Why I Love Star Wars (And why you should, too.)

I was initially introduced to Star Wars by my father at the tender age of four. At first, my love for it was simply the action and the fantasy that surrounded what later evolved into why it means so much to me today. It was my earliest and one of my only conscious memories of a true release for me; to become so immersed in something and to fall in love with it. It opened doors to so many things for me as a child: science fiction literature, sci-fi films, other works by George Lucas, my interest in film in general, and now my desire to work in the film production business.

Of course, being unable to have seen them in their original theatrical releases, my father and I made darn sure that we saw the re-release of the original trilogy in theaters in 1997 in order to promote the prequels (which shall not be mentioned here). Although they were not as I remembered them, with new scenes and re-mastered special effects, I felt as though I could join the ranks of the nerds who remember the original theatrical release in 1977. And for a seven-year-old, it was rather awe-inspiring.

The mastermind behind it all, George Lucas, a relatively lesser-known director when he began production of A New Hope in 1973, has become one of the most notable people of the 20th and 21st centuries. Along with George Lucas in shaping my love of the film series was the man he entrusted to make the film look and feel the way it was intended: Norman Reynolds. Reynolds began as the Art Director of the first film in the Star Wars saga, A New Hope, and worked as the Production Designer on the final two films The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. Lucas and Reynolds fundamentally changed the aesthetics and narratives of Hollywood motion pictures to include the “right stuff”: from deep, meaningful stories based on dramatic conflict, themes, and irony, to sprawling and breathtaking special effects sequences, as well as the film industry in general.

Star Wars has shaped science fiction, and filmmaking in general, since its inception, as well as helping me shape my own view of what I want to excel in creatively. However, transitioning creativity from film to the theatre can be a bit more difficult than it seems. Reynolds and Lucas’ view of what this “galaxy far, far away” should look like has drawn me into two vastly differing styles of design: the cold, metal, pseudo-steam punk/industrial indoor and space style, and a bright, vivid, colorful, natural outdoor planetary style.

These qualities keep finding their way into my design styles time and time again. Reynolds’ use and knowledge of line and perspective creates an environment that is in reality very simplistic, yet appears to fill the screen and take up the empty space not occupied by the actors while not taking away from the action or drama between them. This is essentially what I think set design should be. A set for the theater should have all of the elements of the world in which it is, be simplistic in nature, and be arranged in a way that creates space while still keeping the action situated clearly in one environment.

The innovative use of shapes and colors to create diverse places and beings across the fictional galaxy has also influenced my desire to attempt to think much more creatively and diversely about how to create these different environments. Knowing the methods of how beings, ships, and environments were pulled together from vastly differing influences to create something original is a big inspiration for my research methods. I have gradually moved from simply researching the topic/setting at face value to going much deeper into what I can take from place A or place Z, and turn it into something that works for the show at hand.

However, the production element that I love the most in Star Wars is the use of light, shadow, and color. In the films, space is black, sprinkled with white stars. Spaceships are off-white and gunmetal grey. Stormtroopers, Luke Skywalker, and Princess Leia wear white. Darth Vader wears black. Tatooine is a wave of beige sand, bleached by the sun. Inside the Death Star: grey walls and floors, grey-uniformed officers, black prison cells. However, the starkness is contrasted with vivid blue and red light sabers, firing lasers, and exploding spaceships, and in the final film of the trilogy, the striking green foliage of the forest moon of Endor . The lighting plays off of objects and characters to create a realistic environment and to highlight important sequences. In addition, in times of dramatic tension, most notably the duel between Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker in the Bespin Mining Facility, the background colors of red and blue light both create an exciting, enticing environment for this battle to take place in, as well as represent the colors of Vader and Skywalker’s light sabers, respectively, and to symbolize their inevitable intertwined fates. It is times like these when what might have been only a modestly exciting action sequence is amplified, by contrast with the rest of the film’s chromatic plainness, into literally a dazzling thrill.

What makes Star Wars so inspiring is that Lucas and Reynolds have collaborated to create something that has become a staple of popular culture in the 20th and 21st centuries. It has shaped me not only as a person, but also as a designer. The beauty I see in its production value is something I want to strive for, even if it is dated by a few decades. In relation to films being made now, with the aid of over-the-top computerized special effects, the original Star Wars trilogy utilized real sets, “real” alien beings, tangible effects, and still reads as natural and organic as it did when it was first released. It has also inspired me to choose a career path in special effects, specifically in prosthetic makeup effects. I view the field of prosthetics as a dying art form, being killed off by the aforementioned CGI effects. It makes a film or television episode feel more real and grounded, rather than taking you out of the story by how different CGI and real life looks.

George Lucas and Norman Reynolds have also been inspiring as artists and as people in general. Reynolds has taken someone else’s ideas for a piece of work and has turned it into something iconic and beautiful. The role of production designer and art director is a huge responsibility, and being in charge of the look of the entire production and adhering to the intentions of the director and writer can be a daunting task. Like a designer in the theater, the production designer must collaborate and communicate his or her ideas to the director. Reynolds has also made something that is so iconic and famous, for little recognition. Everyone associates George Lucas with being the mastermind behind the project, which is completely understandable. Star Wars was his brainchild, but few people know who was responsible for conceptualizing what sticks with us most about the films: they way they look and the way they make us as viewers feel. George Lucas (although I choose not to acknowledge the newer prequel trilogy as canon at all), has been quite inspiring to as a director, artist, and visionary. He had the guts to make something new and original, and through the trials and tribulations of “production gremlins” he succeeded by his hard work and dedication to the craft. The production of the original trilogy was close to a disaster, but somehow, Lucas created a masterpiece out of the chaos. Though he has admitted that he may not be up to par in his ability to write, and during production he was no communicator, but his ability to “strap on the blinders and just plow right through“ has made him pull it together and create something from nothing.

Lucas has said, “Everybody has talent, it’s just a matter of moving around until you’ve discovered what it is.” This quote really means a lot to me. Having been in the boat of not knowing what my true talents are, and still being unsure, I keep going back to this quote as a bit of inspiration to keep trying new things. Knowing the hardships that Lucas and Reynolds had to face during production has also made me create a new motto to live by, “Failure is always an option.” As negative as this sounds, I view life as a series of failures, regardless of how big or small they may be. The more often you can pick yourself up from a failure truly shows what you’re made of, and this has never been made more apparent than watching Empire of Dreams: The Story of the Star Wars Trilogy in preparation for writing this essay. Seeing the chaos that surrounded the productions made me reflect back on my four years at Wells College and the chaos that surrounded my productions in that time. I had a wave of nostalgia hit me; nostalgia of freshman and sophomore year and nostalgia of my childhood… and then I realized something. Star Wars really changed my life. I know that it sounds incredibly half-hearted, cliché, and nerdy, but I can’t comprehend what my life would be like had I not been exposed to it at such an early age. It’s shaped me as a designer, a reader, a thinker, a critic, an artist, and as a woman. I truly love it… and you never forget your first love.

Legion (2010)

First, I want to start by saying that this wasn't a bad movie....I just thought it was a stupid movie. Entertaining, but stupid. When I first heard about Legion, I REALLY wanted to go see it. I like angelology. I like demonology. I like Paul Bettany. I thought it would be awesome. It had its awesome moments, but I was just overly disappointed by the film.

The plot centers around a group of people at a remote diner outside of Las Vegas, one of whom is a woman about to give birth to the next Christ. It appears as though demons want the child dead to bring about the Apocalypse. The Archangel Michael come to Earth, but upon arrival, he cuts his wings off rendering himself mortal, and a glowing collar falls off from around his neck. (This collar is never really explained, so don't ask.) He goes to the diner to protect the mother, Charlie, and reveals that angels are making the hits. Not demons. And they're led by Gabriel. Some stuff happens, and people die, along with Michael. Charlie and her boyfriend, (or whatever. Their relationship is also never really explained), apparently named Jeep, (I didn't stick around for the credits), escape the diner with the baby, which has been born by now, and the climb up a mountain. Gabriel finds them , and Jeep falls off a cliff and survives. Then Michael comes back as an angel (deus ex machina!) and pretty much saves the day. Michael gives Jeep the prophecy tattoos, and Charlie, Jeep, and Jesus II drive off into the sunset (literally) with the clichéd car-so-packed-with-weapons-you-could-supply-the-entire-Armed-Forces in search of some Prophets woh can explain the prophecy tattoos. But then the film ends, and there is very little explanation as to why ANYTHING in the movie happened in the first place.

As an amateur angelologist and demonologist, I was angry all through the movie. I had to throw EVERYTHING I know out the window in order to simply tolerate it. Now, from a hiistorical biblical perspective, this film is complete bullshit. Now, I'm a stone-cold atheist, but I know God isn't a complete dick. Neither is Gabriel. But apparently, for yet another unexplained reason, Gabriel is the bad guy and was given orders from God to kill the baby. And even if that were the case historically, Michael was given the original order to kill the baby, but he disobeyed God's orders - very un-Michael like. Michael should have an unfaltering devotion to God. But I guess not. Also, the angels can exist in their pure forms in the ethereal plane. And nobody explodes. Well, one guy did, but he had angry boils. But the only person who really shouldn't explode is Charlie.

From a cinematic standpoint, Legion was pretty good. Cool action and shitfuck scary monsters, but with pointless dramatic scenes in between pushing along a bunch of sub-plots that don't really matter. And at only around 20 minutes in, I was already being bombarded by sub-par acting.

But what I did like were the action scenes, and the demons. I love movies with a serious creep factor. Now I'm going to be terrified of cute little old ladies. I rather like the juxtaposition of the main demons to their hosts: an old lady, an ice cream man, a police officer, and a child. All some of the least threatening people you could stereotypically think of. And action and guns are always a plus. I just wish someone would have shot that crazy woman in the chair earlier in the movie. Then I would have been much happier.

All in all, I give this movie a Mehh+. Decent enough, but not something I'd watch more than maybe three or four times on purpose.

How To Train Your Dragon (2010)

We are living in a golden age of animated films. The past ten years have given us some of the best animated films ever created: Monster's Inc., Shrek, Finding Nemo, WALL-E, 9, Up and more - never has the animation genre been so aesthetically beautiful, emotionally powerful, and all-around exciting! 2010's How To Train Your Dragon can surely be added to the list of fantastic animated films of the past 10 years: a terrific film about family, friendship, individuality, and the importance of understanding before action.

It all begins with a young Viking blacksmith's apprentice named Hiccup. In a land where the aspiration of all Vikings is to be a big bad dragon slayer, Hiccup finds that he does not quite fit in. A strong personal drive and a talent for forging exists, but Hiccup's scrawny physique and tendency for clumsiness and disaster makes dragon slaying very difficult - a problem furthered by the fact that Hiccup's father is village leader and legendary dragon slayer Stoick. But Hiccup's desire to be a great dragon slayer is put to the test when he meets, befriends, and trains a rare breed of dragon outside of town. This dragon (ironically dubbed "Toothless") gives Hiccup a new outlook on life as he learns the truth about dragons while everyone else in the village lives to kill them.

A story with some seemingly been-there-done-that elements is in fact told with care, uniqueness, humor, and heart as our main character Hiccup searches for a place in his world and acceptance from his father and entire Viking village. While a few supporting characters are of the more clichéd variety, the characters are one of the film's greatest strengths. The likability level of each character is increased by much of the voice talent behind them: although some stars are throw-aways (Gerard Butler, America Ferrera), as just about any actor could play the role as well as another, other actors - especially Jay Baruchel and Craig Ferguson - are crucial in the forming of their characters. Baruchel is particularly important for the character of Hiccup, providing the awkwardness and dry sense of humor that makes the character so likable, and Ferguson's quirky delivery alone makes the character of blacksmith/dragon slaying instructor Gobber so hilarious. Then there are the dragons: the many odd, lively, and unpredictable creatures that help make the film so enjoyable. Hiccup's dragon friend Toothless is a particularly strong character - undoubtedly the strongest in the film - the kind of endearing character that cannot say a word while communicating the most in the film.

How To Train Your Dragon is the embodiment of fantasy entertainment, creating a fun and lovely world of dragons and Vikings (to the point where one stops questioning why all of the adult Vikings have Scottish accents and all of the young Vikings have American accents). After doing such a great job helping the Pixar team create an amazing look for the 2008 animated film WALL-E, the best cinematographer of our day, Roger Deakins, reassumes the title of "visual consultant" for this 2010 animated film - and it shows. The animation is exciting and first-rate with action and beauty in every shot, making most modern animated films look like flip book animation. John Powell's fantastic score adds another dimension to the already epic film landscape by amplifying the sensations of every scene.

But where How To Train Your Dragon is pure movie fun and substantial in its quality animation and characterization, the film also packs an emotional punch. The relationship between Hiccup and Toothless has its funny and exciting moments but many simple sequences achieve very moving results. Particular poignancy exists in the relationship with Hiccup and his father, as the audience is reminded of the importance of not only accepting who they are and where their talents lie but accepting who other people are as well, and especially in Hiccup's relationship with Toothless and subsequent journey of learning the truth about dragons amidst a culture who strives to destroy them. As fun and exciting as some animated films can be, the films with such great themes as How To Train Your Dragon are the films that standout within the genre.

Produced by the teams at DreamWorks Animation - the same studio that brought the Shrek films, the Madagascar films, Over The Hedge, Bee Movie, and Kung-Fu Panda to the screen - How To Train Your Dragon is easily their best film yet. As good as they are, no other film that has come out of DreamWorks Animation can compare with the character, visuals, and emotion of How To Train Your Dragon. With so much heart and visual grandeur, How To Train Your Dragon is as meaningful for the individual viewer as it is an overall fun event for the whole family.

WIN+...no other words are needed.

Inglourious Basterds (2009)

If you need heroes, send in the Basterds.

There are really only two types of reviews you will find: either people absolutely LOVE it and will see it again and again and again, or people who hate it and Tarantino with every fibre of their being. Now, I'm a big QT film, and I was happy that this was a BIG step up from Death Proof (which I wasn't a big fan of).

Now, what people need to understand before they read and/or write any more reviews about "Inglourious" is that it is an A/U (alternate universe). Of course Hitler wasn't shot and killed by American soldiers! Of course all of the major Nazi leaders weren't blown up in a French cinema! What are you, stupid? God. Seriously. Oh, and all of the shit people give it about the over-acting and the cheesiness of it all, have you ever even seen a QT film? If you didn't like Kill Bill, you aren't going to like this, so why did you even bother buying a ticket. Anyway, I fucking loved it.

The film stars an ensemble cast of Brad Pitt as Lt. Aldo Raine, who leads a squad of eight Jewish-American soldiers known as the "Basterds" behind enemy lines in Nazi occupied France, Christoph Waltz as Col. Hans Landa of the SS, nicknamed the "Jew Hunter", Michael Fassbender as Lt. Archic Hicox, a British soldier who goes undercover with the Basterds as a Nazi officer, Diane Kruger as Bridget von Hammersmark, a German actress and double agent, Eli Roth as Sgt. Donny Donowitz, known as the "Bear Jew", and Melanie Laurent as Shosanna Dreyfus, a Jew who has assumed the new name 'Emmanuelle Mimieux' and is operating a cinema in Paris after the murder of her family by Landa.

Why should you see it? This film has really amazing cinematography, fantastic ensemble acting from the entire cast, and a great homage to the spaghetti western style, as seen in most of his works. I read somethere that only like 30% of the film is in English. And unlike other foreign language film, there were FOUR languages dominating: French, German, English, and Italian. And it all fit into the Tarantino mold of rich, meanungful dialogue one second and then shocking action in another.

And why else should you see it? CHRISTOPH FUCKING WALTZ, that's why! He deserves an Oscar, even for the first 20 minutes of the film. He spoke every language in the movie, a delivered with all the poise and creepiness that Landa must have. He stole the show in an ensemble film, which is quite a feat. Props, man. Props.

I just watched it again yesterday, and I'm still blown away. I fucking loved this movie, and I really can't say enough about it.

All in all, this deserves a WIN+. Seriously.

Sherlock Holmes (2009)

So, about how Sherlock Holmes totally blew me away. Yes, that's right, Guy Ritchie delivers once again. As with most remakes that I get wind of, I'm usually like "WTF?! Why?!" But I gave this one a chance 1) because it's Sherlock Fucking Holmes, bitches...and 2) it's Guy Ritchie directing.

I think this is Ritchie's first mainstream film to my knowledge. You may remember Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels (EPIC WIN), Snatch, and Rock 'n' Rolla, and many other indie crime films. His directorial "show first-explain later" style is SO evident in 'Sherlock Holmes', it really isn't even a joke, but the two genres (Doyle and Ritchie) mesh SO incredibly well that you can't really think too much about it.

Sherlock Holmes and his partner, Dr. John Watson have been successfully solving cases throughout England for years. This most recent case was that of Lord Blackwood, a man who murdered in the name of his black magic. Finally hanged for his crimes, it comes as an unpleasant surprise when he literally rises from the grave. And so it is up to Holmes and Watson to find him and stop him before his killing spree devours the whole of England.

Robert Downey, Jr. is right at home in the role of the infamous detective. He plays another character with the wit and confidence of his Tony Stark persona in "Iron Man". And I was incredibly happy with his character choices (which were probably mostly Ritchies, but w/e). We all think of Holmes as being neat and clean and proper, but that was never how I personally had envisioned the character. I liken him to Henry Higgins of George Bernard Shaw's "Pygmalion": a learned and incredibly intelligent man on the inside, but a curmudgeonly, unshaven, ill-kept man in the outside. Absolutely perfect, and this performance really spoke to me. Jude Law plays his right hand man, Dr. Watson, in a role much smarter than many incarnations of Watson in the past. Here, the two are equals, more than hero and sidekick, and their chemistry is incredible. Even when the plot gets a bit dry and drawn out, the pleasure of seeing their continuous verbal quarrels worth the admission price alone.

However, as you know, no matter how epically awesome I find a movie, there is always one thing that will really piss me off. This time, it's Irene Adler. First of all, I hate American characters mixed in with all-British casts (but she was in the books, and I hated her anyway). Second, I don't like Rachel McAdams. There were so many other actresses that I would have liked to have seen in this role *cough*Julianne Moore*cough*. Maybe that would have made me like the character a bit more. Third, *SPOILER ALERT* who runs onto the highest possible point on an unfinished bridge to get away from people chasing her, only to realize that once she's on the bridge that she well knows is unfinished that she can't actually get to the other side? Irene. Who falls from said highest point on said bridge about 60 feet straight down onto some flimsy scaffolding that MIRACULOUSLY didn't break, into an incredibly cunbersome position that actually should have severed her spinal cord in 2 places, and then just sits up and talks as if there isn't a single scratch on her body? Irene. (Both of which are more FAILs in writing...not really McAdams' fault there). But I don't care. Fuck her. She's a terrible character who did nothing in the movie except wear pants in a society where no self-respecting woman in her right mind would be caught dead wearing pants--and to make the movie 30 minutes longer than it needed to be. Besides, Holmes doesn't need a love interest thrown into the mix. That's what Watson is for.

All in all, I give this film a WIN for being an AMAZING reboot of a timeless classic.

P.S. I hear there's a sequel in the works! But I keep hearing that Brad Pitt will play Professor Moriarty...Fuck him. I vote for Johnny Depp. Besides, the man needs to get away from Burton and Bonham-Carter and he needs to stop being typecast.

Flash Forward (2009)

I decided that not blogging has made me miss it immensely, so here's the first of a bunch of blogs all at once about things I've been watching.

We'll begin with Flash Forward, which airs on ABC on Thursdays at 8pm EST.

On October 6, 2009, a mysterious global event causes everyone on the planet to silmultaneously experience, for two minutes and seventeen seconds, his or her life six months into their own supposed future: April 29, 2010 at 10pm PT (which, by the way, is the night of my 21st birthday). When it is over, many are dead in sccidents involving vehicles, aircraft, and any other device needing human control. Everyone who survived the global blackout, dubbed the "GBO" is left wondering if what he or she saw will actually happen.

A team of Los Angeles FBI agents, led by Stanford Wedeck (Courtney B. Vance) and spearheaded by Mark Benford (Joseph Fiennes) and his partner Demetri Noh (John Cho), begin the process of determining what happened, why, and whether it will happen again. Benford sort of turns into Chuck with the investigation, which the FBI dubs "Mosaic", and uses the images he saw in his flash forward to piece things together.

The team investigates a number of events related to the flashforward, including "Suspect Zero" who did not lose consciousness during the event, "D. Gibbons", and a similar mass loss of consciousness in Somalia in 1991. Meanwhile, personal revelations contained within the flash forwards occupy the personal lives of the principal characters. Mark Benford sees his alcoholism relapsing, his wife sees herself with another man, and other characters grapple with similarly unexpexted or surprising revelations in their flashforwards.

Okay, after the first two episodes, I was hooked. This show is like crack for me, no lie. That being said, I do hope that the ratings in the US hold up well and this doesn't get cancelled like so many others *cough*PushingDaisies*cough*. Every episode has left me saying "WHAT THE FUCK?!?!?!" Every. Time. It's 24, mixed with a little Fringe, with a dash of Lost. Okay, maybe a few gallons of Lost. Anyway, any piece of information I give in this could quite spoil everything for someone who hasn't seen it. I HIGHLY recommend watching at least 3 episodes. It will change your life.

All in all, I give this a WIN+ for sheer WTF factor.

Merlin (2008; BBC)

So I figured I'd change things up a little and blog a bit about some TV. First one I'm gonna talk about is Merlin from BBC One and NBC. To my knowledge, this is the first BBC show to be picked up by a major American network, which is pretty awesome in itself.

The show stars Colin Morgan as the title character Merlin, Bradley James as Prince Arthur, Katie McGrath as Lady Morgana, Angel Coulby as Guinevere, Richard Wilson as Gaius, Anthony Head as King Uther, and John Hurt as the Voice of the Great Dragon.

Basically, the plot is sort of like Footloose, except with magic instead of dancing, but with dragons and knights and castles. Merlin is sent to Camelot to be taught and looked after by Gaius, one of the few people who knows about Merlin's gift of magic. Meanwhile, crazy King Uther has outlawed magic and has imprisoned the last dragon, so Merlin has to keep his magic a secret from everyone. It is Merlin's destiny to look after Arthur so that he may grow to rule a great kingdom.

Although there are significant plot/canon/timeline inconsistencies, It really didn't make that much of a diffrence to me (who's read pretty much EVERY Arthur legend on the planet). It's one of those shows that you really can just sit and watch and become completely immersed in. Great acting talent, AMAZING sets, AMAZING wardrobe, and honestly, just a REALLY awesome show all around. The show may be a bit confusing at first, with all of the differences from the original tales, but I have a feeling it will only continue to get better from here.

It shows on Sundays at 8pm on NBC in the US and Saturdays on BBC One at various times in the UK (I believe, but don't take my word for it..I watched them all online).

All in all, I give this show a WIN for having a very promising first season, and I can't wait for more to come! Even if you don't think you'll like it, I highly suggest at least checking it out.