'Detroit: Become Human' isn't very good.

So when it comes to me checking story based interactive games, lately I've been trying to go through as many of them as possible. I've done my best to either play through them myself or watch long play versions of these games on Youtube.

Indeed, as a writer who is currently dabbling with a project that has to do with interactive story based gaming, reviewing these games has been a crash course to learn about the genre. It has been a great learning tool in figuring out how to write a similar project myself.

So this time I decided to check and review 'Detroit: Become Human', a story based game that I had in my Playstation 4 library. I had added it when it was free on Ps plus store, but hadn't for some reason tried it, even though the game kinda seemed interesting.

Premise-wise, what we're dealing with here is a futuristic world in the United States that has androids in it. In a not so near future (2038) technology has advanced so rapidly that these human like robots are now assisting humans in our everyday life.

Game-wise, the story consists of three characters / storylines that has androids as our protagonists. We have an investigative android cop "Connor", a housemaid 'Kara' (looks like Jennifer Lawrence) and a servant 'Markus', that we get to control as players during the story.

Catalyst-wise, the story starts when Connor is assigned to investigate why some androids seem to get deviant and stop obeying their masters. These formerly obedient androids have started acting like human beings and are getting in trouble with the law.

Indeed, as we get introduced soon to our other protagonists, 'Kara' is wanted for kidnapping a girl whereas 'Markus' gets caught by the cops for killing a person. Clearly something is going on and we need to figure out what is going on and why.

Story-wise, as we experience things unfolding, the biggest gimmick in the game is that your decisions have an effect on how the story unfolds. The way you choose to react (shoot/not kill etc.) to different situations changes the way the game progresses.

Not surprisingly, the challenge with a genre that has 'story trees' and a huge script is that it's difficult to write a story that makes sense and that can take different directions. It's really challenging to come up with a plausible story that doesn't get ridiculous at some point.

Indeed, especially in a game like this, when you have a script with three storylines that reportedly ran for 6000 pages, that means that you need to know what you're doing. Your premise and structure better be bulletproof and thematically solid in order to work well. 

Unfortunately, In 'Detroit: Become Human', even though at first the 'androids as humans' story seems intriguing, later on things more or less fall apart. It becomes obvious that the premise isn't well thought out and that the questions raised in the first act won't be answered.

Indeed, when you reach like 40% in the game, you'll notice that almost nothing makes sense. Things aren't explained, the plot holes are big, the story has no momentum, deus exes happen and there's no emotional pay-off (Markus's storyline is especially boring) at the end.

In that sense, when I think about 'Detroit: Become Human' and the genre in general, I think it's obvious that it's not easy to come up with a multi-threaded story that works. It's not easy to come up with a story that feels rewarding and keeps you interested from start to finish.

After all, in a game like this, when you give the audience that many decisions to make during the gameplay (it's mostly an interactive movie), it creates so many hurdles. It's challenging to write a coherent story without making serious mistakes in the process.

In that sense, in the end, when it comes to this particular game, even though 'Detroit: Become Human' certainly doesn't have the worst story I've ever seen, that doesn't mean that I enjoyed it that much. I can't say that I was particularly entertained by what I saw.

After all, when you exclude the first act that worked, considering all the problems that followed (heavy handed themes, plot holes, lack of direction, too many bland protagonists etc.) those were bad. You shouldn't get too excited about the game and its story.

On the contrary, unless you're really a fan of 'interactive movies' that have a lot of 'quick time events' and tons of decisions to make, this is not a game for you. 'Detroit: Become Human' isn't a game for you and will likely not entertain you the way it should.

'Life Is Strange 2' has a disappointing story.

So when it comes to my recent interests that have to do with gaming, during the last few weeks I've been catching up with the 'Life Is Strange' series. I managed to check the remaining games in the series that I hadn't managed to play and review before.

Indeed, after playing and reviewing the first 'Life is Strange' some years ago, I wanted to check the rest too. I managed to check and review the third one a month ago and now it was finally time to check and review the second one in the series too. 

So when it comes to the second game in the series (after not particularly liking the third one), I watched the long play version of the second game about two weeks ago. I checked the game and, well, wasn't that impressed with this one either.

Premise-wise, this time we're dealing with two immigrant brothers in the United States, who after an unfortunate incident (their dad gets killed) decide to escape to Mexico. They think that is the only way to handle the situation and so off they go together.

Story-wise, the big 'hook' in this game is that as these two kids flee and run away from the law, it is revealed that the younger kid has super powers. The kid has some sort of an ability to control and move objects with his mind, which leads to all kinds of incidents.

Quality-wise, it has to be said that the game - even though in parts relaxing to watch (13 hours long and has a great soundtrack) - isn't particularly well made. There are so many issues and problems in the story (including plot holes) that it's hard to count all the flaws.

Gaming-wise, one of the worst things is that as a player (you control the older brother) you have very few things to do. The game that is divided to five different chapters (in different locations /w different side characters) is basically one big cut scene show.

As sad as it is, at no point of the game do you get a feel that you're in charge of the story. There's no rewind button with your decisions and since it's the kid who has the super powers (the kid is pretty unlikable) that makes the experience even more frustrating.

Theme-wise, one of the worst things here is without a doubt that the game is extremely "woke" and takes an over-the-top anti-Republican stand that is impossible not to notice. This is evident in every chapter in the story and is something that really bothered me.  

After all, the way they beat-wise kept giving us "Deliverance-style" antagonists everywhere they went was just not believable. You had racists, bigots, religious nut jobs and anti-immigrant cops to such extent that you felt like you were watching a parody.  

Not surprisingly, once you as a 'player' reached the final chapter in the story with your brother, due to the implausible story beats and 'messaging' issues, the stuff doesn't feel satisfying. I just wasn't sold by the story that wasn't that well thought out.

After all, as a whole, when you think about all the implausible things that occurred [no spoilers here], there were simply too many of them. There were too many problems, even though the writers probably tried their best to make a game that had an honest message. 

In that sense, in the end, I have to conclude that unless you're able to look past these problems (story flaws, poor pacing, lack of control, arbitrary chapter endings, demonizing etc), this is not a game for you. You shouldn't be thinking that you'll enjoy the experience.

After all, even though there were some good things too in the game like its relaxing atmosphere in places and its solid soundtrack that I managed to enjoy, those weren't enough. These qualities weren't enough and didn't make the game as a whole a positive experience. 

'James Bond: No Time to Die' movie review.

So when it comes to watching the latest James Bond 007 film, it has to be said that I didn't have my expectations that high about it. I wasn't thinking that the movie - even though probably not horrible or unwatchable - wouldn't be that well made as a whole.

After all, in my last post about the franchise (<click here>) I listed reasons why the films - even though successful at the box office have lately been lacking in quality. The franchise hasn't been doing well quality-wise and has suffered from all kinds of problems and issues.

Yet, as I last week got a chance to watch 'No Time to Die', as a rather big fan of the franchise, I couldn't help but to feel at least somewhat optimistic again. Perhaps I would be proven wrong here and that perhaps the last 007 film starring Daniel Craig would be okay after all.

So having now finally seen the film, I have to say that - as unfortunate as it is - I wasn't that impressed with Craig's last outing as James Bond. The movie, even though not completely awful, didn't manage to convince me that the franchise has still something to offer.

Premise- & and idea-wise, it has to be said that in 'No Time to Die', the producers & writers at least tried to do something different here. They knew they were in trouble and thought that perhaps they could make an entertaining film by tweaking the concept a bit.

In practice, what this meant is that Craig's final outing (no huge spoilers here), instead of being a traditional Bond movie, is more of a character piece. The emphasis in this movie is on James Bond as a character and how he feels as a (supposed) human being.

Indeed, the film that lasts more than two and a half hours (even with excluding the opening & closing credits) spends considerable time dealing with his 'family' life. There's his girlfriend from 'Spectre' who is involved and there's her 5 year old girl in the movie too. 

The big challenge with this kind of concept tweak is that it requires that the film is really well written. You need to have everything well thought out and balanced, which means that your story must have well rounded characters & storylines (also protagonists & antagonists).

Unfortunately, that's not how the writers were able to pull of the script in 'No Time to Die'. Even though agent 007 is the main focus in the film (the girlfriend is the protagonist in the pre-title sequence), there's no balance here in the movie with the characters at all.

 

Indeed, when it comes to the antagonists in movie, as incredible as it sounds, the two main villains get roughly seven minutes of air time total. Ernst Stavro Blofeld is in the movie for like two minutes and Rami Malek's villain Safir is on screen for like five minutes. 

Not that surprisingly, even though the movie does work in its first half, when it comes to the last act of the film the thing feels almost embarrassing. Pretty much nothing here makes sense and that includes the villain's angle with Bond's family, which is just pathetic.

Indeed, in the final 15 minutes and its climax, you can only wonder how the 'story' spent so much time with some other things (lots of 'team effort', Q, female 007, etc.) and not with the villain. How did the movie go for so long without developing the antagonist's motivation at all.

In that sense, when it comes to this film as a whole, it shouldn't come as a surprise that I wasn't able to enjoy it as much that I would have wanted to. It just wasn't that well made as a whole, even though the action scenes were solid and the movie looked great too. 

After all, when you take into account how botched the script was (had tons of reshoots) and how the writers (hacks Purvis & Wade were involved again) didn't shine here, that wasn't a good thing. That was genuinely disappointing how the story was lacking. 

Still, in the end, when it comes to this movie, I'm not saying that you shouldn't give it a chance at the some point. I'm not saying that and do recognize that we're talking about a franchise that has gone for almost 60 years and has reached its 26th movie already. 

At the same time, at least when it comes to me, it's a safe bet that I won't be looking forward to watching this movie again. I won't probably give it a second shot, and instead I'll watch those older Bond films, especially those that starred Roger Moore as agent 007.

I've been playing piano for 3 months every day.

So last time when I wrote about my piano playing hobby, I talked about how I had managed to keep my practice routine going for like a month. I had managed to keep playing piano every day, which enabled me to progress with the instrument relatively well.

Indeed, especially as I kept practicing the theme song of 'La La Land' (Mia & Sebastian's theme), I kept getting better. As I managed to learn the song and get my muscle memory improved (especially the jazz solo), it was obvious that I had been doing things right.

At the same time, even though I kept progressing and had learned some new stuff, I knew that it wasn't enough. I was more or less only getting started and had still so much to learn about the craft (proper technique, sight reading, musical theory etc.)

Naturally, the next step was to select new songs to play that would both challenge me and keep me interested with the instrument. I chose - like I had predicted in my last post - the theme song from 'Pirates of The Caribbean', which is a really popular melody.

So with 'He's a Pirate' song, I have to say that things didn't go as smoothly as I had thought at first. The melody, even though rather simple and even repetitive in many places, requires a lot of control from you and ability to play the keys really fast. 

Indeed, as I kept learning to play it - I again divided the song to sections in order to learn and memorize it - I noticed that I wouldn't be able to progress as fast as I would like to. I was simply not as good, especially technique-wise, than I thought I would be.

Progress-wise, it was rather difficult to admit that even though I did get better with the song and how I played it, I had my limitations. No matter how hard I would practice, I would still struggle with the fast transitions, even though I did my best.

So the next step, naturally, in order to keep my sanity and not go crazy from all the repetition was to move on from the song. I had to choose another song to practice, which would help improve my basic technique and consequently make me a better player.

Song-wise, after the Pirates song, I decided to choose 'City of Stars', another song from 'La La Land', which I found to be interesting too. It just sounded so melodic and fascinating, even though the song seemed rather simple and 'easy' to play. 

Fortunately, even though I at first really struggled with that song (left hand skips certain notes), I learned the melody and moved to the next song. I chose Edith Piaf's 'La Vie en Rose', a popular and romantic song that I've been practicing for the last two weeks. 

Indeed, this a song that has its own challenges and demands (octave + stretches with fingers, using almost all the fingers at the same time). This is clearly a new song that will improve my basic technique, even though it requires tons of practice from me. 

In that sense, now that I've managed to keep going with my practice routine for three months pretty much every single day, it's pretty clear that I'm slowly getting better. I'm getting better, even though I have still so many things to learn. 

After all, among other things, I still struggle with my muscle memory and my ability to control fast transitions. I also don't have the ability to sight read (play without practice by simply looking at the notes) that well, which is a sign that I have to practice on this front too.

Still, in the end, as I'm next trying to pay attention to the theory side a little bit more, I shouldn't be feeling too bad about the progress that I've made during the last few months. I shouldn't be thinking that I'm not getting better as a pianist.

After all, even though there are days when I don't notice the progress - despite my deliberate practice, I keep getting better. I keep getting better and as long as I practice diligently every single day, eventually I'll be able to play the instrument as well as I'd like to.

Netflix's 'Squid Game' review.

Yesterday I managed to finish watching 'Squid Game' a super popular 'survival' series that was released on Netflix a month ago. I watched the series after hearing a lot of good news about it from my friends who had already watched the show and had managed to like it.

Indeed, they said that this South Korean 'Battle Royale' style series, even though violent, was something that they got hooked on and couldn't stop watching. The series was entertaining and despite its brutal nature had a message that they could relate to.

So having now finished watching the first season of the series - nine episodes total - I have to say that I'm pretty glad that I gave the series a chance. 'Squid Game' managed to be fairly entertaining, even though I have some issues with how the show was written in certain places.

Premise-wise, we're dealing with a situation where people who are in a financially dire situation are given a chance to 'redeem' themselves. They are given a chance to take part in a mysterious, secret game in a secret place, in which they can win significant amounts of money.   

The big catch here - that they don't know about before they participate - is that if they - at any spot - fail at these games, they get killed. They will be executed on the spot by the organizers of the game, who will show no mercy towards the participants. 

Character-wise, our main character is Seong Gi-hun (Lee-Jung-jae) who as a divorced gambler is in a dire situation. Deeply in debt and being chased by the loan sharks, he lives with his elderly mother and is desperate to get anything going on in his life. 

The catalyst in the story is when a mysterious person in the subway makes him an offer  - as Seong finds out that his ex-wife is about to move to the U.S. with his daughter - he's willing to do anything. He takes the bait and - after being put to sleep - is taken to an island.

Not that surprisingly, once he wakes up in a facility with hundreds of other 'players', things get brutal rather fast. As the 'green light, red light' children's game starts and the failing players get gunned down, the situation that they're in becomes completely clear.

Quality-wise, when it comes to the show's overall quality,  I have to say that for the most parts of the show, I was able to appreciate the quality of 'Squid Game'. There were a lot of things that the producers and the writers managed to do fairly well here.

By that I mean that there's no question that the series as a whole has pretty solid production values. The series looks really good - despite its pastel color palette - and its clear that a lot of money was spent to make the sets and locations look believable.

Acting-wise, if we don't count the VIP-characters that are awful, the acting was pretty good too. Especially when it comes to our main character Seong Gi-hun, the actor manages to make the character - despite his personal flaws - surprisingly likable and relatable.

Story-wise, it has to be said that the first five episodes are easily the strongest in the series. This is when all the different characters are still being introduced/developed and the 'children's' games that the contestants are forced to play are interesting to the audience.

 

However, the real problems start with the sixth episode when not only do we have to get rid of some of our 'supporting cast' but the games they play - as unfortunate as it is - become boring. The show loses pretty much all of its direction and energy here. 

Indeed, in the sixth episode when the contestants play a marble game of their choice that decides who gets killed, the show gets pointless and come to a standstill. The episode goes nowhere and there's at least 30 minutes of material that could have been easily cut.

Furthermore, this section is also where we're introduced to the VIP persons who come to the island 'for fun' to observe the massacre. They don't work at all and especially when it comes to all their lines, the exposition (ultra on-the-nose) and the acting is abysmal.

Fortunately, even though this part of the series doesn't work (I think includes also the organ harvest sub-plot), it manages to rebound from this. Once we get back to the remaining battles that are a bit better and we have gotten rid of the cast, the series gets watchable again. 

After all, even though in the final act the 'cop angle' (including too many convenient close calls) doesn't get resolved properly, the story beats for the main character are good enough. The finale is pretty entertaining and the reveals are somewhat logical and expected.

In that sense, when it comes to the show as a whole, I think it's clear that 'Squid Game', despite some of its problems that are pretty obvious, still manages to deliver. There's clearly a lot of things going on in here that work and the hype for the series is earned.

After all, even though the writing could have been better, when it comes to the show's message, that part definitely works. The series drives well across its point of what rogue-capitalism, cruelty and overall lack of empathy can do in society, if we don't take care of each other. 

In that sense, in the end, when it to comes to whether you should give the show a chance - in case you haven't managed to watch it yet - I think the answer is fairly clear. You should watch it and give the show a go and not be discouraged by its violent content.

After all, even though there's some violence and bloody content here, that's not what the show is about. The show has other things going on in it and these aspect, like it being entertaining and having a solid message is what makes it worth watching and worth your time.

'Life is Strange 3' is a disappointing game.

So when it comes to me playing interactive 'choice' based story games, I haven't actually been playing them that much lately. Ever since I finished the first 'Life is Strange' game a couple of years ago, I haven't tried to play any of them if I'm being honest here.

Indeed, even though I managed to buy an interactive game like 'Detroit: Become Human' for my Ps4, I haven't actually played it. I also skipped 'Life is Strange 2' for some reason and didn't purchase it when it was released a couple of years ago on different platforms.

Yet, surprisingly enough, even though I've been slacking with these games, a couple of weeks ago I decided to check the latest 'Life is Strange'. As I noticed that 'Life is Strange 3: True Colors' was released, I had to check whether its story was even remotely good.

Having now watched the full walkthrough of the game on youtube (I wasn't going to pay 69€ for the full game), I have to say that I was rather disappointed with the game. Even though there were some parts that worked, as a whole its story was poorly constructed.

Premise-wise, this time we're dealing with a young, troubled female called Alex, who decides to reunite with her brother Gabe. Once she's out of foster care, she goes to see him in Haven Springs in Colorado, a beautiful small town where life seems to be easy and simple.

'

Indeed, unlike in her past - that we aren't really told much - in this place everything seems to be in balance. Her brother is living a good life with his girlfriend, who also has a son and everyone seems to be welcoming our protagonist's arrival to the place.

Catalyst-wise, the game's inciting incident happens when Gabe dies during a search & rescue mission for his step son Ethan. As Alex manages to save Ethan's life in the mountains, an explosion in the vicinity of an old mine causes a rockslide that takes Gabe's life.

Not surprisingly, the main story arc is about why the explosion happened and killed Gabe. As Alex notices, things aren't as simple as she had thought at first and people in the town - as she tries to help them - have their secrets that their trying to hide from others.

Theme-wise, it has to be said that I didn't have a problem with the story being about 'healing'. The idea of our protagonist trying to solve the problems of others with her empathy (she has a skill) is something that is pretty commendable in my opinion.

At the same time, the problem with the game is that story-wise pretty much everything in 'Life is Strange: True Colors' is way too amateurish. There are so many problems with the game's screenplay that - apart from the game's first hour - are just mindboggling.

For example, when you take a look at game's story, very few things make sense. The main storyline about the death of his brother and why it happened is so poorly constructed and is so full of plot holes that it's just painful to experience the story.

Indeed, if we exclude the beginning that works - basic things like exposition, pacing and story plausibility are all wrong. Severe mistakes are made like introducing new characters in the last act and using 'deus ex machina' resolutions again and again. 

Furthermore, when you think about how short the game actually is (6 hours with a poorly placed 1 hour Larping scene at hour 4), that's not exactly a good thing either. There just isn't enough content to justify the game's price tag if we're being honest here.

In that sense, when it comes to 'Life is Strange 3' as a whole, even though I did enjoy some aspects of the game, those aspects are not enough. The good things like the game's relaxing atmosphere, its music and how beautiful it is don't really manage to outweigh the negatives. 

Indeed, when you think about those bad things like some of the characters changing abruptly, 'Gabe' shown in a negative light (flashback) in the last act or the 'Usb stick plot', those were awful. You can't make mistakes like these if you want to be a professional writer.  

In that sense, in the end, if you're perhaps thinking about purchasing the game based on how much you possibly liked the first game, I wouldn't get too excited. I wouldn't think that the third 'Life is Strange' is going to be worth your hard earned money, 

On the contrary, even though the first 'Life is Strange' had its issues, there were still tons of good aspects in that game. Those solid aspects outweighed the negatives (weak last act), which is something that unfortunately cannot be said about this third game in the series.

Playing piano: the importance of practicing.

So when it comes to my new hobby, in my last blog post I wrote about how I had managed to start playing piano again after a 20+ year break. I had managed to start playing the instrument after hearing a piece of music that was so beautiful and compelling to me.

Indeed, once I heard J. Halvorsen composition 'Passacaglia' almost a month ago, I started practicing it every day. I had a solid practice routine (three times a day) that allowed me to learn the song rather fast, even though skill-wise I had to start almost from zero.

Not surprisingly, after I learned to play 'Passacaglia', the next question was would I keep practicing and would I have the motivation to keep going. Would I be able to learn to play stuff like 'La La Land', that I happened to mention in the article.

Fortunately, when it comes to what has happened during the last few weeks, I have some good news to share. As it happened, I did continue practicing and did learn to play 'Mia & Sebastian's' theme from 'La La Land', even though I had some setbacks too.

Learning-wise, the biggest challenge was that during the first two weeks of September, I had limited opportunities to practice. I had previously practiced at my parent's place and once they came back from their summer house, I had no 'free' place to play anymore.

Thankfully, once my dad came back from the farm the second time, he actually brought me an electric keyboard that was stored there. The keyboard, even though cheap and a bit clunky to play with, gave me an opportunity to play whenever I wanted to.

Practice-wise, I noticed rather quickly that I unlike with 'Passacaglia' that I learned with 'synthesia' (program that shows which keys to play) this method didn't work anymore. This time I had to learn to read notes in order to figure things out properly.

Not that surprisingly, at first learning to read notes turned out to be rather painful and frustrating. This was especially the case with the bass clef and the notes that were outside the bar - particularly for an amateur like me who had been on a break.

Another challenge was that unlike with 'Passacaglia', a composition that is pretty simple to memorize, 'Mia & Sebastian's theme' wasn't as basic and repetitive. It was a challenge to do stuff like memorizing more notes, using black keys and using more fingers at the same time.

Fortunately, as I kept diligently practicing every day, I kept progressing rather steadily. I managed to already learn to play the melodic part of the song (played it at school) and have now moved to the 'jazz solo' part of the composition, which will take some additional practice.

In that sense, now that I'm almost ready to start practicing yet another piece of music (probably Pirates of The Caribbean), it can be said that things are going well. I've managed to exceed my expectations, even though things could have gone better too.

After all, when it comes to this whole thing, there's no question that playing piano is hard work and that there are no shortcuts. You have to be able to put in the hours and understand that sometimes in your sessions you feel like you're not making that much progress.

Still, when it all is said and done, in my case, I'm glad that I've managed to keep my practice routine going so well here. I'm happy that I've found the motivation to learn to play the piano again and learn these wonderful melodies that touch my heart.

After all, even though I won't become a professional pianist, that's not a reason to not keep going. I shouldn't be worrying about how good I might eventually become, because in the end, becoming 'great' is not what this whole thing is supposed to be about.

So I managed to start playing piano again.

During my summer vacation, one of the 'goals' that I had set for myself was that I would start playing piano again. I was thinking that if things would go really well, perhaps I would be able to find motivation to start playing the instrument after a 20+ year break.

Indeed, the last time I played piano was in high school during a school event when I was 18. I played the instrument for our school's choir during an independence day's event, which subsequently was the last time I played it for more than twenty years.

So naturally, with a history like this with the instrument, the chances weren't obviously that high that I would start playing piano again. It was at least somewhat unlikely that I would pick up on this hobby after having been on a break for so long.

Fortunately, even though I hadn't played piano for so long, as it happened, last week I actually started playing it again. I managed to get back to playing the instrument and even managed to get some encouraging results during my practice sessions.

Return-wise, the biggest reason that I started playing again had to do with me hearing J. Halvorsen's beautiful piano composition 'Passacaglia' (based on Händel's musical piece). The piece was so beautiful that I just felt that I had to give it a shot, no matter what. 

Naturally, getting started wasn't easy and I had some real troubles trying to get my muscle memory back (hands to synchronize etc.). It was a bit scary and even hopeless to do basic stuff like where you had to use your both hands simultaneously (left hand two octaves, right hand blind).

Practice-wise, for me the best way to practice was to do it three times a day. I would play for an hour after I came back from work, have another 30-40 minute session in the evening and the next morning play for 5-10 minutes to check how I had progressed.

 

Progress-wise, the good thing about having a practice routine like this is that it allowed me to not overload my brain and my muscle memory too much. Once I inevitably got a bit frustrated after almost every session, I could just go on a break and come back later that day.

Indeed, especially after the evening sessions, when I could feel how my brain really started to turn into mush, it was obvious that I had practiced enough. It was time to call it a day and get some sleep, before I would get too desperate about the whole thing.

Thankfully, as I kept going, every single day I got progressively better at playing the song. I practiced it in sections and it didn't take more than five days before I was ready to play the song at work and show my progress for my friends (we have multiple pianos in our school).

In that sense, when it comes to whole thing, now that I've gotten back to playing piano at least a bit, I think it's clear that I should keep going. I need to keep practicing and find new material that inspires me without getting too complacent (I think I'll do 'La La Land' next).

Indeed, even though I obviously have no desire or intention to become a great player or anything like that, that's not a reason to not take this hobby at least a bit seriously. I definitely shouldn't be thinking that I wouldn't have time for this instrument.

On the contrary, as long as I pick new songs to practice and take things slow enough, I'll get better at it. I'll become a better piano player and even though practicing takes time, it's worth it and shows that I can do other artistic things too in life than just write scripts.

'A Quiet Place 1 & 2' reviewed.

A couple of weeks ago me and my friend decided that it would be a good idea to finally give a post apocalyptic film series 'A Quiet Place' a chance. We thought that it was time to watch these suspense / horror films and not avoid watching them anymore.

After all, even though we're not the biggest fans of the suspense film genre, now that there were already two popular entries in this series, we thought that we couldn't ignore them anymore. We had to check out these two films and see whether they were any good. 

So having now seen the two 'Quiet Place' movies, I have to say that we were both rather pleasantly surprised by the quality of these films. Both of them were actually rather well made and managed to keep our attention from start to finish really well.

Film-wise, the basic premise in the 'Quiet Place' is that we have a post apocalyptic world, where alien monsters have pretty much destroyed the world and the society we know. Only a few remaining surviving members of the human race are left on this planet.

Indeed, as these ruthless extraterrestrial monsters keep hunting us humans with their special hearing ability, it's no wonder we are in deep trouble. They can hear us so well that almost every sound that humans make will make our position known to these monsters.

Not surprisingly, this 'must stay quiet' is the biggest reason why the movie is so suspenseful and that gives it so much potential. Our protagonists - in almost every situation - have to stay as quiet as possible and keep their calm, or else they're going to be killed.

Character-wise, both these movies mostly revolve around a family that has managed to evade the monsters. We have the father (John Krasinski), the mother (Emily Blunt), the deaf daughter (Millicent Simmons) and the kid (Noah Jupe), who manage to work as a team.

Story-wise, one of the best reasons that the movies work so well is without a doubt that the story is kept as simple as possible. The writers keep the story tight (almost vignette-like) and don't overreach and try to explain or solve the whole situation in one movie.

Indeed, unlike some other movies, these concentrate on what's absolutely crucial and then sticks to it. It's about our protagonists trying to figure out how to stay alive, how to evade the monsters, how to contact other people possibly alive and how to kill these monsters.

Quality-wise, I have to say that in my opinion the second 'Quiet Place' manages to be better than the first one. The second one has more intense survival & suspense moments that don't have flaws and plot holes in it that are as apparent.

Indeed, even though the first movie is by no means bad, there are some plot contrivances that weigh it down a bit. These flaws like the 'sound making toy fire truck' and in the basement 'the nail that sticks out on the stairs' are things that people have had issues with. 

Still, just because the first film had some silly flaws in it, when in comes to both of these movies as a whole, there's no question that both films managed to be entertaining. There's clearly a lot of good stuff going on in here that makes these movies suspenseful and watchable.

In that sense, in the end, if you haven't managed to watch the 'Quiet Place' films yet, I think it's safe to say that you should give them a chance at some point. You should watch them and not be discouraged by the idea that these are movies that are supposedly too scary.

After all, even though there are some 'scary' moments here, that's not what these movies are about. There's more to them than just the 'jump scares' and those other things - like the 'silent' premise and keeping things tight - are the reason why the films work so well. 

Film Review: 'The Courier'.

Yesterday me and my friend found time to watch a film that we had wanted to watch for quite some time. We managed to find time to watch a spy thriller called 'The Courier', a film about spying during the height of the cold war in the 60s.

Indeed, especially considering that the movie was based on a true story and had a star actor in it (Benedict Cumberbatch), it was an easy decision to give the film a chance. It was more than likely that the movie was going to be entertaining and worth our time. 

Having now seen the film, I have to say that I'm pretty glad that we gave the film a shot. 'The Courier' is pretty well made and entertaining, even though there are some fairly obvious problems - especially in its story - that need to be addressed.

Premise-wise, the movie is about a British businessman Greville Wynne (Benedict Cumberbatch), who at the height of the cold war gets hired by the Mi-6. They feel that he as a salesman with ties to Russia is the only person to bring information from their inside source in Moscow.

Indeed, the Mi6 knows that a high ranking GRU Colonel named Oleg Penkovsky has crucial information about their Soviet leader's intentions. Secretary Nikita Khrushchev is supposedly unstable and might be starting a war with the west, which needs to be prevented.

Quality-wise, when it comes to the film, one of the best things about it is that the movie looks really good. Pretty much every shot in the movie feels authentic (1960s) and it's clear that the producers spent a lot of time finding the right locations to shoot in (shot partly in Prague).

Acting-wise, it has to be said that both leads in the movie are spectacularly good. Both Merab Ninidze who plays Penkovsky and Cumberbatch, who plays the British salesperson-turned-into-spy are absolutely wonderful in their roles.

Story-wise, it has to be said that 'The Courier', from a perspective of a writer and a history enthusiast (especially the Kennedy assassination), even though entertaining, is a bit of a mixed bag. There are some factual, logic and character problems in it that hurt its quality.

By that I mean that one of the biggest flaws in the story is that its stakes aren't actually that 'high' or particularly well defined. There's no real urgency going on in here, even though the film tries to tap dance around this issue quite a bit.

Character-wise, when it comes to these issues, factually speaking there's no evidence that Penkovsky, even though prolific with leaking information, was a benevolent man. He merely did all the leaking to advance his own 'career', once he would eventually try to defect.

Yet another significant historical issue in the film has to do with how it tries - for storytelling reasons - to portray Russia's leader as a nut. It tries to imply that Khrushchev was somehow insane with his ideas (the upcoming Missile Crisis), which is not supported by the facts.

After all, as the film admits in the final part, the reason that Khrushchev put nukes to Cuba was not because he was crazy. He put them simply to protect their ally Cuba (after the Bay of Pigs) and also because the U.S. had already placed their own nukes in Turkey.

In that sense, when you put these issues together, it shouldn't come as a surprise that these flaws end up hurting the movie. Especially when it comes to the last third (story-wise weak defection attempt + imprisonment) they don't make that much sense or feel authentic.

Still, despite problems like these in the story, there's no question that as a whole, the good things outweigh the bad ones in the movie. These positive aspects, like the portrayed comradery between the two leads and the overall atmosphere kept the movie afloat and watchable.

In that sense, when it all is said and done, if you haven't managed to see 'The Courier' yet, I think it's safe to say that you should probably give it a go at some point. You should give the film a chance and not be too discouraged by my criticism of it.

After all, despite its issues, especially considering that it has received good reviews (95% audience fresh at Rottentomatoes.com), that's something to consider too. That's a reason to watch the film and not be too bothered by its flaws that in the end, might not matter too much.

Review: Pixar's animated film 'Luca'.

So when it comes to watching animated movies, it's not a secret that whenever a new animated film is released, I'm going to watch these movies. As long as these films get even remotely decent reviews, I'm more than eager to give them a chance and see how good they are. 

Indeed, the reason that I watch these animated movies and enjoy them is that they help me to forget my worries in life. These films, almost always, have themes, characters and storylines in them that make me happier and less judgemental as a person.

So this time, when it comes to these movies, me and my friend managed to watch Pixar's latest animated film 'Luca'. This is a film that - thanks to the Covid-19 pandemic was just released on Disney+ service and was now available for us both to see.

Story-wise, what we're dealing with here is a 'fish out of water' story, in which two sea monster kids decide to explore life on land. These kids go on an adventure in a nearby town, once they notice that they assume human form when they're out of the water.

Premise-wise, it has to be said that 'Luca' doesn't have the most well thought out concept that Pixar has managed to come up with. The premise, even though not completely awful is something that honestly doesn't make enough sense and feels somewhat clunky.

Indeed, especially in the film's first act when we're introduced to the main characters, the whole thing just doesn't seem particularly compelling. This includes the sea world with its characters (the family of Luca) that are a bit too underdeveloped.

Fortunately, once our kids (Luca & Alberto) get to the new world, start dreaming and start meeting actual people, things get better. The film - as it also gets more colorful - starts to breath and manages to create an atmosphere that feels pleasant for the audience. 

Quality-wise, one of the best things about the movie, since it happens in Italy, is that it explores the Italian culture with actual insight. The makers of the film spent a lot of time making sure that the film is culturally accurate and feels right.

Indeed, my friend who later watched 'Luca' the second time with her Italian friends, told that her friends had genuinely appreciated the film. All those little details and the 'Fellinian' atmosphere that is in the movie is something that they apparently liked a lot.  

Plot-wise, since this was a 'relaxed' movie, it has to be said that the stakes aren't that high. The main story on the land - about the guys wanting to win a Vespa in a contrived competition with their new friend - is a bit too lazy and weak. 

Furthermore, since the main story is not strong, the villain in the movie is also a rather contrived invention. We have a bully in the town, the king of Vespa driving, who with his henchmen tries to beat our protagonists in the competition - which doesn't feel that organic.

Still, when you look at the animated movie as a whole, even though the story wasn't that strong and had some flaws in it, that doesn't mean that these issues were that critical. I'm not saying that the storyline was so bad that it sank the movie as a whole. 

After all, when you - from a positive point of view - look at how colorful, relaxed and childlike the movie managed to be otherwise, these positive aspects clearly outweighed the negative ones in it. It was still enjoyable to watch the movie as a whole.

In that sense, in the end, even though the film could have been better, it's safe to say that if you haven't managed to see Pixar's 'Luca' yet, you should give the movie a chance. You should give the film a chance and not be discouraged by some of its negative reviews.

After all, especially considering that lately Pixar's films have been disappointing (e.g. 'Soul'), 'Luca' is a surprise. It's a positive surprise and shows that even though the story isn't that great, the film can still work as long as those other elements in it are first rate.

'The Tomorrow War' - movie review.

Last week me and my friend found some time to watch together a new movie. We decided to watch a science fiction film called 'The Tomorrow War', a time travel war movie that had just been released on Amazon prime and was now available for us to see.

The reason that we decided to watch the film, that stars Chris Pratt, is that it seemed watchable. Based on its trailer and the reviews that it had gotten, there was a chance that it could be worth our time (80% fresh by the audience on Rottentomatoes.com).

Having now seen the film with my friend, I have to say that I have a somewhat mixed views about the movie. There were things that worked rather well, but there were also things that - especially story-wise - were not good at all and that weren't well thought out. 

So first, when it comes to those things that actually worked in 'The Tomorrow War', I have to say that the premise itself wasn't that awful. The idea that you have people from the future warn us about an upcoming war against alien monsters isn't that hopeless. 

Indeed, when it is also revealed in the first act that we need to almost immediately send troops to fight the future war through a wormhole, that creates a lot of opportunities for the story. There's a lot of potential in the premise that needs to be handled well.

Story-wise, the whole thing gets going when our protagonist, a military contractor played by Pratt leaves his family and takes part in the operation. He's prepared for the 'suicide mission' and after getting futuristic equipment attached to him, is transported to year 2051.

Not surprisingly, when we reach the dystopian future it doesn't take long before things get really heated and the action starts. The monsters that we're supposed to somehow beat are nasty, deadly and can rather easily defeat our brave volunteers. 

Entertainment-wise, the movie manages to be at its best when our troops - including 'Chloe' from '24' - go on a rescue mission to find some samples that would help to defeat the enemy. This is when the movie works rather well and is fairly entertaining and gripping.

Furthermore, when it is revealed roughly in the middle of the movie that Pratt's daughter happens to be his military commander in the future, the movie finds its heart too. We have an actual emotional stake to get things sorted out and to save the mankind.

Unfortunately, even though at this point the story seems to work (if you're able to overlook the logical flaws in the premise), this won't last. The writers start making some genuinely terrible decisions that will seriously hurt the film's overall quality.

By that I mean is that once the emotional arch is concluded at roughly 1h 45 min mark (Pratt & his daughter find the cure, the big boss is dead and the daughter dies), the movie doesn't stop. Instead we get another 30 minute fourth act that makes almost no sense at all.

Indeed, instead of doing its 'aftermath' conclusion in a closing credit montage, the writers decide that the story needs _more_ problems to be solved. They decide that the monsters were here already waiting for us and that their 'nest' needs to be found and destroyed. 

The problem with this - story-wise - is that once the main emotional arch in the movie is concluded - you shouldn't add new arcs to the movie anymore. You can't start over and think that the audience is going to be hungry for some secondary stuff anymore.

After all, once Pratt and his daughter managed to create the poison to kill the monsters, managed to kill the big boss and the daughter dies, that's more or less where the story should have ended. It shouldn't have gone more than 5 minutes after that point.

Not surprisingly, everything that happens in the extra act is just awful. Pratt's dad is back for a new 'arc', some kid figures out where the nest is (!), they have to go solo because the rest of the world won't help (!!) and the crucial poison becomes mostly redundant too.

In that sense, when me and my friend finally reached the end of the movie at 2 hour 15 min mark, it shouldn't come as a surprise that we weren't happy with what we had seen. This was not what we expected to see from the movie as a whole.

After all, when you think about the film, especially considering how - objectively speaking - incredibly stupid the last act was, it was just impossible not to feel disappointed. There were just too many problems that hurt the movie's quality. 

In that sense, in the end, I just wish that the writers would have ended the film when its main emotional arc ended. I wish they would have understood that this is where the heart of the movie was and not spoil it with some additional content that didn't make sense.

Unfortunately for us, that's exactly what they did with the fourth act of the movie. They added stuff that made no sense emotionally and where all logic flew out of the window, so it's no surprise that the film as a whole - as sad as it is - left a bad taste in our mouths.

What to expect from the new James Bond film?

So as we're getting closer to the latest James Bond movie 'No Time to Die' finally being released, I think it's time to write a bit about the upcoming film and its prospects. Is there a chance that the movie is going to be any good and that the audiences are going to like it?

Indeed, ever since the Covid-19 pandemic hit last year and the release date has been postponed again and again, there has been speculation about the quality of the movie. Some have said there's no way it's going to work and that the producers are really worried about the movie.

So when it comes to my views about the upcoming film - as a writer and a teacher who uses Bond films to illustrate story structure - there are at least a couple of things to discuss. I think I have at least some sort of an idea what to expect from the movie.

Character-wise, the very first thing that needs to be addressed about the film has to do with the online complaints that the movie is going to be too 'woke'. Supposedly James Bond as agent 007 has lost his masculinity and is now part of the #metoo movement.

Indeed, since we have been told that there are also female 00-agents in the film's universe, that somehow kills the franchise. The producers have supposedly given in to the woke-crowd and those who want to emasculate the character, so all is lost now.

In reality though, the problem with this argument is that even though some of these 'new' elements can be interpreted as 'pandering', these female elements aren't actually new. We've already had strong female characters over the years that have made Bond look even 'weak'.

Indeed, when you think about how in 'Thunderball (1965)' the Bond girl kills the villain and saves Bond or how in 'The Spy Who Loved Me'  (1977) 007 has an equal Russian partner, how is that different? This time the female 00-stuff even happens mostly off screen. 

Story-wise, the biggest challenge with the new upcoming film is that the producers have been struggling with the franchise for quite some time. Ever since 'Golden Eye' was released in 1995 after a 6 year hiatus, there have been problems in figuring out what the whole thing is about.

Indeed, once Soviet Union ceased to exist, that changed not only the real world but especially the James Bond universe. Once the almost mythical cold war and its many insanities ended (spying, stacking up nukes etc.), it had a big effect on the franchise.

Film-wise, it's not a secret that Brosnan's last two films lacked any kind of relevance or excitement, whereas Craig's post 'Casino Royale' films (implausible poker plot) weren't that good either. They were basically average at best 'Jason Bourne' & 'Mission Impossible' imitations.

Script-wise, another big problem with the franchise has been that the quality of screenwriters working on these films has gone drastically down lately. Ever since Bruce Feirstein wrote 'GoldenEye' and Cubby Broccoli passed away, the films have been mostly written by hacks.

After all, every Bond movie after 'Tomorrow Never Dies' has been written or co-written together by two guys (named Neal Purvis and Robert Wade). This duo who co-wrote the latest movie is also responsible for the mostly lame and unfunny Johnny English films.

In contrast, when the franchise was living its golden age quality-wise, most of the films were written by writers who knew how to tell a story. These guys like Richard Maibaum - who contributed to almost every Connery & Moore films - actually had real talent and craftsmanship. 

In that sense, when it comes to the upcoming movie and the whole thing, especially considering that the last film 'Spectre' had a bad story structure, I can't say that I'm that hopeful. I can't be that optimistic about 'No Time to Die', even though part of me wants to do that.

After all, when you look at the trailer of the film, there's no question that it admittedly looks pretty good. Based on what we're shown, it actually looks like it could be a solid and entertaining movie - even though other aspects tell that the movie isn't going work.

Still, when it's all said and done, when it comes to the quality of the final product, we won't be able to tell for sure before it is released. We don't know yet and have to wait for three more months before we can tell how good or bad it is (September 30th release in my country).

In that sense, in the end, we can only hope that Daniel Craig's final Bond is going to be an entertaining one. We can hope that it's going to be a solid movie, although the chances are that it won't be and that it will be a pretty flawed movie with some redeeming qualities in it.

'Friends: The Reunion' reviewed.

So when it comes to the current state of sitcoms on television, it's pretty clear that things are not going great. At the moment, there aren't any live-action sitcoms on tv that are popular and that people would actually be talking about. 

Indeed, once 'Modern Family', a popular & award winning comedy went off the air a couple of years ago, after that there haven't been any new sitcoms to watch. All the new shows have been painfully unfunny and not even remotely entertaining, if we're being honest here. 

So naturally, once I noticed that there was a reunion episode of 'Friends', a show that everyone watched back in the day, I felt somewhat excited. Even though the series had been off the air for seventeen years already, I knew I had to watch the two hour special. 

Having now seen the reunion show last week, I have to say that overall I'm fairly glad that I managed to watch the episode. There's enough solid stuff in it for the fans, even though there's some pretty obvious problems too that need to be addressed. 

Premise-wise, it has to be said that a lot of people were a bit disappointed that we didn't get a new scripted episode that would have followed these six characters. It's something that didn't happen, because the creators and the actors simply didn't want to do that. 

Indeed, the reason for this was that since in the series finale every character got a happy ending and a positive send off, the audience already got what they wanted. If they'd have given us a '15 year later' episode, it would have been bound to be disappointing. 

At the same time, just because we didn't get a 'scripted' episode, that doesn't mean that we didn't get anything. What we did get was a special where the actors were as themselves talking about the show and the characters (+ doing some table reads too).

Not surprisingly, looks-wise, since it was already 17 years when the last episodes aired and 27 years since the first episode premiered, the actors now looked different. They were obviously older and had clearly aged during this years - some more gracefully than the others. 

Content-wise, what I liked most about the special was when we saw them visiting the old set of the show. This was a stage that they hadn't visited once the series finale was shot in 2004 (it was immediately disassembled after the finale). 

Indeed, as you kept watching and listening to them talking with each other about the series and doing a light hearted quiz, I felt good about the whole thing. Clearly there was a reason why the show worked as well as it did during its run (the producers chimed in too).

Substance-wise, I also liked when they had a table readings about some of their favorite episodes. It was pretty heart-warming how seriously they still took their characters and became Joey, Rachel, Phoebe, Ross, Monica and Chandler as actors.

At the same time, even though I did like a lot of the things in the reunion special, there were some things that didn't work. It was clear that the producers of the special were trying way too hard and didn't have enough respect for the original show.

Indeed, as the special went along, it among other things kept introducing us to celebrities that had nothing to do with the show, like David Beckham. The celebrity parade that also included Lady Gaga, Justin Bieber and some female 'stars' was simply unneeded padding.

Furthermore, I honestly wasn't a big fan of James Corden interviewing the cast in front of an audience. Not only was this a bit awkward and overlapped with the content, but the rest of the stuff here - like runaway modeling - was also pretty embarrassing. 

Still, when you put it all together and think about the special as a whole, despite these obvious weaknesses that made it too long, these mistakes didn't ruin it. There were still enough good moments that managed to save it from being a letdown (the actors saved it). 

In that sense, if you were a fan of 'Friends' as a series or have recently been watching it on Netflix (or wherever it might be available), you should probably give this special go. You should give the reunion a chance and see if you'll manage to like it. 

After all, even though the special could have been better, considering that there aren't solid sitcoms on air, the reunion as a whole was still okay. It was okay and showed that even though things are bleak for sitcoms right now, there was a time when they were actually great.

Combining work and writing isn't easy.

So when it comes to my life and how things have gone lately, it can be said that at least work-wise, things have been pretty good. I got an extension to my contract at our school and will be spending the upcoming fall season with my students too. 

Indeed, even though it seemed that there were going to be some budgets cuts that would affect our staff, those thankfully didn't happen. Our city managed to find extra funding for the students that wanted to take part in our afternoon classes, so my job is safe for now. 

At the same time, even though 'work-wise' things have gone well, it has to be said that as a writer, I haven't been as productive as I thought I would be. Despite my intentions, I haven't been able to meet all my quotas that I had set for myself lately.

For example, when I started working on my new book project, it didn't take that long before I noticed that it would likely be too much work to write it as a side project. Even though I did some stuffs with it, it turned out to be too demanding. 

Blog-wise, over the last few weeks I also lacked energy to write enough articles (lack of ideas to write about). Since I was worrying about the extension of my contract and some stuff about my personal life, it was difficult to concentrate on the blog (it's great therapy for me though). 

Creatively speaking, the biggest challenge has been that ever since I started working with kids, this job has been - even though I enjoy it - rather demanding. The job, even though 'only' five hours a day during weekdays, can be rather involving and emotionally draining.

Indeed, when you work with kids that require your attention (issues like Adhd, language barriers, super sensitivity, selective mutism etc.), it's just something that takes your energy. It consumes me, especially considering that I'm an introverted person (although socially talented). 

In contrast, now that I've been on a vacation for two days, I've noticed that things are different already. I feel that I'm becoming my 'normal' self, have tons free time and don't have to worry about things, which gives me so much more energy to do creative stuff.

After all, even though I have already done some preparation for the fall season (read a special ed teacher's master thesis) and visited old friends at a foundation, I feel different. I feel that I can concentrate on having a writer's identity and start writing bigger stuff again.

In that sense, now that I'm on vacation for the next 8 or 9 weeks, I can only hope that I'll be able to get back to my book writing project. Hopefully I'll be able to progress with it and come up with a solid structure that would eventually lead to a good story.

After all, even though it won't be an easy project to come up with an entertaining story in only two months or so, it's not something that is impossible to do. I shouldn't be thinking that I won't be able to do 'enough' during that time as a writer.

On the contrary, if I manage to get a solid structure that makes sense from start to finish, that's what matters the most. It's the hardest part of the equation and if I manage to do that, the rest I can 'brute force' as a side project when I get to back to work in August.

'The Mitchells vs. The Machines' movie review.

So when it comes watching animated movies, whenever I see that a new animated film is being released, it's pretty safe to say that I'm more than excited to watch that movie. As long its reviews are even borderline acceptable to me, I'm gonna give the film a chance. 

Indeed, for me animated films usually provide a wonderful moment to forget my worries in life. As long as these movies are even remotely well made, watching them gives me hope and a chance to think about those better things about life.

In any case, this time me and my friend managed to watch together a movie called 'The Mitchell's vs. the machines'. This is a movie about a family that find itself in situation where the machines take over the world - and they're humanity's last and only chance.

Expectation-wise, based on the reviews the movie had received (97% fresh at Rottentomatoes.com by the critics and 89% fresh by the audience), it looked that this film would be a treat. I was confident that it would be well made and enjoyable as a whole.

Unfortunately, having now seen the film a couple of days ago, I have to say that I wasn't really impressed by the quality of the movie. Especially when it comes to its story and screenplay, the film is really poorly written and leaves so much to be desired. 

Story- & premise-wise, one of the biggest if not the biggest problem with 'The Mitchells vs. Machines's is that it doesn't know what it's about. It tries to be at least two different movies in one (in two different genres), without succeeding in either one of them.

By that I mean is that first, during its first 20 minutes, we are introduced to a family film about a daughter, who is leaving to college. As the family (dad especially) is feeling sad about the event, the story points to a sentimental family film that has to do with 'reflecting'.

However, once the dad and the family (for absolutely no reason) decide to go on a road trip to take the daughter to her out of state college, things change. We're now introduced to a story sequence (and new characters) that shows how the machines are taking over the world.

Plot-wise, what is really bizarre about this 'twist' is that this 'machines taking over' more or less comes out of nowhere. Before these sequences almost nothing in the story suggested that we would be dealing with some kind of a wacky survival film here.

Structure-wise, the really big problem with this '2 movies in 1' is that it can't be pulled off successfully. It will only result in everything being completely muddled, like the 'adhd'-pacing and the themes being constantly off and things never happening when they should.

Indeed, as we kept watching the film, all I could see was a film full of events that had plot holes (the only family to not be captured?!), comedy bits that were rushed and emotional moments that were incredibly half assed. None of the stuff felt satisfying or entertaining.

Not that surprisingly, once this overlong movie (1h 50 mins) finally ended, all I could think of was that the whole thing was a complete disaster. How on earth were people able to make a 100 million dollar movie with a script that was so bad and so full of flaws.

In that sense, when it comes to 'Mitchells vs. the machines' as a whole, I think it's obvious that from a writer's perspective, this not a movie that is easy to recommend. There are really that many problems with the film's overall concept and story that can't be ignored.

After all, even though - as usual - there's no question that the movie looks and sounds really good, that's not all there is to it to making a solid film that can entertain you. You still need to have a good story in it that actually works and makes sense.

Unfortunately for us, in the end, that's not what the producers (Lego movies) were able to do. They weren't able to give us an entertaining film, so the end result is a movie that instead of being well made, at least story-wise, is amateurish on almost every imaginable level.