Tuesday 29 December 2015

Star Wars VII: The Force Awakens - The good, the bad and the ugly

Spoilers, obviously.

The Force Awakens has now been out for a week, breaking all kinds of records and capturing everyone's attention in the lead-up to Christmas, as though the Skywalkers have replaced the line of David.

After walking out of the cinema, it took me a while to figure out what I thought of the film. It was good, but in such a way that it felt like it could've been better if some fundamental changes had been made to the design of the film. Here are the good, the bad and ugly choices made in the making of Star Wars Episode VII.

Good

Poe Dameron: Despite the silly name (is he a ghost?), Poe is the best character in the entire film. A spectacularly talented fighter pilot, he puts his life on the line to take on the New Order time and again. He's cool under pressure, he knows exactly what he's doing, and we only see enough of him to know his characterisation is spot on. The total hand wave of his escape from Jakku when he reappears in the last third of the film feels justified, because he's just that kind of guy. 

Mixing and matching the roles from A New Hope: Rey, Finn and Poe are the Luke, Han and Leia of the new trilogy. But which one is which? Rey is the strong-willed female (Leia), who intrinsically knows everything about her ship (Han) that is the new talent in the Force upon whom events centre (Luke). Poe is a leader of the rebellion who needs to be rescued (Leia), by nature a bit of a playful scoundrel and has world experience (Han), who leads the attack on the Death Star Planet (Luke). Finn is the guy just wants to run away from everything (Han), who ends up being thrust into a central role in the rebellion (Luke), and I'm sure he has some similarity with Leia that hasn't come to mind - perhaps they were struggling a bit with it by this point. Overall, though, it's an impressive use of characters within the mould of A New Hope that they chose to use.

Han Solo: Second only to Poe in terms of best performances. When he arrives, it's unexpected (even though we knew he was coming at some point), and it's just he hasn't changed...other than that he's got old. He's still the same character, but full of the wisdom, experience, and regret that only age brings. Nothing throughout the film feels out of place with how you would expect an old Han Solo to be. 

Interaction between the new characters: Really well done, although from memory Poe only interacts with Finn, but that's okay because it's the best relationship of the lot. Rae and Finn both know absolutely nothing about the world they've rushed into, so in some ways it's not surprising that they become besties so quickly, even though it still felt forced (for reasons I'll explain later), the 'it' being the speed of that friendship, not the friendship itself. It was also refreshing to see what is clearly a budding romance begin without the two characters not liking each other. They have some misunderstandings, but only in the way you would expect given their backgrounds, and they get cleared quickly. How convenient, too, that young Ms Skywalker (as she so obviously is) will end up with a man with no last name, thus ensuring the name 'Skywalker' will continue on to another generation.

Killing off Han: There was no conceivable way all of the old three could make it through the new trilogy - not with the way this story has been set up. Using his death as the clear symbol of Kylo Ren's fall is classic storytelling. It's sad to see him go - especially this early, as I would've done it in VIII - but it was the right call. Luke or Leia dying would feel like a step too far, but Han? He's a scoundrel, it's natural for him to die first, and for him to do it by being the least like a scoundrel ever seen in the Star Wars films felt even better. 

Industrial Light and Magic: We're back to proper effects, which aren't going to age within a matter of years after the release of the film and don't exist in every nook and cranny imaginable. The graphical quality of the film speaks for itself. Just watch it and marvel.

Bad

Sticking to A New Hope like glue: This was the wrong choice. The intention seems clear: prove that the new Star Wars will be faithful to the original trilogy, and not flop like the prequels. Unfortunately they decided that the right way to do this was to copy literally every single piece of IV and use it in a slightly different way. Put the important map into a droid and sent it away, find it on a desert planet where the main character lives, have them encounter a wise old man who had disappeared for years, run into the rebellion, use what they've learnt to blow up a Death Planet which has successfully had its first test run, have the old mentor die at the hands of the evil man he turns out to be close to, have the main character successfully use the Force before getting away. Ta da! It would've been far better to do something different with the good characters they created.

Finn knows too much: If this guy, who as a character I generally like, was trained to be a Stormtrooper from birth/a young age, why does he seem so much like you and me? How he can he be so aware of things that the average person is aware of? How can he recognise right and wrong so easily? How can he play the role of comic relief so well in a way that is completely different to how the clone troopers have played it in other Star Wars media (that of being completely clueless of anything beyond fighting)? This is really noticeable in Finn, but it's actually true of everyone...

Why is everyone so human: This may seems like an odd complaint, but hear me out. I do not mean that it's a bad thing for them to be human in comparison to the prequels, because in those the characters were all robotic thanks to terrible decisions of direction (read: green screen everything). What I mean is that Star Wars is a space opera. It is not a realistic drama. I am meant to sympathise with the good guys and dislike the bad guys, like in a pantomime. The better the performances, the easier it is to do this, which is why it was so hard in the prequels. Even the complexity of good and evil (like a bad guy being good at heart) is meant to be relatively simple, ala Anakin coming back to the Light at the end. TFA ditched this in favour of complex, realistic, meant-to-be-relatable drama, and I don't like it at all. We see Kylo Ren struggling with the call of the light side. We see Finn explaining his feelings. We see everyone look like they're going to cry more than once. Why? This is meant to be a pantomime! What happened to the space opera?

What even is the Force: Seriously, what is it? Perhaps we never hear a proper explanation of it because the only characters who talk about it with any kind of knowledge are two non-Force users, but if you're coming into this film with no knowledge of the Force, you aren't going to come out much wiser. It seems to kind of help the way you fight, but not especially so, as we see two people use the Skywalker lightsabre with no Force knowledge whatsoever, and they don't die immediately - or at all. The Force has always been deliberately vague in a folk religion, mystical kind of way, but in TFA it was basically about closing your eyes and feeling better. Also, watching a guy thrust his hand out near someone's face for minutes on end is not thrilling viewing, please find a better way to symbolise what Ren is doing.

Rey is a Mary Sue: I want to like this character, but I can't, and I don't want to use the phrase 'Mary Sue', but what other way is there to describe this kind of character? Everything about her is perfect, including her one character flaw ('I want to go home'), which isn't really a character flaw at all, and which she gets over fairly quickly anyway. Pretty lady, very skilled hand-to-hand fighter, knows everything about spaceships and mechanics, everyone likes her, she picks up the whole Force powers thing basically straight away (though this can at least be hand-waved as 'she stole it from Kylo Ren') and everyone will drop everything for her wellbeing. Unlike Luke Skywalker, who, despite his circumstances, is an entirely believable head-in-the-clouds innocent figure, Rey (Skywalker) is an entirely unbelievable worldly figure who manages to hold on to only the most frustrating part of innocence (I can run away and it'll be fine). She even has a British accent, which strikes me as the kind of thing done to make a character seem different for no reason whatsoever. Remember, this is a pantomime made in the US, only evil characters should have British accents.

Ugly

Phasma: What a pointless character. How much of this character was not designed for monetary purposes? She is neither a strong female character (as obviously she was designed to be) nor a cool Boba Fett type (as she talks too much and is annoying in a way the Fetts aren't). I hope we never see her again (but we will).


The way they killed off Han: Could this have been any more excruciating? We knew this was coming. The hints were everywhere, and the moment Han saw Kylo is was over. He walked onto that bridge sealing his own fate. So why did it take so long? It would have been a far more memorable seen had it been over nice and quickly, without seeing Han slowly die and fall off the bridge, and everyone slowly react. The symbolism of 'this is the moment' would've come through more clearly too. This wasn't the first time that a moment was missed either - it only becomes apparent after his death that Leia's request to bring Kylo (Ben) home was what would lead to his death, because it was the only reason he confronted his son at all.

The ending: Who thought this was a good idea? In this case, following the Episode IV script closer would've resulted in something better. For example, a funeral for Han Solo, and then finish with an award ceremony for the fighters who blew up the planet, with a final cut shot of Luke Skywalker staring out over the waters from his island, zooming out to reveal his location, then cut to credits. Instead of this ending, which wraps things up and provides a tiny tease for the next film, we got something that felt rushed and haphazard, with an awkward pacing and an odd leap in the story. In particular, the final minute (which felt like five), which consisted of Rey holding Luke's lightsabre out to him while camera kept on panning around them, was genuinely excruciating and added nothing to the story. All we needed, if indeed we really needed to see the Jedi Master at all, was a quick shot to see that he was old, alone and isolated. Making this sequence so long added nothing to the film, and actually detracted from the events that had happened just prior. It would've been much better to spend more time on the death of quite possibly the most beloved character in the series, seeing how the other characters dealt with it in the aftermath, along with where the group headed from there.


Don't get me wrong, The Force Awakens is not a bad film. But it isn't great either. There is always the sense that this is a fanfiction brought to life just lurking in the background. Perhaps this is unsurprising, as I have no doubt most of the cast and crew are fans of the series, especially of the original trilogy. But the fact that this film is as good as it is ultimately results in a feeling of genuine disappointment, as there are simply too many significant issues in the film that prevent it from being great. This is not a film that I envision too many people ranking as their favourite Star Wars in twenty years from now, and that is a shame.

Saturday 12 December 2015

The future of West Indies cricket

There will be a lot of speculation over the coming day over the future of the West Indies. Some of this will be legitimate, pointing out long-standing difficulties that the joint cricket team has had over the past two decades. Others will be more short-sighted, and will probably disappear should the West Indies vaguely improve over the next two Tests.

It is clear that the Windies will not win this series. It is also clear that they will struggle to win. The biggest alarm bell about their performance in Hobart is that wasn't unexpected. Given the past five years of movement from the team, which has only consisted of going from bad to worse, for this once great group of nations to go from losing to a Cricket Australia XI, full of rookie players, by an innings, to losing to the Australian Test team by an innings feels almost like an improvement in and of itself – not because of their own performance, but because of the leap in quality of opposition.

This very much appears to be the worst team to tour Australia since Zimbabwe came in 2003, and we all know how far they've gone since then.

The biggest problem facing the West Indies is not talent. There is just as much potential within the peoples of the Caribbean now as it was during their heyday thirty years ago. The problem is disunity. Remember, the Windies are a group of nations. These are all independent, proud countries with their own different histories. They first came together for cricket in order to give the touring Commonwealth nations some competition, and no-one ever really thought to disband them.

By the time World Series Cricket came around, they were becoming unified not by their relationship to each other, but to that of the other nations they were up against. The West Indies cricket team was a way of getting back at the old colonial powers. It was a way for these nations to prove themselves. This was stated numerous times as being one the key factors in their unification and subsequent dominance of world cricket.

So, what happened? Well, they did it. They proved themselves on the world stage, bashed around the colonial powers and dominated cricket for years. Like all successful kingdoms and powers, they got lazy. They didn't prepare themselves for the years ahead, and seemed to presume that their dominance would just carry on.

Part of the problem, to be fair, was that much of their dominance was built on top of things outside of their control. The county championship was undoubtedly the biggest factor in getting their players to move beyond 'potential' and into greatness. As the strength of county cricket fell away during the 1990s, and the amount of West Indians entering county cricket dropped, the Caribbean domestic league was unable to take its place. Domestic cricket is not cheap to organise for the WICB, as it involves flying players to whole other countries. This, along with the region's lack of wealth, did not leave much room creating a strong domestic competition, creating a vicious cycle as the their intentional performances began to fall away, and as old greats retired. By the 2000s, the beginning of the end had come. Only in the last five years, though, has this become abundantly clear.

Today, the WICB is totally disunited, with poor domestic structures (in every way imaginable), players who aren't interested in playing for a team that isn't their own nation, players who aren't willing to give up T20 wealth for the sake of a collective group of nations, and international structures that give them no assistance other than keeping them treading water above the Associates (many of whom could beat them on a good day).

Soon, the West Indies will be no more. This seems inevitable. The question is simply whether it will happen by action, or by default. The former involves their performances collapsing to such a point that the ICC will have no choice but to prevent them from playing Test cricket, as they did with Zimbabwe, which will almost inevitably spill over into the breaking apart of the WICB. The latter will happen if cricket becomes an Olympic sport. There can be no West Indies team in the Olympics. Each nation within the WICB will be forced to compete on their own – if they can qualify at all. Should the international results continue to head south, it would not be that surprising if the collective boards decide to make this a permanent state of affairs.

The question then is what happens to these teams within the ICC. How strong would they be? Would they only be on Associate level?

It is difficult to imagine any of the individual nations within the Windward or Leeward Islands being able to put together a team that would satisfy the current ICC requirements for a full member nation, so the question is essentially being asked of four nations: Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados and Guyana. Here's how these teams may look at full strength if they were going to play tomorrow.

Barbados

Kraigg Braithwaite
Dwayne Smith
Jonathon Carter
Shane Dowrich
Carlos Braithwaite
Shai Hope+
Jason Holder
Ashley Nurse
Kemar Roach
Sulieman Benn
Fidel Edwards

Guyana

Rajendra Chandrika
Assad Fudadin
Leon Johnson
Shivnarine Chanderpaul
Vishaul Singh
Narsingh Deonarine
Chris Barnwell
Anthony Bramble+
Steven Jacobs
Veersammy Permaul
Devendra Bishoo

Jamaica

Chris Gayle
Kirk Edwards
Jermaine Blackwood
Marlon Samuels
Andre Russell
Carlton Baugh
Chadwick Walton+
David Bernard
Jerome Taylor
Nikita Miller
Sheldon Cottrell

Trinidad and Tobago

Kyle Hope
Lendl Simmons
Darren Bravo
Jason Mohammed
Dwayne Bravo
Yannick Ottley
Denesh Ramdin+
Rayad Emrit
Imran Khan
Ravi Rampaul
Shannon Gabriel

Each of these teams has its own strengths and weaknesses. Jamaica is essentially a Test team, with a relatively strong batting line-up, though the bowling is unimpressive. Barbados is at the opposite end of the spectrum, with good bowlers along with more all-rounders, though the weakness of their batting leaves them looking more like a top Associate nation. Trinidad and Tobago is full of experience, both at international and domestic level, but lacks top order batting and significant fast bowling, making them seem like a truly pieced together Associate team. But that is nothing compared to Guyana, whose pace bowling options are essentially non-existent, with their three frontline bowlers being spinners (albeit with the variety of off, leg and left arm orthodox spin).

These teams are at least capable. The question is whether playing for their own nation will spur them on to greater things, playing with more pride and showing more on the field than they have in their careers so far. Furthermore, will this properly spur on the next generation, knowing that they will play for their own countries? If so, then this is something worth doing. Let us hope the cricket boards of these nations are prepared for the inevitable.

Thursday 10 December 2015

They see a red ball and they want it painted pink

The first ever day/night Test match was a roaring success.

This was, at least, the opinion of Cricket Australia (as if they would ever say otherwise) and the media (who know which side their bread is buttered on). It was also the opinion of the players...until it wasn't. 

After the Test match all the players were using words that sounded like a ringing endorsement of the concept. They may well have been only that - a ringing endorsement of the concept

Then, a few days ago, David Warner and Nathan Lyon began sounding less than enthusiastic. 

And now, the results have come in from the players who played in the Test match, and it turns out the majority of players actually don't think it worked very well at all. 

What gives?

All eyes are, of course, on Cricket Australia, who were absolutely dead-set on having the match happen, regardless of the consequences, regardless of the lack of evidence that it worked in the Sheffield Shield, regardless of the opinions of the players who had already used it.

Their reasoning appears simple: it will work well enough for people not to complain too much while it's happening, and crowds will flock as it is such a novelty. Often, the introduction of day/night one day cricket was used as proof of the game evolving and that there was nothing wrong with Test cricket doing likewise.

Unfortunately, as long as the ball doesn't work in an already widely existing form of the game, any such format should not reasonably be supported. This is why the actions of Cricket Australia should draw such ire. Channel Nine, which gained enormous ratings gains from the match, was naturally not interested in putting forward such criticism. Cricinfo, which is more or less independent, became particularly excited for the format as it approached - but it was more likely a mix of genuine belief it would/did work and a realisation there wasn't that much point in fighting this battle when there are bigger fish to fry in world cricket right now. The general public doesn't follow cricket that closely, and is unlikely to notice anything significant, other than the game finishing a lot quicker than the last two, and may even see that as a positive given how awful the first two matches were.

This leaves only the members of the public who are keenly interested in this great sport and its future to argue against the work of CA, which are almost entirely drawn from the AFL. And really, given the latter's last few years, who would want to copy that? Corruption, uninteresting results, constant rule changes, questionable administration with no watchdog and a focus on promoting the game instead of producing a good game. This cannot be cricket's long term future. It will only kill the game.