Why Aren't There Any Good Science Fiction Films These Days?

So what do I mean?

I'll being with what the term "science fiction" means to me, what I look for in a film with that as the labelled genre.

Let's go through the last year or so: To me, for a film/book/tv show to be labelled a "sci-fi" it must feature two key things. First, a level of technology that is different to our own. Notice I chose to use the word "different" and not "better" or "more advanced." That was deliberate, because a film set in a universe where the internal combustion engine was never invented, and clockwork is used as the primary form of locomotion/energy generation is still science fiction. Break the phrase down; fictional science. 

Nope. Back to Bond with you.

Second, it's not enough to just have a setting that features a different level or form of technology, the film itself must be more than just "Twilight with Space Lasers" or "Die Hard 5: Death Star Revenge," and this is the absolute biggest pet peeve of this critic, seeing a film listed under "sci-fi/action" or "sci-fi/thriller" when it's just the same boring action tropes covered in shiny CG and lens flare (no guesses for who I'm referring to there). The film needs to utilise the environment, the universe, and weave it together into the integral parts of the plot. You can't just have a cowboy film with aliens and call it sci-fi, it's not. It's just a cowboy shooting at an alien.

Some examples of recent films that have utterly failed to hit the sci-fi butter zone:

Prometheus

Ridley Scott, you wonderful man, what were you playing at? Taking one of the most successful sci-fi franchises of all time and ruining it with this. I'd rather watch AVP Requiem again. It's not enough that you decided to forgo writing an actual story, create any decent characters or set pieces in favour of side-stepping canon, you had to go and ruin the Xenomorph as well. It looks ridiculous. Not to mention the main antagonist closely resembling the offspring of Chunk and The Michelin Man, what were you thinking?

This is a Space Jockey?!

But why does it fail as a science fiction film? It's set in the future, sure. There's space ships and aliens, sure. But it's nothing spectacular, it's a hash together of so many things we've seen before, in previous Alien franchise films as well as further afield. What was missing, the vital spark of pure sci-fi, is the unknown. You don't throw out a film, cobbled together from the ideas you had 30-odd years ago but just couldn't fit into the original franchise. If you do you end up with Jurassic Park 3, and nobody wants that. Sadly, that's what we got. New money for old rope. Instead of sci-fi, I'm relabelling it "action/horror in space."

Total Recall

If you haven't seen it, go watch the original Paul Verhoeven version. And then Robocop. And then Starship Troopers, the man is a genius.

However, the remake starring (for some reason) Colin Farrell was also not a science fiction film. And no, I'm not going to harp on about it being nothing new, it's a remake. And even then, the original was based on a spectacular book by Philip K. Dick (one of the fathers of sci-fi) titled "We Can Remember It For You Wholesale." Originality, less important with this one then. 

A Total Recall without Kuato isn't a Total Recall

So where did it go wrong? In the execution, that's where. Truly, the film misses the point of the original (disregarding the source material, assuming we're working with a direct remake of the Verhoeven film) the idea that a man can have his memory copied over, muddled up, until he's unsure of what's real and what is just the "mental holiday" he paid for. Instead of utilising this as a way to keep the audience guessing as to what is real and what is implanted memory, or even if the implanted memories were originally his that he'd had wiped, the film quickly breaks down into a by-the-numbers action film. This might as well just be an amnesia-driven Statham film. Don't get me wrong, I love a good JS film, but this is supposed to be sci-fi. And yes, Len Wiseman, we know you have a pretty wife, there's no need to keep showing us.

Star Trek: Into Darkness

Yes, I'm a trekkie/trekker or whatever the parlance is these days. I somewhat enjoyed the first J.J. Abrams Star Trek, but not because it was Star Trek. Abrams made damn sure that we all knew he wasn't going canon with this one from the start. The whole "it's an alternate timeline" rubbish belongs in 80s TV, not multi-million dollar grossing blockbusters.

Did he think we wouldn't see this coming?

Remove the established universe, as Abrams did, and what you're left with is a very mundane film riding on the wave of praise the first film generated. By-the-numbers action film, very little in the way of character arcs, a surprise twist that wasn't a surprise twist and dear god, so much CG. More CG than absolutely anyone ever needed. So far as fitting my rules of sci-fi goes, yes it's full to the brim with phasers, teleporters, warp drives etc. but none of it can really be called sc-fi any more - we've had over 50 years of it now, it's like calling a film about modern fighter pilots a sci-fi; it's just not new and exiting to the audience any more. Regarding the integration of the universe into the plot, to qualify as a sci-fi by my second rule; still pretty poor. You could take the exact same plot, same characters, same twists etc. and set it on a galleon in the 16th century and not a lot would change.

Oblivion

This is so obviously intended
to be Apple tech.

Wow. This film really knows how to take brilliant ideas from anywhere, cobble them together and slap a Tom Cruise in it. Trope after trope after trope. None really gelling together to make a cohesive story. You can't really put "last man on earth" with "the guys in white are actually bad and the guys in black are actually good" with "giant red glowing eye computer wants to kill us all" with "let's hijack a ship and fly into their mothership" with "everyone is a clone" and really expect anything good to come out of it. It's a sausage film. Made of the best bits of other films. Sprinkled liberally with Tom Cruise. So this neither satisfies the first, nor the second of my requirements. How can it? When it's a chimera of other, better films. It deserves absolutely no credit for any success it has

.

As a point of balance and fairness I feel I should mention those films that have hit that sci-fi sweet spot in recent months:
- Looper

Yep. Just one.

So how do I think the problem can be solved?

New IP.

The major, major problem with the science fiction film industry is that films are being made, either of books written during the height of the sci-fi era (early 60s to late 70s) which have been feeding our pop culture for nearly 40 years now, and there's not a lot left we haven't seen/someone has been brave enough to make. If not "adapted from...." then "ripped off from..." seems to be the name of the game. Time and time again I see films being released in the same formulaic manner, playing it safe to make back all the millions of dollars spent on the shiny CG. We need risk takers, we need established directors who have the influence, the industry confidence and the finances to make passion projects, ideas that no one else would even risk giving the go ahead to without a S. Spielberg, R. Johnson or a M. Bay stamped all over it. (This is not a plea for Michael Bay to do any passion projects, for the love of god please, the world can't take that many helicopters, explosions, underwear models and Linkin Park soundtracks)

If not an established, proven director, then some bright spark coming from the bottom up. Like Josh Trank and Max Landis.

Landis made his name with a short film detailing the events unfolding in a comic book arc titles The Death and Return of Superman (linked -->) but moved onto the big screen with his first feature, Chronicle. It was by no means perfect, but what it did achieve was an injection of fresh IP. I very much enjoyed Chronicle, the idea of every comic book origin story but instead of kids destined for greatness getting bitten by radioactive spiders or what have you, it deals with ordinary teenagers and how they deal with super powers. Directed by Josh Trank, it did pretty well. It even earned Trank the tiller on the new Fantastic Four movie, and most probably the upcoming Venom origin. Both of which will help us to forget the two awful examples we have from the last 10 years.

Whilst not technically a science fiction film, by my definition at least, Chronicle is certainly something I want to see more of. We need more universes. More unique and interesting backdrops to more unique stories. Not just the same old tropes re-hashed with a younger actor taking the lead.

The Dark Knight Rises

Ladies and gentleman, please direct your attention to the following sentence: here is a spoiler warning, as the following article contains plot development, character actions and other important information for The Dark Knight Rises. You have been warned.

Having shelled out the ridiculous price of a cinema ticket to go see TDKR (primarily so I don't have to worry about reading any spoilers in the months before its release on DVD) I am going to share my opinions with you. I have chosen to structure this review on a character-by-character basis, before talking about the film in general and then reflect on its quality. I will honestly state that I'm not a comic reader, but I do have experience of the DC universe through secondary media - games, films and tv shows - so when I'm discussing what so-and-so character *should* be like, I'm referring only to my impression of them through secondary media alone.

Yes, it's a long one, so let us begin:

Batman

Well, we don't get to see a whole lot of The Caped Crusader this time round, what with Bruce having more interesting things to do in deep Caribbean prisons and being a tad shaken up since the death of Rachel in the last film, some 8 years ago by the Nolanverse calender. When we do get a glimpse of the shiny black suit and Kiss-style eye makeup it's pretty much more of the same. Some fighting, some "WHERE IS SHEEEEE?!?!" screaming into some poor bloke's face and some very cool double-team fighting with Selina in the third act. The interaction between Wayne+Selina and Batman+Selina was a definite highlight for me. When Bruce catches her stealing the pearls right at the top of the film and suddenly this quiet, dutiful maid comes out with sass and passion I was pleasantly surprised, a feeling that continued throughout the film in pretty much every one of their scenes together. I loved the "So that's what that feels like.." line Batman mumbles after Selina disappears from the rooftop mid-conversation; really impling that these two are equals in each others eyes, and therefore they should also be in the eyes of the audience, instead of Poor, Feeble Selina and The Big Bad Bat (something I was dreading).

Overall, Bale did another good, solid Batman when he was actually on screen, as well as his usual half-smooth, half-emotionally damaged Wayne behind the mask.

Bane

Well then, Bane.....

I think this was a poor stab at the character, only capturing the bare essence that makes him such a brilliant rogue. The absence of Venom I can understand, the Nolanverse is supposed to be more realistic and uber-steroids aren't really that viable. But the lack of a well defined and self-fueled cunning and calculating nature was really poor. We first find Bane working for Daggett in order to ruin Wayne financially, which seemed a bit reminiscent of the Poison Ivy/Bane relationship in Batman & Robin, where Ivy uses Bane for muscle and not a lot else. However, with time it appears that Bane is running his own scheme, with designs to only appear to be working for Daggett until the time is right.....but then Ra's al Ghul is pulled back into the mix and it turns out that Bane is just doing what Ra's wants, with the hopes of being accepted back into the League of Shadows. This totally undercuts Bane as a strong, intellegent character. The way that he talks about Ra's indicated a sense of admiration and respect; a desire to prove his worth to someone else. That isn't the Bane I know or wanted to see.

Incidentally, Bane and Talia al Ghul never had a romantic relationship, she despised him, calling him weak for not being able to beat Batman, which was when Ra's decided Bruce should marry Talia and become the heir to the League. I must say, Bane + Daggett felt very reminiscent of Hammer + Vanko, albeit a lot more serious and dark, as is the way with the Nolanverse.

There is also a lack in the admiration and respect Bane shows Batman (their first encounter came about because Bane heard that Batman was unbeatable and decided to challenge him, motivated only by personal pride and sportsmanship, not madness/ambition), their relationship should've been more akin to two individuals with differing political views on how to run Gotham, coming to the conclusion that they will have to fight for control, not one going after the other because reasons.

Regarding the presentation of Bane; I felt he wasn't muscular enough. Yes, this is the Nolanverse where everything aims to be as feasible as possible, and yes Hardy does look pretty damn stacked, but it wasn't enough for me. I grew up on a diet of Bane looking like a walking tank, and I guess I was just expecting a little more. Jeep Swenson, the actor who played Bane in Batman & Robin was a real person, so it's clearly possible to that muscular.... But, understandably, Swenson never had to act or even talk in Batman & Robin, and Nolan needed an actual actor for his iteration, so a compromise between muscles and acting had to be found.

The mask was another issue. Not only is it never explained further than "it keeps the pain in," but as Talia is reattaching parts of it after Batman has beaten Bane there is the sound of escaping gas, which could easily have been Venom. Not attributing his ability to withstand the beatings in Peña Dura to his use and subsequent reliance on Venom was a missed opportunity, I feel, as it would have explained the "it keeps the pain in" line as well as giving an actual reason for the mask to exist.

Selina Kyle

Selina Kyle (never referred to as Catwoman in the film) was wonderful. She felt nearly Whedon-esque in her portrayal, and by that I mean she wasn't a 'tits+ass in leather' girl, but more an actual character who was also female. I was truly happy that I didn't have to write "standard arse-out scene for SK" in my notes whilst watching the film; a serious concern of mine. There was only one moment in which I felt that Nolan felt obligued to have a kiss, and of course there had to be less than 2 minutes left til the detonation. 

Selina was written exceptionally well, with perfectly sculpted dialogue to keep the audience guessing as to her sincerity in pretty much every scene. I didn't see her betrayal coming at all, which I'm attributing to the strength of the dialogue and direction. There was a touch of 'Lower Class Hero' about her, made very clear during her dance with Bruce, which I found quite trite and boring. I was glad to see it didn't become a main theme throughout her development, and seemed to merely be dropped in to give her a reason to initially side with Bane and his plan to overthrow the upper classes.

After every inevitable betrayal there is usually an inevitable reconciliation and rescue. This is implemented really well, managing to tie in nicely with the canonic character of Catwoman; she has serious affection for Batman/Wayne and yet always has this animalistic instinct of self-preservation, which is perfectly illustrated by her vehemently expressing her desire to escape as soon as the opportunity presented itself, and the momentary pause after she clears the tunnel blockage.

The costume was great. It was less superhero and more practical thief, with her goggles acting as subtle little ears when she pushed them back off her face. The bladed stilettos were a nice touch, keeping the character 'strong and feminine' without making her a 'strong female.' Enough to be recognisable as the comic character, but not so feline-obsessed as the last time round.

Det. Blake

Joseph Gordon-Levitt continues to be one of my favorite actors these days. I loved him in (500) Days of Summer, I loved him in 50/50 and, of course, I've always loved him in 3rd Rock From The Sun. However, I was skeptical regarding his casting as what appeared to be a serious-faced policeman, I didn't think he had the style for it even though he handled his role in Inception with aplomb. Up until now I had nailed that down as a fluke. However, I was thoroughly proved wrong, it was not a fluke and am now looking forward to Looper even more that before.

As, what you could call a secondary character, Blake gets a helluva lot of screen time, some of the best conversations and interactions as well as the most emotive character arc. His relationship with the children, with Gordon and with Wayne are all solid and believable. Following his developing career, seeing him promoted from an officer in uniform to a plain-clothes detective was great. The personal interest Gordon shows in this 'young hot-head' helped to reinforce that this guy was the one to watch, he knew what was going down before anyone else and finally someone was listening to him. He was my favorite aspect of this film, hands down. 

I wasn't aware before seeing the film, but Blake (revealed to actually be Tim Drake) was one of the boy wonders who became Robin. This is revealed right at the very end of the film with a throw-away line regarding his name. I feel that the character has already progressed past my impression of who Robin is/is supposed to be as a character and feels more like a Nightwing or a Red Robin (as the Robin's have all become). Nolan has stated there will not be any more Batmans in the Nolanverse, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a Red Robin film being discussed soon.

Other Characters

Those few important figures in this film that deserve mention but aren't really 'main characters.'

Alfred:

Still a perfect balance between that sweet, caring humour and the calm voice of reason and welcome council that Michael Caine has always portrayed so well in the Nolanverse. This time round Alfred feels much more fleshed out, with more intersting aspects to his relationship with 'Master Bruce' as well as a gut-wrenching scene at the end which WILL have you reaching for the tissues.

Miss Tate/Talia al Gul:

I disliked this character greatly. I felt she was rapidly introduced from nowhere, expecting the audience to treat her on the same level as Lucius Fox or Alfred, i.e. background characters that will have a few very important things to do or say during the film. It was only because she was played (reasonably well, I don't dispute) by Marion Cotillard that I actually payed any attention to her early on. Her relationship with Bruce seemed very unnecessary and frankly made no sense. Yes, she is in love with him in the other Batman universes, but in the Nolanverse she appears from nowhere, badgers Bruce about the generator project a bit then turns up at his house and suddenly they're in bed (or rather, in rugs by the fireplace) together. I didn't buy it.

The shock reveal of her true identity took me completely by surprise. It did explain her relationship with Bruce and having a connection to the League Of Shadows is pretty much the deus ex machina reason to be on the board of this or that in the DC universes, so it made thematic sense to me - albeit shockingly.

Commissioner Gordon:

Taking a more minor role in this film, Gordon felt underdeveloped. This was probably a result of working on the assumption that we know all we need to know about him. His wife and kids have left him and he's about to be 'asked to step down' as Commissioner. He looks and acts tired, like the weight of the Dent Act is physically hurting him - a perfect portrayal of the situation. After getting shot and being confined to a hospital bed you can feel his frustration at having no control over 'his city' and 'his cops.' After the city is cut off his role as leader of the resistance gives him new life; it's back to the rough and ready work that we saw him handle in the first two films, a situation where he thrives. Overall, another testament to Gary Oldman's abilities.

Dr. Jonathon Crane:

A brief appearance for Cillian Murphy, reprising his role but without the mask and FEAR-gas associated with his alter ego, Scarecrow. I enjoyed him showing his face, but couldn't help but think that the part had been written for Heath Ledger's Joker; sitting in a chaotic court room passing judgement on the elite of Gotham and sentencing them to death or death thinly-veiled as exile.

The Film

I felt that the pacing was both a strength and a weakness; as a strength it worked well to slowly increase the threat that Bane posed to Gotham which upped the stakes not only for Batman but for Blake, Gordon and Kyle as well. As a weakness, the pacing caused the second act to drag a little for me, there was an absence of Batman and whilst I'm not an action-junkie, there could've been a decent prison riot scene in Peña Duro or at least a few scenes explaining how Bruce gets back to Gotham from the Caribbean.

I'll divide the action into two parts; set pieces and showdowns.

The set pieces weren't anything special. The escape from the stock market was mediocre, with some potential tension sacrificed to make way for some entertaining cops. We've seen the whole city out to get Batman before, what I wanted to see was Bane fighting off dozens of cops single-handed. The chase sequence in the third act involving The Bat and two of the tumblers was, again, mediocre. I was expecting Batman to put The Bat on auto-pilot and swing down onto a tumbler and punch out the driver or something equally as exciting, but I guess that would've made the ending even easier to predict.

The two showdowns between Bane and Batman were polar opposites. The first instance was great; we see Batman giving it his all and Bane just taking the punches. Bane even shows a glimmer of his towering intellect that Nolan mostly ignores when he manages to compensate for Batman's use of the dark - his best weapon. After a few minutes of slugging it out and getting nowhere Bane destroys the Bat - I certainly felt every single one of those blows to Batman's temple that crushed his cowl. The scene had no 'epic battle music' which was a massive plus; it just focused on the clashing of two powerhouses. When Bane finally breaks Batman's back the whole movement was superbly done, from Bane lifting him to the momentary hesitation as he held Batman aloft to the sickening noise as he dropped him. This has been called a 'fan service' inclusion, but I feel it's pretty much vital to any story involving Bane, I would not have been happy if it had been left out.

The second showdown was dire. I'm referring to the encounter amid the street-war between the Police and Bane's forces, where the newly healed Batman has very little trouble kicking the crap out of Bane, breaking his mask in the process. I feel that a few weeks/months training in a prison and climbing a wall should in no way give Batman this sudden edge. Had I been in charge of this scene, it would've been longer and a much closer match, with Batman only just managing to win by the skin of his teeth. But then again, that scene does lead into the final reveal of everything and the total running time is 165 minutes so I can understand if it was a logistical call.

Issues

I do have some issues with this film. And by issues, I mean anything ranging from actual problems to nerdy nit-picking. I'll start with the most important:

The Dark Knight Rises suffers heavily from The Phantom Menace Syndrome. By that I refer to the impossible-to-define-the-protagonist aspect of Star Wars Episode 1. Is it Obi-wan, Amidala, Qui-Gon, Anakin, Mace Windu? There is no right answer.

The same happens here, with Batman, Blake, Gordon, Kyle and Bruce Wayne all apparently (to me at least) getting pretty much the same amount of screen time and development. Yes, all their paths come together at the end to tie up the film nicely, but during the second act, in particular, I found myself having to keep track of five different threads. When this happens, usually one or two are integral to the main, over-arching plot, but here *all* of them are. And that smacks of either two films shunted into one; panic that the film wasn't interesting enough and so more content was shoveled in or an indecisive editing process. Either way, it's simple maths - the more story arcs you have to follow the less each arc will be developed. As a result, there's very little Batman in a Batman film.

Bane's voice was ridiculous. Now I saw the 11 minutes of footage released months ago and I couldn't understand a word Tom Hardy was saying, so I'm glad that his voice was changed so that the audience can at least understand the words. But what was presented to me throughout the film ranged from a poor Sean Connery impression to General Grievous. It added to my dislike of the character, as he either sounded deranged or comical in some of the most crucial scenes. The 'improvements' to his voice irritated me in a second way; they felt like a narration. Given the fact that Bane has no visible mouth, I found it difficult to associate this disembodied voice with the character on screen. Tom Hardy did a great job of conveying emotion and intent with just his eyes, but it always felt about a second before or after the words Bane was supposedly saying.

Bane also appears to have some sort of Jedi mind-powers. On two occasions he touches people (Daggert and Wayne) relatively lightly and suddenly they're in serious pain. What the hell was that?! Never explained or even mentioned; very confusing.

Selina Kyle's martial arts skills, her abilities as a master thief and her acrobatic prowess are never explained or addressed, but just presented with the expectation that the audience will accept them. Well, I didn't. I could've done with at least a short section of dialogue explaining her backstory.

Similarly, Blake figures out who Batman is by looking at him once. Now, this is canon, as Blake has aspirations from a young age to be the World's Greatest Detective (Batman's accolade) and does manage to figure out who Batman/Wayne really is. But the short, throw-away line explaining this seemed a tad silly. Even more so when you compare it to Selina Kyle *not* managing to figure it out, even though she's spent considerable more time in the company of both Batman and Bruce Wayne.

I see no point in having Detective Blake revealed to be Tim Drake right at the end of the film, and then having him follow Bruce's instructions to find the Batcave if there are going to be no more Nolanverse Batman films. It seems pointless, and therefore there must be a point to it. I feel it's just sequel baiting, but not for Batman.

A few nit-picky flaws:

During the stock exchange robbery scene, I do not believe that a shoe-shine and a janitor could've smuggled automatic weapons into a building that reacted so strongly to Bane just because he was wearing a crash helmet.

In the escape from the stock market the police raised barriers to prevent Bane's escape. My question is, why make ramps? Why not just have a vertical-sided wall that no vehicle could just easily drive over? Seemed purposefully stupid to allow Bane to escape.

After getting his hands on what looked like the wireless antennae to the tablet Bane's minion was using Batman is able to trace all its traffic? I know he's Batman, but that's a bit ridiculous.

During the chase sequence in the third act one of the tumblers fires a barrage of missiles at The Bat, something like 8-10. Most harmlessly and quickly impact nearby buildings, but 3 missiles manage to track The Bat through numerous narrow streets and around tight corners. Were these 'better' missiles? Seems like adding risk and/or tension just for the sake of it, but then having it end up looking silly.

That chant. I really hated that chant. It sounded like "this is sparta, sparta" to me ever since the first teasers came out. Hans Zimmer states that it's written 'deshi basara' and it apparently means 'rise up' in a legitimate, but as of yet unconfirmed, language. Those words and that sound don't compute to me.

Conclusions

Overall, not a bad film. It's not the second coming that I was told it would be, nor has it managed to live up to my experience of watching The Dark Knight for the first time. Sadly, I feel that it fails as a Batman film, which for me need to have at least three things:

1) A strong villain; with a believable motivation, unique style and personality

2) A good interaction between Batman and the villain; either in back-story or through the clashing of order/chaos as we saw with The Joker, or through ideology as we *should've* seen with Bane

3) A smattering of Batman-esque gadgets and feats; this time round we had a gun that stopped a motorbike once, a very poorly designed and implemented Batwing and big ol' bomb that might as well have been red sticks of TNT with an alarm clock in it when compared to the microwave emitter in Batman Begins.

My recommendation won't make anyone see or not see it, with the media saturation and Batman Fever that Nolan has cultivated you've either already seen it, are going to see it soon or have no interest in seeing it. But, for what it's worth, I'd recommend this to fans of the Nolan Batman, but not to those fans of Batman as a universe. It's not a great end to a series that has been so popular for so long, but it is a reasonably good film overall with Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Anne Hathaway being my two shining stars.

Deus Ex: Human Revolution...sort of

Well blow me down, as my old man would say. This 'review' is going to be brief, to say the least. So I might as well just get on with it.

The first title in the Deus Ex series was released back in 2000 and I didn't notice. The second title, Deux Ex: Invisible War, hit the shelves in 2003; I didn't notice that either. When the Deus Ex Episode III: Revenge of The Sunglasses barreled it's way into the gaming world I was pinned against a wall by all the press releases, hooting fans of the original title and general rumpus regarding how amazing it would be. I still ignored it because, quite frankly, I saw the Square Enix stamp on it and nearly passed out from the terminal case of Final Fantasy Avoidance Syndrome I suffer from. 

Then Steam had it on sale for £7.99 with all the DLC and I thought to myself, "Why the hell not. You've been missing a good story/shooter of late, what with Hydrophobia only being a few hours long and most other shooters out there being devoid of a compelling narrative, lets give the Japs a pop at impressing me then."

So I did a buy, (my first mistake) followed by a install (and there's the second mistake).

What I'd assumed from the hype surrounding this title, and the metacritic score of 90, is that it would be halfway decent. What I've ended up spending 4 hours of my life playing is a bland and unengaging chimera of various decent genres and/or gameplay mechanics stuffed together and failing to achieve across the board. Think "Ripley7" in Alien Resurrection.

I shall now attempt to surmise why I didn't enjoy this game. Caveat: most of these words are opinions, if you disagree with them then let me know and I shall meet you on the field of valor. 

<-- Pic related.

I booted the game, ran through the titles screen and was greeted with a fairly standard menu screen. My first instinct with new titles is to bolt for the options section and crank everything up to 11 before launching the game, which I did. My second instinct is to check what Steam Achievements/PS3 Trophies are available for playing the game on a certain difficulty or without doing a certain type of kill-move etc. I did this too, saw that I could get two achievements for finishing the game once on hard, three if I never killed anyone, so I decided to begin on Hard and see how that went.

First problem encountered: a boring, extended rail-ride of an introduction where various characters and plot points are thrown at you whilst Adam, the protagonist, gruffly grumbles in a gruff way about gruff things like some shitty Bale/Batman reject mixed with Timothy Olyphant (voiced by Elias Toufexis, who's career involves not being the main voice actor in some medium-to-large titles). Even with my settings at 11 it looks pretty run-of-the-mill, boring, dated and a few other words for shit. The character modelling looked like Goldeneye, but with less rectangular breasts.

This first section just failed to grasp my attention at all, something that the first few minutes of anything, be it game or other media, should be able to do. The Extra Credits team did a great episode that relates to this, comparing the openings of Skyrim and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and I've no interest in ripping those guys off, so for more information on what I mean, go watch their great vid.

Got pimp slapped by a pre-rendered ring hand

So after the intense rollercoaster-ride of being led about a lab and put in a lift, some shit goes down and then you're given control of Adam. Adam, for all his gruffness, handles like a puppy on a waxed floor. I spent nearly 5 solid minutes tweaking the sensitivity to get him to stop pirouetting every time I even looked at the mouse. So navigating the first few rooms and tutorial sections, which mostly involved some light jogging, a few seconds crawling about through some air ducts and far too much time rifling through peoples private office drawers for candy bars and credits, Adam comes across a few ruffians with firearms and ill-favored looks about them. These gentlemen are preceded by a short tutorial about aiming and firing from behind cover, moving between cover and general combat. This is precisely what I'd expect, and to an extent demand, from a tutorial. Obediently, I trotted into combat, fired off a few rounds at each from cover and emerged victorious. Then, I was nearly sick, because I had flashbacks to the PC/PS3/360 title Quantum of Solace. The combat feels frighteningly similar to the horrific memories I have of that game.

MFW

Now hang on, this game is indeed described in it's Wikipedia entry as "a stealth/science-fiction action role playing game," and not a shooter, so the combat was never going to be of a very high caliber. Having noted that my original reaction might have been a tad over the top, I decided that from now on I'd stick to the stealth aspect and try to get that trophy for not killing anyo.....oh fuckballs. 

Right bunch of cocks, maybe

Skipping a bit forward, through the rest of the tutorial and some frighteningly poor voice acting and exposition, we get to some cut-scenes I can wail on. For some clitting reason there are both in-game as well as pre-rendered cut-scenes.....well, it is Square Enix, so I guess they like doing what they're known for. But the problem with pre-rendered cut-scenes is the gargantuan break in (if there were any) immersion you feel as you watch Adam's oddly pointy chin and uber-slicked hairstyle move from what frankly resembles Half Life 2 polygon modelling (not a slight at HL2, but it is 8 years old now) to deleted scenes from Advent Children. 

Utter bastards

Finally on to the first proper mission. Sneak into a place, find a guy, stop him from doing a bad thing. Right, time to flex those stealth muscles! Something which I very much enjoy, especially coming off the back of my recent Arkham City play through. A quick tutorial about how to silently take down a guard and hide the body and.....HANG THE FUCK ON. You tell me how to knock out a guard NOW?! After I've already been through the combat tutorial and been forced to kill at least 7 people? For fuck's sake, I wanted that trophy.....y'dicks.

Anyway, so a there are a few guards between Adam and the door into the building where the guy with the...etc.etc. and you're told how to take them down individually without detection and where to hide the bodies to avoid raising the alarm. First one goes down, nice and easy. Come round a corner and there are 3 more. So naturally I wait behind cover for an opportune moment, pop out and take down another, and another until they've been dealt with. T'was very easy, but I figured that was just because it was the tutorial area.

Skip ahead a few areas and I'm faced with a large room of computer terminals, with several armed guards patrolling along fixed routes who pause to scratch their balls with the barrel of their gun before turning abruptly around and walking back the other way. Anyone played Ocarina of Time? Remember trying to sneak into Hyrule Castle in order to get to Zelda and you had to get passed her guards? Well, the stealth in Deus Ex: HR is precisely that. But lots. Oh no, I'm wrong, the guards also have a little wiggle/sideways walk that I assume is supposed to look like their scanning the area, y'know, actually doing their job, but it's purely aesthetic. They don't see shit.

By this point, I'm thinking to myself "The combat is shit, the stealth is shit. I'm playing this game why, exactly?" I press on, encouraged by the prospect of a stunning story and Mass Effect-esque dialogue choices that will genuinely have me pausing for minutes on end to reflect upon my choices.

This conversation is balls

Instead, I was rewarded with a series of options for answering each question that are given arbitrary labels; stuff like "AGGRESSIVE" or "EMPATHETIC," which gives little or no indication of the outcome of your choice, other than it'll be vaguely in this sort of direction maybe. Not only is this conversation mechanic pretty damn basic, but I've been told that it can have a serious effect on the outcome of certain parts of the game. From my experience of it I would've assumed it was completely inconsequential, there is no effort made to highlight the fact that it IS indeed important. Lazy. Or stupid. Either/or.

I can't really comment on the plot of the game, as I've only played the first 3-4 hours of it, but the best I can say is that it's completely unengaging, with a protagonist who generates less emotional investment from the player than Kratos does.

I was very disappointed with my experience with Deus Ex: HR, but I'm fully willing to chalk everything up to a combination of three things:

1) I'm not a fan of the way Square Enix games are constructed, narratively and mechanically

2) There was some serious over-hype surrounding this game, that just makes all the flaws seem so much more obvious

3) The game probably gets much more involving were I to sink more hours into it

All three of these points are things that cannot change what I experienced, I'm quite saddened because, on the surface, it sounds like this game is completely my cup of tea, down to the 2 sugars and buttered crumpets. I shan't give a recommendation, because I feel that I've not truly experienced enough of the game to warrant a fully rounded opinion. So, have this instead:

Batman: Arkham City

Have you heard of Batman? He's mighty popular at current, what with Mr Christian 'Gravel-Voice' Bale giving it all that on the big screen. Thankfully, Rocksteady Games have made two titles to date with a much better sounding protagonist. I've played Arkham Asylum, and loved it, and now I've played Arkham City. Look, here:

In the Batmaniverse, Arkham Asylum is akin to an Alcatraz for the criminally insane, and is the setting for the first game in this series. A stonker of a title, go play it. The name Arkham is taken from the H.P. Lovecraft mythos, a town in Massachusetts which features in 12 of his tales. I figure this information will cause a certain friend of mine to explode with cross-over desires. Onwards with the review.

Plot

How am I supposed to brood without the Bat-Umbrella?

This game, Arkham City, is basically Asylum but bigger. The premise of an asylum for dangerous criminals has been expanded to 'city' size (more on that later), and the number of villains doubled. The plot sees Bruce Wayne imprisoned by Dr Hugo Strange, the overseer of Arkham City, for basically no clear reason other than so he can swoop around a dark, Gothic landscape for a bit and be gruff. Once inside The Caped Crusader immediately sets off trying to...no, wait, he has no motivation at this point. Yes, he's been imprisoned by Strange and would probably like to get out, but the first thing he does is rescue Catwoman from Two-Face, I assume so the game can introduce the second playable character. After this, the three major villains (Two-Face, The Penguin and The Joker) present themselves and territories are carved up across the city. In addition to these three Big Villains and their appropriately garbed henchmen armies, there are also several Small Villains running about being a nuisance. This is present in the form of a few side missions that have multiple parts which become available as you progress through the main plot. These missions provide enjoyable sections of the game where you get a chance to play The Detective and not The Cage Fighter. There are also a few recognisable names from about the mythos, like Commissioner Gordon, Oracle and a few TV celebs that crop up to be liabilities during the game as well. All in all, a ton of names well and truly dropped. Now Batman can get on with the task of....nonono, wait!

When will this happen?!

The Riddler. He's back and all, only this time instead of being a series of disembodied recorded taunts with a graffiti problem he's an actual villain in the city. There are riddles to solve by taking thousands of photos of everything you can with your cowl-cam and over 400 trophies to find which range in difficulty from 'look up, use batclaw' to piloting a batarang through a sewer version of the Boota Eve course. In addition to this, the oddly House-resembling Riddler has captured a few medics who were also trapped in Arkham City. When you have found a enough trophies The Riddler challenges you to solve his puzzle houses and save the hostages, the final puzzle house being where you meet and defeat Edward Nigma himself.

Characters

I think I can safely assume that, even if you've not seen The Dark Knight, you're at least aware of the truly wonderful performance that the late Heath Ledger gave in THE LEADING ROLE as The Joker. He was great because he captured the essence of unpredictability and madness of The Joker that is diametric to Batman's logical and calculating methods of detective work, moral code etc. But that was the Nolan franchise, and is thankfully very different and removed from this game. In the Arkham series, The Joker is voiced by Mark "I used to bulls-eye wamp rats back home in my T-16" Hamill and he does a stunning job. His laugh is spot on, and that's one of the most important parts to the character. In general, each Big Villain is very well done, each playing perfectly to the single trait that was the original inspiration for each character. There is a tier system for importance of villain in this game: The Joker and Hugo Strange are at the top, followed by The Penguin, Ra's al Ghul and Two-Face as major obstacles for Batman, below them Mr Freeze, Poison Ivy, Bane, Deadshot, Azreal, The Riddler and Hush occupying either passing roles as 'hey look, it's that one!' during missions related to other, bigger villains or as side missions in their own right. Next comes the one-appearance only tier, with Clayface, The Mad Hatter and Solomon Grundy. Finally, at the base of the Pyramid of Screen-time, are all the passing references in riddles etc. In total, I counted over 40 named heroes, villains or general characters. In Asylum, most of these characters were mentioned in passing, their names usually being linked to a riddle or mentioned in dialogue, but in City at least 25 are actually in the game. This is ridiculous. Most barely get any screen-time and those that do are developed to the bare minimum. I would've much rather had The Joker, Two-Face and The Penguin, with the potential for each of them to have a secondary villain or two (Ivy, Bane, Deadshot etc) in their employ.

I CAN develop more than
2 characters in a game!

This would've allowed more than a passing show for each villain other  than The Joker, who's the only one I could really tell you anything about  his motives or plans. It would also enable people who are completely  unfamiliar with any of these villains to enjoy their appearances more.  Granted, each character does have a biography in the pause menu but  this is just a flimsy solution to cover the design choice, in my opinion. 

Combat

So there's a lot of stuff going on. In between the things happening plot-wise Batman is usually punching someone. The combat is lifted directly from Asylum, as one would expect, and works just as well. A slight modification including some end of combo finishers just adds to the fun of taking on 50 henchmen at once. All the gadgets (batarang, batclaw, bat-tazer, bat-splosive, bat-birthday cake) and signature moves can be worked into any combo allowing for illegal levels of fun to be had providing you nail the timing. If you've played Arkham Asylum you'll know that early on B-man can't do jack against guns, and the same is true in City. So, not only do you now have a gadget for silently jamming enemy weapons, causing them to panic when you appear and they can't fire, but at the end of a combo you can leap over to the smug bastard with the assault rifle, shotgun or even stun-stick and rip it out of his hands. That not enough? Don't worry, it isn't, you dismantle it in seconds right before his eyes. The henchman genuinely looks upset. And then you throat-punch him.

The best kind of four-way

Fighting anything larger than henchmen is rare. There are The Abramovici Twins (surgically separated conjoined twins with one arm each, one wields a sickle and the other a hammer (Soviet reference shoryuken) and then maybe two Titan henchmen, previously seen in Asylum. Both are dealt with in similar ways, and are not handled badly, it would just have been nice to see more of them as most boss fights are either 'fight hoard, single punch takes out Big Villian' or 'get swamped by Ra's al Ghul and his multiple guises

For the most part making your way around the city involves avoiding henchmen without guns (very simple due to the sexy flight mechanics) or stealthily taking out those with guns. Still very satisfying to clear an entire room of henchman without any of them noticing.

Visuals

Booting this game brought back a wonderful sight to my eyes, a sight that hasn't been seen since the first Dawn of War. A PC Stress Test. I ran it, and it looked fine. I started the game on Ultra High, everything lagged. It rendered fine, but the game was running at half speed. Tweaking a few key settings down to High solved everything. This game is not beautiful, because that wouldn't fit with the Gothic theme. It is as good looking as it needs to be, and then some, but by no means blew my mind. In fact, it was very similar to Asylum. I feel City was just a case of expanding instead of innovating anything new, so this is to be expected and not criticised. 

I'm Batman

Along that theme comes my first criticism. There are a few internal areas, the GCDP morgue and a few rooms in the subway and steelmill, which are pretty much lifted from Asylum and given a quick re-skin. Whilst I don't begrudge the devs doing this, I feel it's a tad sloppy for a triple A game. My second criticism is an expansion on my first, or lack there of. The game is too small. When you climb certain buildings and look out to the East you can clearly see Arkham Asylum in the distance, and due to perspective it does indeed look small in comparison to City. But when you consider the actual playable size of Asylum, I'll wager it was probably about 60-70% the size of City. This is flat out not big enough for this game. If we can have full sandbox worlds in games like InFamous, GTA, Prototype then why didn't Batman get one? An example to further highlight my irritation: at one point there were Two-Face thugs patrolling the steps of a building chatting about The Penguin and how he sucks...whilst not 25m away across the road there were Penguin thugs saying the same things about Two-Face. The game really needed double the space.

On a lesser note, the score is spot on. A brilliant mix of Nolan-esque soundtrack and original themes.

Longevity

Picture funny, but
not relevant

The game took me 32 hours to finish; that's the main quest, all the side missions and all The Riddler trophies/challenges. Then there's the ton of challenge maps available to be played as Batman or Catwomen, (Nightwing and Robin if you shell out for the DLC) but all they consist of is internal maps used in the main game filled with either a hoard to fight or some guards to takedown. These challenge maps were also present in Asylum, and I ignored them then as well. There is also New Game Plus, which restarts the story but you keep all your upgrades and gadgets, plus change Batman's suit to one of 7 available as DLC. The villains are also leveled to match, to keep the challenge up. This mode is best for trophy hunting as, with all the gadgets unlocked, any Riddler trophy you come across can be claimed then and there (idiocy dependent). There is also a single achievement for finishing the game twice. I HATE this, for two reasons; 1) because it's the cheapest way to extend a game, 'just do it again for a shiny thing,' and 2) because I'm probably going to do it.

Conclusion

A very good game, well worth what I paid for it and certainly an enjoyable way to spend 30+ hours. It is by no means perfect, nothing ever is, but what flaws it has are mostly down to my personal experience and expectations. Recommended to anyone who enjoyed Asylum, fans of comic book characters and stealth games.

Those of you wanting batnips can take a hike.

Surrender to them

DC Universe Online

"OH GOD, it's an MMORPG. He's reviewing a MUMORPAGUH! It must be the endtimes!"

I know, I know, but bear with me here, Dear Reader, for I have a hard on for superheros.


Those of you versed in the study of patterns (we'll call it Patternology) will surely have seen this coming; I got this game through Steam. Those of you familiar with my current fiscal status might have seen this coming as well; I only started playing it after it became Free To Play. After a good eight hours of downloading at a constant 814Mb/s Steam kindly informed me that it had finished downloading. I most definitely wasn't perched, owl-like, on my chair watching those last percent trickle in with eyes wide in anticipation. Well, I was, so there's not much point avoiding the issue.

***FANBOY ALERT***


Sadly, I was not done. Even after 8 hours of downloading there was a further two hours spent running "fixtimestamps.exe" AND THEN four more hours of patching and updating necessary to play FTP. Eventually when I was allowed to play the game I'd spent a grand total of nearly fifteen hours obtaining I was instantly in love. (see previous Fanboy alert for all the reasons why you SHOULD NOT argue with me at this stage in the review, and kindly continue reading. Thank you for your time.)


Why "love?" Well, let me tell you. As a child, younger, smaller and less hairy than the man-child I find myself becoming these days, I was always a fan of everything superhero-y (ironically, except comic books) and I literally jumped a little in my seat when I saw DCUO was Free To Play. The jump was actually more of a hop, soon to become know as the Skyrim Hop, come 11-11-11. I was so thrilled to be given the chance to create a superhero of my own, and to experience playing as them in the same world as huge characters including Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, The Joker, Lex Luthor, Bane, Two Face, The Riddler, The Penguin and countless others, not to mention all the other budding superheroes and villains across the globe. Needless to say, I was somewhat excited.

My wonderful friend Matt, doing what I always wanted to.


Shifting this post into review mode, and we come to character creation. This follows a fairly simple set of categories that determine your hero or villain's abilities and, to an extent, story line progression. Obviously, male or female are the only two choices under Gender. Body Style is a loose term for male characters; "would you like The Boy Wonder, Average Joe, or Brick Shit House?" For female characters, sadly, there is no "deflate chest" slider. You're stuck looking like you're smuggling hams up your shirt, despite the obvious aerodynamic drag issues during flight.

Power Girl. Subtly not included.

Next is an option to choose how your character stands when you're not playing. That's all I can honestly see Personality applying to. Fair enough. Alright, here's an interesting bit; choosing your Mentor. Heroes choose from Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman, Villains from The Joker, Lex Luthor and Circe. This choice affects some part of the game I failed to reach (for reasons that become painfully clear later on but are apparently quite important. Next comes Power; choose from Fire, Ice, Gadgets, Mental, Nature and Sorcery Update: [and Light, like "In Brightest Day, In Crapest Movie" Light, if you have the DLC pack]. This determines what advanced powers you can unlock. For example, Ice power users can freeze targets solid, Mental can confuse enemies into attacking each other and Nature can steal health from enemies and heal allies, but these are just a few examples of some of the abilities each power unlocks.

Some men just want to watch the helpless patients in this hospital burn

Movement style seems to be fairly unimportant. Flight is the easiest to navigate the world with, and is the most common. Super Speed isn't the fastest, oddly, and acrobatics allows you to jump, flip and crab-walk around til your heart's content. I personally went with flight. Because it's flight. Seemed like a no brainer. Finally you choose your combat style. This had a much wider variety than I was expecting. The choices range from bows, duel swords, rifles, hammers, martial arts and hand blasts (which I chose). These determine your basic melee and ranged attack stats, DPS, AOE and all the usual acronyms. There are some combinations that made sense to me, for example Mental powers and hand blasts, but there is room for customisation and combination experimentation here til you black out from superherogsms. It is worth noting, for those of you with absolutely no creative talent, you can just select"Inspired By", and basically play as one of the well known heroes and villains. Yawn.

Costume comes next, colours, latex, capes and utility belts. The works. Too detailed to get into, suffice to say some really odd things can be created:

Suddenly, Fox People.


Some might say that's a large chunk of the review gone just on character creation, and they would be right. Anyway, onwards.

After a short introduction/tutorial level you are chucked out into the world as a whole, and instantly slapped across the face with the most generic and bland interpretation of "superhero mmo" Sony Online Entertainment could come up with. The world is deathly under developed, the missions are grind-y and mostly without story, and there are more dick bags than an under 15s game of CoD. I felt exactly as I do now, being a middle-class white male in his 20s, when wandering around a slightly dodgy neighbourhood, (i.e. fearing for my life an all my worldy possessions) except I was a fudging superhero, in a game, full of other superheroes. Trying to complete mission objectives in what always turns into a free for all brawl to get the collectibles was just dire. The only times I found myself enjoying the game was during the few end of mission sections where your character leaves the main world to continue alone in a building, usually culminating in a boss fight. My first was beating up Bane. I say beating up, I stayed at the back hurling barrels of acid whilst a poorer-looking-than-Arkham-Asylum Killer Croc chomped some Mexican rump. In a lighthouse of all places.

There are serious problems with visuals and gameplay, that much is clear. What about longevity? Well, since going Free To Play DCUO has become more overcrowded than Power Girl's bra, most of the time when I come to play I have to join a queue at least 6000 long. The wait is usually 20-30minutes. And even then the sheer weight of players causes the server to crash at least once an hour (credit where it's due, SOE are making things better) So no, there is no longevity to this game, at least until the world and his wife get bored of it. It makes me feel sorry for those who paid for it before the game became FTP.

.....And that's another thing!

MMOs. I know it's the 21st century and all that, and we're supposed to be understanding and accepting of others etc etc but I just don't get them. Why buy a game, and then agree to buy it again every month?! It baffles me. I think that might be one of the reasons I very quickly tired of DCUO, I'm not an MMO fan, and this seems to confirm my suspicions of most MMOs; that it all comes down to who's got the biggest, shiniest boots of +5 winning. A bit of a pet peeve, I spent a while making my character look the business, only to have him covered in useless tat just to upgrade his stats enough to not die:

Looks pretty swish, no?

Not too far off (Couldn't take new screenshot, server is down, surprise surprise)

[Update: Matt, a veteran, pointed out that you can hide the changes to your hero so none of the gear changes your appearence]


It comes down to this: from what I can tell, a very basic MMORPG game set in a world I adore. I can't even say if it's executed badly because I've nothing to compare it to! My recommendation would be as follows: If you're a fan of MMOs, avoid this because there are probably better ones out there. If you've never played an MMO before, go play anything else, it will be better than this big bag of disappointment, who's only job was to fill the time before Skyrim. And it even failed at that.