AnActor Explains

Able to deliver its own charm, as well as a heavy dose of unease, “Andor”, nevertheless, follows Disney’s formulaic misunderstanding of “Star Wars” by shamelessly replicating legacy moments from the franchise and applying them generously. Two adversaries at a bar… a protagonist kneeling to speak to his droid… countless memeable lines of script and unforgettable cinematic moments are all wantonly reproduced and blended into this show’s poorly managed plot and directionless, meandering adventure. This tedium and almost subliminal effort is carefully deployed, only for it be completely subdued by Andor’s muddled presentation (which is a complete betrayal of the Star Wars universe). In Andor, settings, vehicles, costumes and props; even lighting and color schemes are brazenly borrowed from countless parallel sci-fi properties, resulting in a haphazard amalgamation of varying franchises merged into one massive identity crisis without a proper soul. To make matters worse, as with any current Disney production, this series is charged with the politically bleak agenda of the arrogant and destructive activists who have overrun Hollywood: an agenda which renders this show’s plot points easy to predict, as the ideology behind it dictates an extremely narrow and perverse understanding of mankind and existence. Among the many toxic themes these hacks disseminate, you will find distrust, despair, and betrayal abound. All men are evil and corrupt, women are manly girl bosses, children are left to fend for themselves and all of humanity is irredeemable. You’d think complex themes and grim issues would be a step forward in film and television, but no! Especially not if those motives are written in bad faith, as politics under the guise of entertainment and in the hopes of pitting real-life races and genders against one another. Art is meant to be the epitome of human expression and a mirror to the human experience; one that leaves the viewer contemplating their life and personal understanding. Disney’s need to lecture its consumers undermines all that, placing politics first and kicking human decency out. Don’t get me wrong: Andor’s script is excellent, despite the poor vocal performances and regardless of the wandering storyline, Andor’s exploits are compelling. The world building works, and would be perfectly fine, if not for the fact that this is supposed to be Star Wars and not some independent production in another universe. The lack of direction and proper plot construction betrays the lack of adequate training and experience in Disney’s writing room. Creativity cannot exist within a cemented reformist framework, causing the production to devolve into a pander. Despite betraying its roots, as well as the classic purpose of drama and a myriad of other overlookable issues, Andor is a perfectly fine science fiction series that can entertain, and is a production made with more effort than most. High praise in an age of cash grabs and facsimiles.

In their careless attempt to reproduce the legendary style of George Lucas, screenwriters Chris Weitz and Tony Gilroy begin “Rogue One” in media res (in the middle of things), abruptly flinging us to remote corners of the galaxy only the diehard fandom can recognize, suddenly forcing a parade of characters upon us, denying us an inkling of who’s being presented, or their qualities; confounding and frustrating us, and immediately cheapening what ought to be moving science fiction opera! Today’s film industry hacks try to emulate timeless cinema, but fail to produce it, due to lack of soul. Rogue One is a bastardization of Star Wars, mostly due to its screenwriters, making its amazing special effects and fight scenes the real reason to watch it. “Rogue One” not only fails its opening presentation, it also assumes that we’re fans! The result is a glossing over: the rebel alliance isn’t daring or intrepid; the empire doesn’t strike us as formidable, and, worst of all, the plot feels unimportant, carrying no immediacy. The writers don’t care to develop or expound! Their lack of respect for this movie’s essentials is clearly seen in an audience who isn’t moved and who’s left scratching their heads and shrugging rather than actively becoming involved in the narrative. “Rogue One” also fails to juggle its numerous parallel plots with clarity or intrigue. The audience develops a scarce rapport with the protagonists, causing interest to wane. Much of the script is bumbling and many scenes are pointless, failing to develop the story. Galen’s message to his daughter is a great example: it’s wordy, embellished, and unnatural. What would your supposed last words be to your daughter? Wouldn’t they be, “I love you”? Either due to incompetence or politics, the writers refuse to make sense, not only here, but across the entire production. Even the music in Rogue One is an uninspired facsimile of the earth-shattering soundtrack from “Return of the Jedi”. Please see that movie and “Rogue One” back to back to experience the difference yourself. Because of this film’s extremely fractured presentation and lack of impetus, the only remaining reason to see Rogue One is its amazing special effects and fight scenes. Despite being sabotaged by production at every turn, Hollywood’s wonderful artists and film crew save the day again! They’re the true heroes of our industry. All the above is evidence of the lack of education and professionality of Rogue One’s writers and director. Even a high school teenager can deliver a better story! No matter how lavishly Hollywood praises its celebrities, showering them with accolades, most of them are hacks. Today’s in vogue actors and directors are only highlighted for their ability to serve the industry’s narratives. Make no mistake: no genuine degree of aptitude is considered in their hiring. We, the true professionals of the industry: middle class directors, artisans and crew, number in the thousands. We’re friends and colleagues, and we know what real cinema is. We’ll point it out to you! That’s the idea: that as a twenty year veteran of the industry, I can enlighten you, so you can be a wiser consumer and cinephile (a person who is fond of motion pictures and, not anything else, please). Together, we can save art and entertainment. We can force the industry to pay attention to YOU. We can force them to make a better product, by not paying.

One of the greatest action movies of all time, “Predator” transcends its art form, spanning the action, horror and survival genres one by one, increasing the pace and stakes of the film, drawing the audience closer and closer to the edge of their seats. Employing the musical talents of the legendary Alan Silvestri, whose suspenseful and dramatic composition is ideal for this production, as well as the mindful eye of cinematographer Donald McAlpine, whose absolutely gorgeous close quarter cinematography beguiles the viewer, a great deal of Predator’s enduring merit lies in its excellence in production. Placement of elements in each frame, here, is a masterclass. Use of a jungle biome is fitting, given the name of the film, which already carries a natural connotation. Make no mistake, Predator is a reflection on our technological superiority over our environment, only to find ourselves at its mercy when the tables are turned. After presenting us with excellence in human male superiority and demonstrating to us exactly what these pinnacle soldiers are capable of (their coordination, awareness and ability to adapt), “Predator” squares them off against an enemy that’s truly at the top of the food chain. A vie for superiority ensues, culminating in the greatest melee Hollywood has ever seen. Predator is truly timeless cinema, evolving the scope of its genre, invigorating art and culture, and inspiring an entire generation of artists, as well as a franchise that’s still evolving to this day.

With the franchise now in the hands of other cinema professionals, “28 Weeks Later” does an incredible job of replicating Danny Boyle’s directorial style, as well as Alex Garland’s Britain of horrors. Everything, including filming setbacks, such as the original’s shaky hand cam recordings and experimenting with color and quality, have been reproduced. This sequel now includes wonderful cinematography, heightened clarity and an improved color palette. The plot of the film is entirely believable, adding to viewer suspension of disbelief. The premise is truly exciting, able to keep viewer interest thru its unexpected and heartbreaking narrative. “28 Weeks Later” is an almost flawless production! Were it not for some small defects, such as an only better-than-average script, an extremely poor soundtrack (the instrumental metal music is completely out of place), and a rather abrupt and inconsequential ending (a new type of enemy could have been introduced here), this film would have only required a deeper moral message to be counted among the great horror classics of all time. Despite these trivial issues, “28 Weeks Later” is excellence in filmmaking, and a definite must see for any Horror afficionado!

Employing a handheld recorder to deliver a gritty, lo-fi feel, director Danny Boyle and creator Alex Garland, thru innovative approach and creative thinking, made history with “28 Days Later”. Their novelty in this film includes making it a character-driven drama (modeled in the protagonist waking up to an empty post-apocalypse), instead of the usual, outright horror flick. Their biggest adaptation, however (the choice which changed zombie movies forever), was Garland’s decision to create running undead instead of the slow, meandering, mindless monsters the world had seen ‘til then. Heavily inspired by the zombie canines of the Resident Evil horror game, the inclusion of ravenous, agile and worthy opponents all but resurrected the genre. Swarming masses became only part of the issue; suddenly zombies could catch you. In terms of production value, “28 Days Later” is frustratingly poor quality. Directors looking to instill a foreign or elevated sense in their setting have toyed with color palettes, quality of photography and other mediums for decades. Their efforts have almost always been to the detriment of their creation. The great progenitor of ambiguity in the horror genre is, of course, Ridley Scott’s first Alien movie. Due to poor overall monster design, Scott opted to focus on closeup details of the beast, leaving much to the imagination. Due to Alien’s insane popularity and lasting effect on the film industry, his directorial decision has marred the action film and horror genres ever since, providing an excuse for entire generations of directors to be lazy in their filmmaking. Make no mistake: more clarity is most often the better choice, despite it raising the cost of production. Boyle’s use of handheld digital video causes a number of issues, such as unsteady movement, poor image quality, and muddied lighting and colors, all of which can frustrate or even disgust viewers. The resulting cheap recording leaves the audience believing they’re seeing a hobbyist’s or amateur’s work, despite Boyle being an acclaimed professional. The zombie narrative in film usually exemplifies a social issue: Although it takes on an anti-Communist rhetoric in movies like “Invasion of the Body Snatchers”, zombies today tend to represent ignorant citizens who’re unwilling to learn or think. These drones can then be easily weaponized for a creed or cause that's foreign to them. Zombie films are prevalent in contemporary society because we’re seeing the radicalization of mankind politically, racially, & culturally. When you vehemently stand for one idea over another, you can let slip your humanity. Suddenly, your ideology can come before your ability to reason. When it does, you can become ravenous, and may even try to bite someone’s head off! Film can be successful, pivotal or culturally significant in more ways than one. Take, for example, the movie “Clerks”: its dreadful acting, poor cinematography and heinous black and white recording are more than made up for thru the film’s excellent script and wonderful character development. Despite its poor script, meandering, directionless plot, occasional poor acting and the aforementioned terrible recording, “28 Days Later” more than compensates for its myriad production issues with its meaningful and timely adaptations, allowing zombie movies to gain a new level of significance, both in the horror genre and the socio-political narratives of our time.

The true antithesis to Gene Rodenberry's Star Trek (which championed human exceptionalism), Neil Druckmann's appropriated post-apocalyptic dystopia presents the human race as near extinction and still at its worst: constantly killing, destroying, and oppressing. This intriguing setting would never fail to entertain or keep viewers on edge, if not for Druckmann undermining TLOU’s wonderful premise by failing to keep pace, squandering pivotal action and drama, and, worst of all, catering to the hypocritical and nefarious political agenda of our time: Woke Intersectionality. The world of The Last of Us (TLOU) is a love letter to radical feminists and Neo-Marxists who hate the established Democratic “Patriarchy”. Please consider my following explanation: Kindhearted, well-meaning Americans want equal opportunity and an end to prejudice. At first glance, Woke diversity and inclusion seem to champion these ideals, but the ideology instead opts to elevate racial and gender minorities thru exclusion or slander of the White man (that’s prejudice, folks). Furthermore, established World culture is co-opted by these activists; franchises such as Snow White, Star Wars and Dr. Who are exploited to draw subscriptions and tickets sales to a *new* revival of the series or film in question! That classic is then stripped of its former meaning, and repainted with Neo-Marxist political undertones, such as hatred of the nuclear family, hostility towards leading men and disdain of white people and American culture in general. Only the name of the brand and its lingering cultural impression are left intact. This mining of I.P.s (intellectual properties) for social programming, moral grandstanding and dollars at the cost of art and entertainment is now an established facet of the contemporary, cannibalistic film industry. How appropriate, then, for Druckmann to be the inheritor of this franchise and not its true author. Despite having helped develop TLOU, creator Jacob Minkoff and director Bruce Straley seem to be the true minds behind the fantastic first installment. In the true plagiarist, usurper fashion of the Woke generation, Druckmann came into control of TLOU, only to distort its exceptional message of love and dedication. Its lead character, Joel, an example of a responsible male caregiver and a morally sound man, was immediately deposed in the game’s sequel: his head smashed in because he was a white, male protagonist AND because male power must be neutralized. The supporting lead, Ellie, is turned lesbian only to promote that sexuality. Ellie is later physically beaten and tortured by the game’s embodiment of transgenderism, Abby, because that sexuality is far more important to represent. The hatred and vengeance with which the Neo-Marxists behave belies their inability to deliver any uplifting or caring narrative. Their ends are chaos and destruction thru vengeance and abuse. The Last of Us streaming series is an advertising arm of today’s radical anti-humane, anti-democratic film industry; a sector of art and entertainment now filled with monstrous corporate behemoths. These undying avatars of greed and statecraft are managed by Ivy League graduates who’ve been brainwashed over the course of two decades. To purchase or watch this product is to support the end of mankind (responsible humanity) and opt for a more selfish, irresponsible tomorrow. You are literally paying for your own indoctrination.

The definition of Art is the expression of Human creativity. Art is often created for appreciation, thoughtful consideration or entertainment. Art often meditates on the human condition (such as social customs, interpersonal issues, or political matters), and, despite drastically changing the setting, contemporary “science fiction drama” often reflects on the human condition instead of technology or context. This makes a proper understanding of script and character development essential to the success of any production in the genre. “La Brea” wastes its exciting premise on horrible dialogue, excessive characters, and a slow development expressed in hours of unnecessary subplot due to writer incompetence. Some of the rules of proper screenwriting include never stating the obvious and never explaining thru dialogue what can be related thru performance (let the audience live the experience thru the visual medium). Character dialogue should be rooted in conflict and the script should always advance the plot. “La Brea” makes all the uneducated mistakes in film production and more, severely cheapening the experience, and squandering a great deal of audience interest and attention. If you’re enjoying this series, then that’s a good thing. Please, continue to appreciate it. My aim, here, is to enlighten you in regards to the filmmaking process and its aspects. This show had every opportunity to offer a profound message of separation, vulnerability, friendship, adventure, nature… the scope of themes it could address are endless! Unfortunately, “La Brea” only glosses over these very human issues instead of developing them, resulting in a poorly conceived daytime Soap. The best way to vie for television with deeper meaning and more effort is to refuse to pay for a mediocre product and to not watch the release on streaming (because viewership is carefully tracked). If you’re willing to make this small sacrifice, you’ll be helping force the film industry to deliver a better product.

Made in 2024, at a time when most of the country (including me) thought we’d soon be getting the first African American female President, “G20” is a political prop piece designed to have the victors in the White House (and their supporters) cheering, while thumbing their noses at, literally, half a nation of loser opposition! Sadly, things didn’t go as planned. “G20” is a Rambo-esque, Steven Seagal-ish, female empowerment, rescue-the-male-damsel action flick. :: Presenter takes heavy breaths to catch up :: Which pits Kamala Harris (or maybe Michelle Obama?) against the forces of evil (White males) with the goal of rescuing corrupt World leaders. Oh, and also her hubby. Now, hear me out: the action thriller genre is usually very unrequiring. All you need is smart choreography, excellent cinematography, innovative takedowns, and large explosions! I’m all for diversity and female empowerment… as long as its tasteful, thoughtful, and representative. “G20” is none of those. Hollywood is more concerned with making the least effort for the largest payday. As a result, no attempt is made to explain how a short, overweight, middle-aged female politician can take out dozens and dozens of well trained, musclebound male thugs that are half her age. If I’d been in the writer’s room, I’d have employed outsmarting, clever deceptions, decoys, traps and creative dialogue. After all, it’s not unheard of for sharp wit and astute thought to overcome physical adversary; that’s why we’ve got the phrase, “the pen is mightier than the sword!”. But, no; instead, what we’re handed is an activist’s wet dream of superficial excuses, prejudice against white people, heavy handed lecturing, and a script steeped in hatred. The villain represents everything contemporary Left-wing America hates, and the movie bears all the modern Neo-Marxist tropes, such as women in STEM, rude and narcissistic youth, pathetic husbands and bigoted white millionaires. Its nigh impossible for a morally sound citizen to support this level of false narrative and pretense! It’s true that action thrillers are about justice thru personal vengeance, but “G20” isn’t for consumers. It’s message of retribution and antipathy is designed exclusively for its own creators: the Hollywood elite. Folks, please don’t pay for a millionaire’s payback postage. The politics in this film completely eclipse any impartiality, creativity or entertainment. Please, don’t watch this on Amazon.

It’s rare for a sequel to be better than the original, but that’s most certainly the case with Sonic the Hedgehog 2: better graphics, a better plot, and a cleaner, faster pace are some of the improved attributes this film boasts. Sonic 2 also comes with clearer morals, such as the value of family and cooperation. The decision to give Jim Carrey more leeway and to include minor characters from the game both improve the story significantly. Unfortunately, Sonic 2 does inherit the use of non-essential subplot to waste time instead of simply getting to the point. This is now, however, a minor drawback. Sonic the Hedgehog 2 manages to be entertaining and even funny at times, but most importantly, it’s a safe film for your children to watch.

While Disney’s Pinocchio of the 1940’s is considered one of the great works of art in cinema, it’s based on the published serial of a late 19th century Italian magazine. This paper original is honestly more like a Western Monkey King retelling, and is basically the misadventures of a wild spirit given bodily form. The harsh brutality of its story could simply not be shared with the vulnerable American families of the time, causing Walt Disney to adapt the fairy tale for… you guessed it! “Modern Audiences”. This castration was successful and this defanged version is the politically correct one you know and love today. Eighty years later, a completely different Hollywood takes shape: one obsessed with identity, hatred towards masculinity and destruction of the establishment. Under this new philosophical umbrella, all artists, directors, producers and crew must adhere to the socio-political regime in power. They must not only pronounce it, but diffuse its ideals in their projects! To deny this agenda results in being sidelined from the industry; a fate worse than death, in which you’re denied fame and fortune. It’s this monstrosity of a film industry that brings you “Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio”, another edit of the original, and one which sees the fairy tale conform to the requirements of today’s Post Modern Neo-Marxist ideals. *Spoilers ahead* This politicized revision robs Geppetto of his agency, painting him in a spineless light and denying him the creativity and love he originally had as a character. Now he’s presented as a bitter, broken drunkard who is pitied by a powerful feminine spirit. Pinocchio is no longer unique, and is simply a facsimile of Geppetto’s long dead son. This radical alteration deeply wounds the value of the story, forcing Pinocchio to walk in the shadow of another’s glory. The production goes further, viewing Pinocchio thru animosity instead of in an innocent light. The wide-eyed vulnerability of a child is replaced by an impertinent mischief which is cumbersome at best. As a final rebuke, the activist writers deny Pinocchio his transformation, claiming his actual identity as a puppet is far more valuable. I can see how this brazen disrespect to the legacy of such a beloved classic can anger audiences. Can you? Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio turns sweet bedtime tale into horror story. The script is wasteful, pointless, and erratic. The plot is altered to suit a political agenda, and the characters are dismantled and reforged to serve this one premise: you, the audience, need to be lectured to. You need to learn your lesson, because you carry fault for the sins of others. We, the Hollywood elites, know better, and you will pay for your own indoctrination. In response, I say fight this. Fight this with every inch of your soul.