Like To See: Wolverine

Published on October 29, 2017November 17, 2020 by Michael Christopher Cole2 Comments

Over the last 17 years, we’ve had 6 main team X-Men movies, and 3 Wolverine stand-alone films. Among the 9 films, I think there are 4 great, 3 pretty good (I’m apparently in the minority when it comes to people who enjoyed Apocalypse), and 2 crappy movies. We’ve had 2 Magnetos, 2 Professor Xs, 2 Mystiques, but only one Wolverine.
Other than his brief childhood James Howlett/Logan/Wolverine is virtually ageless or at the very least he ages slower than the average person. So unlike the other X-Men characters, recasting him cannot rely on age shifts in order to adjust the actors. Hugh Jackman however, is about 18 years older than he was when he started playing the character, and while he has aged well, he is not ageless, and as you probably know Logan from earlier this year, was his final performance as the character. I don’t think however that it’s the last we will see of the character, so I want to talk about what I think Fox needs to do with Wolverine.

First, I think there is a chance that if Fox were able to partner up with Marvel, that Hugh Jackman would return for the role. He has been a vocal proponent of the two universes colliding. We’ve seen it with Spider-Man and Hulk, and so it’s not completely out of the question, but X-Men seems to be too financially viable to make Fox that desperate, so I don’t think this will happen, unless Marvel makes some offer that makes Fantastic Four (also a Fox property at the moment) a better financial option. So, I don’t think this is going to happen, but that doesn’t mean that imagining Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine fighting Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk doesn’t give me one hell of a nerdgasm.

Alright so the ultimate fantasy aside, here’s what I want to see that I think is realistic. As of right now, we have two X-Men films (not including Deadpool) coming out in 2018. None of which appear to include Wolverine. I’m glad about this, because it will give us some idea to what level these films can perform without Hugh Jackman—sure he only had glorified cameos in First Class and Apocalypse, but that doesn’t mean there weren’t people going hoping for him. I also think that a couple of X-Men movies without Wolverine gives us a bit of a pallet cleanser. These are X-Men films, but to a considerable extent 4 of the 6 main team films were Wolverine (feat. The X-Men) films. Let’s delve into the team more, hopefully some different characters are going to be X-plored, like Scott Summers who has been second fiddle in the movies despite apparently being a very large aspect of the comics. The same goes with Jean Grey’s Phoenix, (the next film being titled Dark Phoenix) who has also been given a weak portrayal compared to the comics.

Throughout out the next couple of X-Men movies (including New Mutants if it’s going to remain in the current continuity), I want to see them start up the hype for Wolverine, the way they have for other characters in the past. References to him in reports, and Easter Eggs (I’m not even sure they need to have the next actor cast yet). After a couple of films, do another Apocalypse style cameo. Where we see an actor in that animalistic berserker mode, without actually showing his face, but start to show how he’s different than Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine (again it doesn’t even have to be the actor who will ultimately play the new Wolverine).
Eventually, after Easter Eggs, and cameos, make him a side character. Perhaps it’s a main team story, with Wolverine passing through on the adventure (which from what I remember of the comic and the cartoon is fairly consistent for the character). He’s kind of a transient character, so maybe he happens to come to Professor X for help. He meets Jean, and the rest of the team, but doesn’t immediately jump back into team mode.
This process, allows Fox to slowly change the character, which is the nice part of replacing a member of a team franchise. The character is iconic, and arguably linked to Hugh Jackman as much as any other franchise character (maybe RDJ as Tony Stark is as closely tied) even more-so than characters like James Bond who at one point was definitely Sean Connery. The benefit here, is that unlike Bond, Wolverine doesn’t have to immediately jump to the next actor, who inevitably cannot live up. If Fox is smart they’ll take their time getting Wolverine back in the mix, and by that time, we’ll be so excited for it, that perhaps we won’t notice it’s not Hugh Jackman.
That’s what I want to see!

Oh The Horror!: A non-Horror Fans’s Journey (writer by Mike Cole)

Published on October 22, 2017November 17, 2020 by Michael Christopher Cole2 Comments

Hey guys,

It’s Paul

Halloween and Horror have been the unofficial themes of the month at World’s Best Media. You can see that mainly reflected in our podcasts, but we’ve been trying to infuse the Halloween spirit everywhere. Tim and I (especially Tim) are big Horror Movie fans. So, Mike was kind enough to write up an article from his point of view as a non-Horror Movie fan. Halloween is coming soon, folks! Read below! Enjoy!

Written by Mike Cole

I’m a huge film buff, but I would also argue that I’m a bit of a film snob. I don’t think this is necessarily a great thing, arguably it is better to not have discerning taste, as then you can enjoy everything. Horror fans tend to be my role models in this way. Many horror fans, will go see ANY horror film that comes out. It’s why the genre is so successful, because every horror film seems to make money.
Now, I’m aware that I sounded like a pretty big douchebag in that first paragraph, but I truly don’t mean it that way. It’s a good thing. There isn’t really any other genre that can stay as true as horror. Perhaps it’s because comedy is subjective, and tragedy is personal and cathartic, but horror, the shit that really scares us? That’s fairly universal.
I imagine we can all understand the fear of someone or something lurking in a dark place, I read once that fear of the dark is an evolutionary characteristic developed to keep us safe. In fact, most of our fear probably stems from something deeper in our species’ history than comedy or drama would.
Personally, I haven’t seen many horror films. For me, there have been three routes that have lead me to watching a horror movie: all my friends are going (only can think of 2 horror movies that my friends went to), it’s a prestige pic and a horror movie (this one is also pretty rare), and lastly everyone’s talking about it.
Now, the two horror movies that I remember seeing with friends, are The Ring, which I thought was a pretty excellent film in its construction, and secondly The Human Centipede. The Human Centipede, came about from me seeing an article that this weird movie (which no one I knew had heard of yet) was going to be playing at The Coolidge Corner theater. I told my friend Slade about it, not because I wanted to see it, but because I thought the premise was so bizarre. Slade couldn’t get the idea of it out of his head, and made me go with him and a few friends to see it. This would end up being probably the most authentic ‘horror-going’ experience of my life. I don’t remember being scared, but I remember being grossed out, and cringing a lot. At one point, I remember thinking there was a good chance I was going to throw up in my popcorn bag. Seeing The Human Centipede, disturbed me enough, that I had at least a night or two of trouble sleeping. It was not an experience I wanted to replicate.
As I mentioned, prestige pics (basically movies that may be considered for awards) don’t tend to also be horror films, but there are a few slight exceptions. It may not be fair to consider them ‘horror’ but definitely scary/suspense/thrillers. For this list, as far as I’m aware it tends to be the works of Alfred Hitchcock, and The Silence of the Lambs. You’re probably aware of Psycho, Vertigo, and The Birds, at least on some level. They’re well crafted, and perhaps in their time they were scary, but not really anymore, but they’re still enjoyable. The Silence of the Lambs is perhaps remembered for being scarier. People think of Hannibal Lecter as terrifying, although personally, I found the character of Buffalo Bill to be far scarier. The voice of actor Ted Levine (which nearly ruined the show Monk for me because of this film), who played Jame Gumb aka Buffalo Bill, is terrifying along with his erratic behavior makes him far more frightening than the caged and calculating Lecter.
Lastly, I mentioned that I have watched some horror films based on hype. For this category, I have watched the original Halloween, which I didn’t really find scary, but thought was a great film. I think part of the problem with this was just the age of the film. I saw it in the last five years, and Jamie Lee Curtis is so much more a part of my knowledge, that she doesn’t have some of the nameless/faceless quality that comes with many horror movie victims/survivors.
After hearing about all of the hype, I also saw the first three Saw films. I think the first movie, wasn’t really too scary, but ultimately was well made, and enjoyable, the following two, I found to be increasingly scary, while decreasing in quality. Again, the fear factor to me, could come down to the fact that Carey Elwes is one of the main victims in the first, and I know who he is. Also the second film has a pit of syringes, and needles are one of my worst fears.
From the little bit that I have indulged in the horror genre, I’ve been able to see that there is a lot to be enjoyed about it, but I am not sure that I have the patience to sit through the terrible to find the divine, but I think not enjoying the ‘b-movies’ of the genre is only to my detriment, and I’m not advocating for any of you to do the same.

What I’d Like To See: MCU Phase 4

Published on October 15, 2017November 17, 2020 by Michael Christopher Cole5 Comments

Thor: Ragnarok comes out in a couple weeks, and is being called ‘the most anticipated movie of the fall,’ and I must agree it, looks awesome. This puts us at about the half-way point of the MCU Phase 3 (I believe Avengers 4 is the final film slated for this phase). What is going to happen with this phase has largely happened, and so I want to turn to speculation for Phase 4.
The phase one movies were largely introductions. We got the Avenger anchor characters (Thor, Cap, Iron Man, and Hulk) setup, and it culminated in The Avengers. Phase two was about expansion, in phase two we had movies like Guardians of the Galaxy who were the Avengers in space, and Ant-Man who is a West-Coast Avenger, as well as filling out the world-building of 3 of the originals (no Hulk movie for so many reasons). And so far Phase 3 has been letting our toys play together. We’ve had Captain America: Civil War (which is really an Avenger’s movie in many ways except they’re split) and Tony Stark is almost a secondary protagonist in Spider-Man: Homecoming, Thor: Ragnarok looks as if it could be called Thor and Hulk against the universe. These mash-ups have been great, and Thor and Hulk look like they’ll be the up there as well.
Here is the thing you need to understand about Marvel’s process (as best as I can understand it): they started us off with characters that may have been B-list to the masses, but they knew wouldn’t require much to make them appeal to people who don’t give a shit about comics (while staying true to the comics), then as time as progressed, as the audience has become more hooked, they’ve brought us into a cinematic comic-book world unlike anything else. They started introducing us to less traditional movie-going experiences, but more traditional comic book experiences. Things are weird, and overall the audience is loving it—can you imagine when Iron Man came out in 2008 if someone had told you Marvel would make a movie about a talking raccoon and a sentient tree that you would have been excited? Maybe if you’re reading on this site I guess, but overwhelmingly I think the answer would be no for those of us not delving into the weird world of comic books.
For Phase 4, we’ve had the cross-overs, we’ve had the mash-ups, we’ve had the weird, now it’s time to get to ‘the replacements.’ By the beginning of Phase 4, the franchise will be ten years old, many of the actors will have been in for 6 or more movies, and it will be time to start changing the line-up. It’s not necessarily what many want as a viewing audience, but it is what the business will begin to dictate, and honestly, I think there are some great potential options for it.
Comic books, unlike movies or TV, don’t have actors they need to replace, and yet they often do replace the characters. Right now in the movies Steve Rogers is Captain America, but both Bucky Barnes (aka The Winter Soldier) and Sam Wilson (aka The Falcon) have both ascended to the role of Cap. Most of the superheroes in comic books have been multiple characters, and it can rejuvenate them, it can change perspective, and I think it can do that for the MCU.
You might be thinking, “I don’t want anyone but Chris Evans playing Captain America,” but just because he doesn’t play Cap doesn’t mean he can’t return as Steve Rogers, or even later to return as Cap if the storyline allows it. This option frees up the actors a lot, because while the paychecks are nice, for the Chris’s (Evans and Hemsworth, and maybe even Pratt) it’s a lot of physical work to keep in their superhero conditions.
As it is, in Homecoming, we basically get Tony Stark having outsourced many of the Iron Man duties to autopilot, and so I think there is nothing that says they have to kill off the characters, or recast, just replace. We need an Iron Man, and a Cap on the team, but do we need Steve Rogers or Tony Stark?
With Ant-man, we’ve already seen the second iterations introduced, largely because Hank Pym (played by Michael Douglas) is too close of a character to Tony Stark, whereas Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) is a much different character.
The richness of comic books in adaptation is that there is so much source material much of it conflicting, but all kind of co-existing, and it allows the filmmakers to do whatever they want. It solves a couple of problems that I think are going to occur, one is that inevitably if these films continue going, there will need to be recasting, but this could allow a buffer space, and a shifting of the world/tone to allow new actors in. The second issue it solves is it uses fatigue on the part of actors playing the same characters to further world-build. It also allows different kind of conflicts, the conflict between characters not trusting a new Cap, or a new Thor, or whomever needs to be replaced creates conflict, and this has been Marvel’s strength is the conflict between protagonists, not the conflict between protagonist and antagonist.
Clearly, Kevin Feige knows what he’s doing, he’s been slowly sucking us all into a far less generic cinematic franchise, one that does resemble comic books more than traditional films in a lot of ways. So perhaps this will be the eventual route he takes, and if it isn’t I’ll be along for the ride, because on the whole he’s been getting it right, but I suspect if the audience keeps going along as he pushes us further and further, we’re going to see these kinds things happening, and I personally look forward to an MCU in which characters are replaced and not actors (for as long as possible).

What I Want To See: Game of Thrones Spin-off by Guest Correspondent Mike Cole!

Published on October 4, 2017November 16, 2020 by Michael Christopher Cole1 Comment

What I Want to See:
Game of Thrones Spin-Off

Writer: Michael Cole

Recently, it was announced that a FIFTH Game of the Thrones spin-off is in development over at HBO. I’m likely to give them all a try, but if we’re looking at it being franchised to that level, I have something very specific I would like to see happen, and I think you’ll want to see this too.
I should clarify that, obviously, we don’t know how the original series is going to end, and at least a couple of the spin-offs have been called prequels. We don’t know who will survive the final season, whether Westeros will be alive and well, severely damaged, or a White Walker infested hell-scape. Because we have no clue what’s coming, keep in mind that my pitch, which is a spin-off taking place after the events of original show is contingent on at least two of the characters surviving.
After the winter is over, or however the show ends, I want to see a spin-off starring Tormund and The Hound. We’ve now had 7 seasons, with all kinds of amazing speeches and conversations, and other character interactions, and I can honestly say none of them have entertained me more than the ten minutes of screen time that Tormund and the Hound shared in the season finale.

This two minute interaction, is essentially the trailer for the show I want to see, throw in a bit of their brutal battle scene, and you get the exact reason why I think this show would be incredible.
These two are a buddy comedy, THE buddy comedy, we’ve been waiting for. They are the Murtaugh and Riggs, or the Foley and Taggart, of gritty fantasy, or really of all fantasy. They have the necessary grit that’s been lacking in a lot of buddy comedies, the reluctance of the Hound to like Tormund, they’re perfect!
My idea, is that Tormund and The Hound (Sandor Clegane) walk the countryside after the great war, and end up defending villages and towns from all kinds of Westerosian danger. Structurally, think about Hercules: The Legendary Journeys starring Kevin Sorbo. In that show, Hercules and Iolaus, traveled around in the same manner, in this show however, Tormund isn’t a trusty side-kick, but rather a kick-ass partner to The Hound. In addition to the title characters, I think occasionally they would run into Brienne of Tarth, who would be this show’s Xena. As on GoT Tormund would pursue Brienne and lightly antagonize The Hound, and the show in the tone that those ten brilliant minutes of screen time have created.

The Hound’s desire to get himself killed, to just keep doing whatever he thinks is right until the day comes when someone or something ends his life, really means that if he doesn’t die in the finale of the show, it’s likely he’s going to go about doing this anyway, whether it’s alone or with a partner. Tormund on the other hand, doesn’t necessarily seem to seek death, but seems to find an excitement (to really live) by facing down those he opposes. The interesting nature of having two people approaching the same problems in the same way, for completely opposite reasons, would make for a lot of interesting character work and potentially some awesome philosophy to be interweaved into this tapestry.
I don’t know how many seasons this structure could run for without getting old, but I would think if you did at least one for every land mass or if you introduced seasonal story arches to go with the serial style of the episodes, you could probably make the show go for a little while, and personally I think most good drama or comedy/drama shows are doing shorter runs, and so I think ‘Tormund and The Hound’ is the winning formula for HBO to go with for their 6th spin-off (unless they’ve already thought about it and it’s one of the first 5).

What I Want To See: The Star Wars Anthology Films by Michael Cole!

Published on September 21, 2017November 16, 2020 by Michael Christopher Cole1 Comment

Hi guys,

Mike had a great idea to do a series of articles about his favorite things in pop culture and writing about where he as a fan, would like to see the property go. This one is about The Star Wars Anthology Films and it’s great! I loved reading it! We’ll be getting more articles in this series coming soon from Mike, in the meantime, Enjoy!

– Paul

The Star Wars Anthology Films

There is no doubt, that for many of us, we’re living in the Golden age of Star Wars fandom. We’re about to see the release of The Last Jedi, the third Star Wars film in as many years, and so far, we’ve been getting pretty good results. While, I know that there are some complaints that The Force Awakens was too repetitive of the original trilogy, that’s really the big complaint, and not too much else as far as quality. Rogue One, tells a backstory, that may have felt unnecessary before its release, but showed us how they could fill in elements of the story in original new ways.
The last couple months however, have come with some shake ups. First, Lord and Miller were fired from the Han Solo Anthology film (and replaced with Ron Howard. Wtf?) Then, last week, Colin Trevorrow was fired from Episode IX.
What I want to talk about today, is what I want to see from the future of the franchise. First of all, as of right now, it seems as if Episode IX will be the end of the Skywalker saga (that may not be the case but it is at least the public perception) but the Star Wars Anthology films will carry on the legacy after that point.
The Anthology films, so far have a good track record, as they are 1 for 1, and they did a lot as far as new terrain, new ships, new fighting styles, and told a good story, but still some feel it’s an unnecessary story. The Han Solo film, may end up doing the same in the sense that it will be much better than it expectations, but it has less going for it right now. Sure Han Solo is one of the favorite characters from the series, but part of that is because of his mystery which this will be filling in (it didn’t work wonders for Anakin Skywalker), and then there is the fact that the studio hired two comedy directors, who have been consistently good, but didn’t really show any particular aptitude for what this film should be, and then they’re being replaced by Ron Howard (did I mention Wtf?) who isn’t a bad director, but is arguably overrated, and honestly a weird choice given all the young risky filmmakers they’ve picked thus far. After Han Solo, there are rumors that we’ll see a Boba Fett movie, or an Obi-Wan spin-off, and while all of those could potentially be awesome—and make no mistake, I’ll be seeing all of them— they’re not what I want to happen.
One great thing about Rogue One, was that the cast of characters was almost completely new. We weren’t filling in unnecessary detail on characters we knew and loved, we were getting new characters. That’s what we should be getting. There are a million different directions these films could go in, and there is no limit on where in time you place them. We could get a ‘Knights of the Old Republic’ film or perhaps a series, we could get any element that is mentioned but not fleshed out completely and do more with it, i.e. Tattooine’s Hutt gangsters, podracing, and slave trade, or any number of other things could be explored. It shouldn’t all be so interconnected.
Arguably the only fully functional extended cinematic universe right now is the MCU, and one of the amazing things that the MCU does correctly, is despite teasers and Easter Eggs, they have some stand-alone films, but also as importantly, is they don’t stick to a genre. Ant-Man is a heist film, Winter Soldier is a spy film, Guardians of the Galaxy is a Star Wars film. This is something I want the Star Wars Anthology films to start doing; I want them to start to explore different tones and genres. It’s not to say they don’t have to remain Star Wars films in their feeling, but don’t be afraid to make a Star Wars film that’s more of a thriller, or more of a comedy. Rogue One very vaguely does that, solely in the fact that it’s somewhat similar to a Dirty Dozen Star Wars film, and hopefully Lucasfilm and Disney decide to go broader into the Galaxy Far, Far Away.

What do you want to see in the Anthology films? Tell me in the comments below.

How To Treat Source Material by Guest Writer Michael Cole

Published on September 15, 2017November 16, 2020 by Michael Christopher Cole3 Comments

I’m fortunate enough to know many talented and creative people. Some of them have already contributed great stuff to World’s Best Media. Like Tim Cuff, my cohost on The World’s Best Podcast with Paul & Tim, or Ryan McDonald who created the amazing promotional video for that podcast. Both Ryan and Tim have contributed much more than that to this creative project I started, but one person who’s had a big influence on this entire thing who hasn’t gotten his due, is an old friend of mine named Michael Cole. Mike’s an extremely talented writer who has his own blog and has published a book of his own short stories called “Everything I’ve Got: A Collection Of Short Stories, Poems, and Essays”. He was the person I went to when I knew I wanted to start a blog and there would be no World’s Best Media without Mike Cole. One of my goals, when I created World’s Best Media was to give a forum to all of these talented people I knew to offer what they’ve created to the world. So I’ve been wanting to do something with Mike specifically for some time and we are going to have him be a special correspondence for World’s Best Media. Mike will be contributing guest articles every now and again on topics similar to the type of thing we cover all the time on all our podcasts and blogs. Pop-culture, movies, books, TV, everything. So without further ado here is Mike’s first piece for our site. I already have one more of his articles ready to post and we’re very happy to have him writing for us. I think you guys will love his point of view. Below his article I just posted a link to his website. Enjoy!

-Paul

How to Treat Source Material by Michael Cole

When something is adapted into a movie, there is inevitably some complaint about source material. Whether it’s a video game, a book, a comic book, or a TV show, someone is going to be unhappy. It’s inevitable.
Currently, the problem tends to be that something doesn’t follow the source material close enough. It’s a natural complaint, after all if you were a fan of the original thing, then you want to see it adapted well, but is it a fair to expect a literal translation of page to screen?
I think it depends, and I don’t mean it depends on the specific work it’s based on, as much as I mean what the original format was. Look at a finite book series, like Harry Potter or Percy Jackson; there are 7 Harry Potter books, telling one overarching story, there are 5 Percy Jackson books (plus 5 where he’s a semi-main character, plus 5 where he’s a background character). Both of the series have pretty defined beats that lead to their ending in the final book, so they should be pretty close to the original source material, at least in those beats. Harry Potter does a pretty good job of this, cutting some of the fat that isn’t needed, but overall sticking to the same structure. Percy Jackson got two movies (of 5 books) and by the end of the second book, there was a battle which was essentially the final battle from book 5. By doing this, they had predetermined that even if it had been successful enough to warrant further movies, that they wouldn’t be able to continue following the story that had been laid out for them.
I think a finite series, should adapt the basic bones of the original, but an ongoing serial, something which has the mythology being rewritten constantly, has much less responsibility to strictly following the source material. We’re seeing this with comic books, they’ve been restarting, and reinventing, and reimagining the stories and the worlds, and so when it comes time to adapt them into films and TV shows there is a wealth of source material, but sometimes its contradictory, so in this way sticking with the spirit of the characters and their arches tends to be paramount, and making sure that any element that has remained untouched through all the various adaptations and updates isn’t changed (at least without VERY good reason). It’s well established that Joe Chill killed Bruce Wayne’s parents, in every variation except for Tim Burton’s Batman, in which Jack Napier killed them before becoming the Joker. While there was some disagreement about changing it, ultimately it made no impact on the ongoing storytelling in the overall Batman catalog, but allowed that films story to have the proper impact without shifting too far from source material.
What is interesting about film adaptations is, that if you look at them before a certain point (I tend to think of Harry Potter as being the turning point) a significant amount of book to movie adaptations had significant changes to the source material. Look at a movie like One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest based on the novel by Ken Kesey, (among many other hugely successful films adapted from books around that time) it took a starkly different approach from the book. In the novel, the whole story is told from Chief’s perspective, and as readers we have a hard time differentiating between what is real and what is hallucination. There are moments in the book to make it clear that the Chief does hallucinate, like when the beds each lower down as the floor opens up and all the sleeping people are experimented on by putting mechanical and electronic parts in them. In the movie, because the story is closer associated with McMurphy’s point of view, we see the ward as being filled with people who are mentally ill, but the view point of it is clear itself.
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, is an example of a book that would have been unfilm-able as a literal adaptation, and that is where a lot of stand-alone literature falls. We naturally want to see a film adaptation, but not every book translates, whether that be due to technical constraints, or more hard limit medium differences (if Chief had narrated the film as heavily as he had the novel, he would have been talking nearly the entire movie.)
One of my favorite books, The Knife of Never Letting Go which is the first book in The Chaos Walking Trilogy, is being adapted into a film for release in 2019. The book takes place on a world where everyone can hear everyone else’s thoughts, including the animals. (I’m going to give no spoilers so don’t worry). The people refer to that concept as ‘Noise,’ as in your thoughts are your ‘Noise,’ and most people can hear everyone’s ‘Noise’. On the page, Patrick Ness, fills the page not only with what you need to know, but noise, words all over the pages a typography nightmare, and it makes for an incredible novel. We can ignore a lot of it visually, so we get the idea, but we’re not actually as overwhelmed as the characters. How is this going to work in the film? My hope is that they’re not going to be completely faithful to the novel. My hope is that they’ll find some other manner of conveying that, because— at least for me— ignoring audio noise will be too difficult and distract from the storytelling.
Ultimately, I think there must be a consistency whether it’s to the characters, or the concept, or in some cases it should tell the same story, but I think depending on what kind of source material you have, and what kind of film you’re going to make, you have to change things. You’re going to get some people mad, and those people will get frustrated with those who enjoy the new item, but a movie isn’t a comic book, or a book, or TV show, and the focus just has to be on the quality of the storytelling, and not an overwhelming reverence to an original in a medium that doesn’t tell stories the same way.

What do you think about adaptations and source materials? Do you prefer them to be perfect visual representations or are you ok with changing things as needed? Tell us in the comments below.

https://michaelchristophercole.com