Those of us addicted to AMC’s The Walking Dead tuned in warily but eagerly last night for the premiere of Fear The Walking Dead—a title I’m still not crazy about—to see if creators Robert Kirkman and Dave Erickson could bring us new (fresh?) scares and an intriguing prequel storyline to compliment those bedraggled Southerners we love so much. In many ways this new series feels almost like Kirkman appealing to Hollywood more than to his fans, even to the point of setting the story in Los Angeles and focusing much of the first episode around junkie Nick Clark (Frank Dillane). And this is the only major stumbling block of the pilot, not enough walkers, way too much family drama.
The diverse family dynamic certainly makes for quite a few characters, which is a smart move in that those of us familiar with The Walking Dead will know that starting with a crowd means more people to choose from when the significant deaths start happening. Gruesome? Yes, but it’s the way of the walker world we’ve come to know. The pilot started and ended with a newly deceased walker—which may not end up being what we even call these zombies in this new show—but otherwise followed Kim Dickens’ Madison Clark, a school guidance counselor mostly concerned with her junkie son, Nick, and vaguely aware of the subtle signs around her that something major is happening in LA. One of those signs is that a lot of her students aren’t showing up for school, blamed on a bad strain of the flu going around.
When Madison isn’t at the hospital with Nick—where he insists he wasn’t hallucinating and did indeed stumble upon his girlfriend eating the face off a junkie in the church they were crashing at—she’s trying to get through to her teenage daughter, Alicia (Alycia Debnam-Carey), who is going through an all too familiar, just-need-to-get-to-college phase. Madison’s live-in boyfriend (soon-to-be-husband?) Travis (Cliff Curtis) is the only one who thinks to check out Nick’s crazy story about cannibalistic girlfriends and finds a gruesome sight at the church to back it up. (You’d think the cops would also follow-up on that. LAPD, amiright?) Madison insists Travis keep his findings to himself so as not to “enable” Nick. And thus the zombie apocalypse begins, and our main characters write it off as either the flu or a drug-fueled hallucination.
Granted, the show couldn’t jump right into survival mode. The epidemic didn’t likely happen over night, but it also didn’t take that long. Rick Grimes woke up about a month after things got started and the world was already a pretty dismal place by then. Getting to see how news of the epidemic spread initially, and the reaction of a city as large as Los Angeles, is what I’m most intrigued to find out about, but the first episode was incredibly insular. As a devoted watcher of The Walking Dead, it was hard not feel a lot smarter than these new characters. In the end they encounter their first undead person, they run him over twice and watch as he still tries to get up. Madison and Travis look at each other with incredulity but not nearly enough terror. If FTWD is going to match the scares of TWD they are going to have to get the characters on-screen a lot more amped up over the insanity happening. We Angelinos are tough, but we’re not numb to blood-covered dead people trying to eat us.
The look and feel of the show are there, casting orange-ish L.A. hues in abundance in contrast to TWD’s green ones, and the music maintains decent tension, even if I was rather craving Bear McCreary’s frenzied strings (no complaints about Atticus Ross’s opening theme). Because of the newness of the disease-spreading, there will be a lot more opportunity for blood and gore on the show, rather than the decayed look of TWD. Madison Clark isn’t nearly as compelling as Rick Grimes was in his pilot episode, but Nick Clark is and so far is the only one displaying a little gravitas toward the situation. But considering that the similarly short season one of TWD played out in a slow Georgian sizzle, I’m trained well enough in Kirkman’s world-building to know its worth sticking around to see what’s coming.
Rating: 7/10
]]>The Walking Dead panel gave fans a good idea of what to expect for season 6, beginning almost immediately with a trailer for the upcoming season—premiering in a 90-minute episode on Sunday October 11 at 9pm—that opens with lead character Rick Grimes running, and running hard. Not a new sight after five seasons of the show.
Most notable from the trailer is Morgan (Lennie James) joining the clan at Alexandria after having trailed Rick throughout last season. The trailer alludes to some tension between Rick and Morgan but showrunner Scott Gimple, immediately after the trailer played, admitted to the show’s notorious tendency to spin previews into misleading audiences from clues to what is upcoming.
The most interesting part of the trailer, for fans, was at the very end, where fan-favorite Darryl (Norman Reedus) is seen bound with a gun to his head by the leader of the Wolves, the menacing group we’ve only begun to see introduced as a threat to Rick and co. Interesting to note, Ethan Embry was featured as a new cast member in the trailer and Gimple revealed Merritt Wever would also be joining the cast.
Panel moderator Chris Hardwick led most of the cast of the show, Gimple, and executive producers Gale Anne Hurd and Greg Nicotero through questions around upcoming story and character development.
Gimple did say there would be more flashbacks in the new season, saying a whole episode may be entirely in flashback and that they would “definitely be playing with time.”
He also said the Wolves will play a part in a way audiences won’t expect. Andrew Lincoln, who plays Sheriff leader Rick Grimes was asked about his characters’ final facial hair moment this past season. Does he miss the beard? He stated, “My wife doesn’t miss it” and joked about how co-star Steven Yeuen remarked after the shave that he looked like he had a shrunken head.
Hardwick asked Yeuen about Glenn—his character—and one of his storylines this past season: Glenn’s frustrating decision not to kill Nicholas. Yeuen spoke about Glenn’s desire for Nicholas’s redemption and his own need to save himself. But he did joke he wouldn’t trust Nicholas to push any revolving doors.
It was Lennie James’s (Morgan) first time on the panel. He spoke about Morgan and Rick’s “particular man-love” hinting that maybe things won’t be quite so tense between Morgan and Rick next season like the trailer insinuates.
Sonequa Martin-Green spoke passionately about the arc of her character Sasha, saying it was an honor to portray PTSD in honor of those who have suffered and that she thinks Sasha will find hope at the end of the tunnel.
Audience favorite Norman Reedus was initially given some rather bland questions including what he does to get into character—Motorhead and Candy Crush as it turns out—and for the record his favorite emoji is the red balloon. Eventually he was asked his predictions for Darryl next season. He commented that Darryl isn’t into suburbia so he’s likely to be getting restless.
As has become tradition they played a blooper reel and the cast showed their tightknit comradery and senses of humor. Andrew Lincoln admitted his mother would like Rick and Michonne to get together. Gimple says he’ll take note.
The 90-minute season premiere will preview at Madison Square Garden and fans can catch up on all the seasons as AMC shows an entire season every Sunday starting later in July.
]]>We’re shaking with excitement. For those, like us, who can’t get enough of any type of Walking Dead, Feared or otherwise, any morsel of what’s in store for us in the future gets us all geared up and ready to take on the apocalyptic world. So we’re sharing it with you.
The Fear the Walking Dead clip posted by Variety just this morning really puts the “tease” in teaser. It doesn’t give away much. Except that there will be a lot of…fear. No smidgen of a zombie is seen, but rumor has it they will have quite a different look from the current zombie type in Walking Dead as they will be a bit, well, more fresh. The trailer is titled “Nick’s Escape” so we’re guessing this is a character who might get more than a quick grisly death. IMDB credits a “Nick,” played by Frank Dillane, with six episodes in the series so we’ll see.
Also starring Ruben Blades, Mercedes Mason, Cliff Curtis, and Kim Dickens, to name a few, Fear the Walking Dead is set in Los Angeles at the very start of the walker outbreak. Or whatever we’re now calling it. Walking Dead fans may get a little bit more information on all that led up to where they started out back in 2010, but no one’s promising anything.
Check back with us in July when we cover the San Diego Comic-Con as both shows will be there along with Talking Dead host Chris Hardwick.
Fear the Walking Dead is set to premiere in August on AMC in what is as yet a two-season commitment.
]]>Here it is. We’ve made it to the top. The top ten that is.
Breaking down all of the television shows we’ve come to love over the past five years (not even mentioning all the shows that premiered previous to 2010 that we’ve been dedicated to all this time) has been a monstrous undertaking. Collaborating on these lists not only made us want to re-watch everything we’ve put on here, but exposed us to great shows we hadn’t already been watching. Basically none of us have had much of a social life the past few weeks.
Talking about all this great TV, with stories, visuals, characters, and creativity that rivals the very best that cinema offers us, has also just whet our appetite to talk about it more. All we can say is keep an eye out, you may just see more of the small screen represented here on Way Too Indie in the near future. No need to prattle on about the many virtues of the following ten shows by way of introduction. The writers can explain how they made their way to the top, and you can let us know if you agree or not and which you plan to binge first.
Based on the The Walking Dead comic book series created by Robert Kirkman, Tony Moore, and Charlie Adlard that was first published by Image Comics in 2003 and follows the survival of sheriff Rick Grimes and his team surviving a zombie apocalypse, Frank Darabont who’s known for his screenplay for The Shawshank Redemption created the show in 2010 to much praise and popularity. Winning two Emmy’s for outstanding prosthetic makeup and countless other nominations, it hasn’t been without a significant amount of professional accolades as well.
Since its premiere on AMC on October 31, 2010, however, it has veered off significantly from some of the storylines within the comics from the deaths of certain characters and the survival of others to the outright creation of characters never seen in the comics at all (Daryl Dixon). That has not stopped it from being the most-watched drama series in basic cable history, with a viewership of 17.3 million for it’s season five premiere. Executive Producer David Alpert has stated that there are enough storylines from the comic series to take the show well into the 12th season and then some. Us fans grab hold of bits of hope like this as we would follow the show to the end of the world. Both figuratively and literally speaking. Other shows have gone creepy and weird (American Horror Story and The Returned are two on our list) but no show delivers scream-out-loud scares the way those always gruesome walkers do. Even more scary, is that as attached as we get to characters—and boy, do we—Kirkman and the writers have shown us time and again that no one is ever safe. [Scarlet]
Watching Lena Dunham, creator and star of Girls, rise to the top with such rapid momentum used to be somewhat of an annoyance to me. I’d seen her film Tiny Furniture before Girls came about and found her portrayal of someone basically like herself—aimless and emotionally stunted—to be narcissistic and weird. Hearing she’d fallen into the favor of Judd Apatow and was being handed a show by HBO felt like a joke. Thus I began my viewership of Girls armed and ready to rip it to shreds. And then in those incredibly quick 30 minutes making up the first episode, I found myself not only guiltily laughing, but strangely seeing through the general weirdness of the film’s central characters—Hannah, Marnie, Shoshanna and Jessa—to find that I understood them. I understood their motivations because the part of me that can’t deny my millennialness (I’m on the oldest side of the spectrum) doesn’t behave the way they do, but understands the thought process that gets them into their ridiculous situations.
Thoughts on pursuing dreams and needing work to feel meaningful. Thoughts on being loved. Thoughts on sex. And most significantly thoughts on the importance of one’s girlfriends. In an age where women marry older and older, female friendships are sort of the early loves of our lives. The candor and sometimes graphic intimacy these girls share, its very real. And the ways in which they mess up their lives is happening on a daily basis among twenty-somethings somewhere. We don’t watch for the storylines necessarily, and the gritty and deliberately dirty state of the characters is at times gag-worthy, but if you want to understand the insecurities and general hopes of the female new-adult generation, Girls is a great place to start. Plus the music is always seriously solid. [Ananda]
It’s odd to have to defend a show that’s so high up on our list. But that’s because a lot of people fell in love with Homeland early, only to be let down by a somewhat ho hum third season that contained such a daring ending that it actually divided fans. It’s true the first two seasons set the bar incredibly high—first by making us decide if Brody is telling the truth or if Carrie is just plain nuts–then by pairing the two as a couple despite finding out the truth. But if we learned anything from season three, it’s that Homeland loves to paint itself into corners and has no qualms about killing off major characters. Some of its big gambles pay off while others don’t, but it deserves respect for attempting such risky storytelling. Not to mention continuous outstanding performances from Claire Danes, who has picked up two well-deserved Emmys so far. Those who kept watching the show were rewarded with a brilliant fourth season (just don’t ask us to comment on its finale) and recent news that Season five will shift locations again and jump ahead in time. Homeland finally made Showtime a major player in original programming. [Dustin]
As smart phones or other ‘black mirrors’ become an increasingly prevalent aspect of modern life, Black Mirror examines our increasingly complicated relationship with emerging technologies, as well as their unforeseen, unintended consequences. English satirist Charlie Brooker created the series, an anthology where each 45-minute installment exists independent of the others. The episodes take place in varying, unspecified periods of the not-so-distant future; whether they’re taking place 1 or 100 years from now, the conflict is derived from evolutions of contemporary tech. Brooker poses that these aren’t only problems we can see now, but dilemmas that will grow worse with time.
Beyond the moral questions that the series asks, Black Mirror is an exciting, highly unpredictable show. Every episode paints a detailed picture of the world in which it exists. The intriguing circumstances only become more captivating as the storylines take wicked twists. Brooker’s pitch-black wit provides dark laughs, relieving the tension in Black Mirror’s most shocking moments; however, the series’ strength is in its ability to build to a devastating conclusion. You won’t know whether to laugh, cry, or get angry. Brooker develops a universe in which he introduces advancements that visionaries might one day dream up, only to reveal the awful implications each change may provoke, and our seeming hopelessness against them. [Zach]
The first season of Transparent premiered less than a year ago, and yet here it sits in the top ten shows of the last five years. If you think this ranking might be a little unreasonable, you probably haven’t seen Transparent. Jill Soloway’s show packs more drama, character development and naturalism in its ten half-hour episodes than most cable and network dramas do over an entire series. The show, for those living under a rock, profiles the Pfefferman family as their father Mort (Jeffrey Tambor, who already won a Golden Globe for his performance) comes out as transgender to her three selfish children (Amy Landecker, Gaby Hoffmann, and Jay Duplass).
And as Mort becomes Maura, Transparent focuses on the effects of her transition on herself and those around her. The show’s premise alone makes Transparent something entirely new to TV, but it’s the smart, sensitive portrayal of Maura and the Pfefferman family that makes this first season launch straight into the pantheon of great TV shows. Maura isn’t the only one going through some sort of transition; all of her children find themselves going through major changes themselves, whether it’s starting a new family, coming into adulthood, or just trying to figure out what to do with their lives. Transparent puts these stories together, but it never equates them. It uses the Pfefferman children’s stories to highlight their privilege when it comes to uprooting their lives in comparison to the intense struggle Maura faces for wanting what is essentially the same thing: to find happiness being herself, and finally living the life she wants to live. It’s a marvel that the show does this without compromising any of its characters, showing them as people just trying to do the best they can instead of putting them into easy archetypes. Transparent is, quite simply, revolutionary TV. [C.J.]
Because season three is still so fresh in my memory, having binged it only within the past few weeks, my ability to talk smoothly around its many merits might just be a waste of time. The show’s main character, Frank Underwood, played by Kevin Spacey, is next-level evil. Like, forget ax-murderers and sociopaths (though he may be borderline), Frank is a purebred egomaniac filled with oodles of charisma and a cunning and sharply calculated brain. Beside him in his pursuits of the most powerful spot in the country, and the world, is Robin Wright’s Claire. She, the most poised and well-spoken woman to ever understand exactly how to use her femininity to befuddle, bemuse, and work her way to the top. And these are the MAIN CHARACTERS. Watching their relentless political pursuits, their consensual affairs, wily networking and bargaining and consistent success, makes one wonder who to even root for in this world. And harboring even the smallest fear that politics could be half as dirty as they are in this show really makes one question their patriotic pride.
The show is based on the British version, which I tried watching an episode of and found I just couldn’t trade Underwood’s smooth southern drawl for a British accent.His asides to the camera, where he tells viewers directly all the evil things he’d like to say but won’t, make it impossible to wonder if Frank is at all conflicted. Knowing he’s 100% depraved somehow makes him even more intriguing. But it’s Frank and Claire’s psychologically-muddled marriage that fascinates to no end—especially in this last season where it was tested to its limits. No word yet on a confirmed fourth season, the network wants to toy with us like Frank toys with congress, but we’ll be waiting to hear. Simultaneously dreading and hoping. [Ananda]
Not four months had passed since Breaking Bad ended its run, and rumblings already started to spread: there was a new show in town that might give Vince Gilligan’s crystal meth-epic a run for its money as One Of The Greatest TV Shows Ever. In hindsight, much of this is chalked up to hyperbole since True Detective only has the one season to its name. But, my goodness, how magnificent, absorbing, twisted, darkly poetic, and sickeningly compelling that first season is! Created by crime novelist Nic Pizzolatto, True Detective shifted the paradigms of television before Steven Soderbergh got a chance to do the same (see No.19 on this list).
So, let’s break down the “how.” Firstly, the architecture of the story’s arc is the Golden Gate Bridge of television writing: a single case involving two detectives in Louisiana, spread across decades, into a single season, divided not so much into “episodes” as much as “chapters.” Pizzolatto’s background in fiction and academia filters through his cadenced dialogue and exceptional layering of the psychology of his two detectives. Secondly, casting two movie stars in the form of Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson, who were able to commit thanks to the show’s anthological nature and deliver mind-blowing performances. And lastly, nabbing Cary Joji Fukunaga, one of the most promising young directors out there, to direct every single episode (it was almost Alejandro Gonzales Inarritu, but my gut tells me it’s a good thing it wasn’t). One astute writer, one exciting director, one formidable DP (Top of the Lake’s Adam Arkapaw) and one knockout ensemble cast. True Detective combines all the sensibilities of cinema, and spreads them out over the temporally-liberal format granted by television. The result is nothing short of groundbreaking. [Nik]
The fact that Louis CK landed a deal with FX that grants the comedian full creative control over his show, and nearly unlimited leeway to mold it to his pleasing, was unprecedented. His ability to turn Louie into the most surprisingly honest and endearing program on TV is a testament to CK’s creative genius. Writing, directing, editing, and starring in nearly every episode, Louis’ series sacrifices traditional sitcom continuity for flexibility. Each episode’s situation has been crafted to fit the story that Louis intends to tell, which means that introducing a new sibling or a black wife for your white children is simply a new reality in which CK can craft a hilarious, engaging narrative.
Louis CK has developed into one of the funniest, most successful stand-up comedians in the world today (he splices clips of stand-up into most episodes); however, he was already an experienced television writer, self-taught video editor and aspiring filmmaker without a vehicle suited to his sensibilities. This series occasionally feels like a collection of CK’s early short films. Some stories simply serve as brief cold opens to episodes, while others unfold in 2, 3, or 6 part installments. Louis allows the story to inform the structure, and consequentially his bits don’t appear cut short or too drawn out. Each episode is hysterical, beautifully crafted, and often climaxes with touching vulnerability. It’s easily the most essential comedy on television so far this decade. [Zach]
In the same year Steven Moffat replaced Russell T. Davies as showrunner, lead writer and producer of the 2005 revived Doctor Who, he was also launching, with Mark Gatiss, what would become a pop culture phenomenon and sensation for British Television and the world: Sherlock with Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman. In 2014 it won 7 Emmy’s including Outstanding Lead Actor for Cumberbatch, Outstanding Supporting Actor for Freeman, and Outstanding Writing for Moffat. Moffat and Gatiss were also nominated for two more Emmy’s for their creation of the show. Gatiss, who also plays Mycroft Holmes on the series, had also been a writer for Doctor Who along with Moffat before their co-creation of the tv-adaptation of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s character who personifies the essence of intelligence…and neuroses. Its intense and catchy theme music was composed by David Arnold and Michael Price for which they also won an Emmy in 2014.
The show incorporates technology into the show inventively, especially considering the dated source material. What it does best, however, is plays up the bromance between Holmes and Watson, letting their friendship be the driving dynamic that carries the show forward. The ‘ol Conan Doyle penchant for cliffhangers helps, too. One of the most frustrating parts of being a fan of Sherlock is the aggravating wait between each series which averages a break of two years in between each 3-4 episode season. Moffat and Gatiss announced that they have already developed plots for a fourth and fifth series as well as a Christmas episode that will supposedly be broadcast this November. Filming for the next series should begin late 2015 for its 2016 release. [Scarlet]
The king—or queen—of the shows has arrived and I only hope I can express accurately why it is. Just. So. Good. In an age of DVRs, Roku’s, AppleTVs, and Chromecasts there is very little reason to watch anything live (not to mention have cable), but Game of Thrones is one of the shows I make time for every Sunday night during its season. For one, the fear around spoilers as people discuss the show is very real. There ain’t no fan, like a Game of Thrones fan. They want to discuss episodes and events, and they want to do it immediately. But what really makes me shirk Sunday Funday plans to plant myself in front of my TV every week is that my devotion to the heroes and villains of the show is so strong that I literally can’t wait to see where each new episode will bring them.
Set in the fantasy realm of Westeros and Essos, the show follows a great many characters, some who live, some who die, some we hate, some we love, some we don’t know how to feel about. The main premise is political. Everyone wants to sit on the iron throne. Some would claim it based on lineage, some would like to simply take it for their own. The film has outstanding visuals and amazing actors and falls firmly within an R-rated sensibility. It has given great roles to Sean Bean, Peter Dinklage, Emilia Clarke, Kit Harrington, Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, Lena Heady and so, so, so many more. The costumes are elaborate, the magic is subtle but exciting, the dragons are awesome, and scope is epic. All of this make Game of Thrones feel timelessly legendary. It doesn’t matter if you read the books or not (personally I’m saving them for once the show is over and I need my fix, though apparently the ending will have already been ruined for me), this show, and its source material, capture imaginations and don’t let go. It’s the kind of show people will return to for many years to come, and it feels exciting to be experiencing it with the world week after week. [Ananda]
View Other Picks in this Feature:
Best 50 TV Shows Of The Decade So Far (#50 – #41)
Best 50 TV Shows Of The Decade So Far (#40 – #31)
Best 50 TV Shows Of The Decade So Far (#30 – #21)
Best 50 TV Shows Of The Decade So Far (#20 – #11)
Little did you know, the future of cinematic storytelling rests…in the palms of your hands. I strongly believe that, in maybe the next 20 years or so, you’ll be seeing your favorite movie directors telling stories not just via movies, but via video games. Games are the future of storytelling, and it’s time to embrace them as a legitimate art form. If you’ve never picked up a controller, or you’re afraid to because you’re “not good at video games” (actually, you’re just a beginner and need to relax and cut yourself some slack), or you consider games a frivolous pastime, I implore you to give games an earnest look; you don’t know what you’re missing.
Video games offer things movies can’t: agency and interactivity; a sense of personal accomplishment; long-form storytelling; environmental storytelling (I’ll explain later); customization; and the list goes on. Games open up countless new ways for filmmakers to tell stories; they just haven’t caught on yet. But they will! As a strong, exciting indication of the emerging trend, Guillermo del Toro is set to co-direct a new horror game, Silent Hills, alongside legendary game director Hideo Kojima.
Listen, video games will never replace or be superior to movies as a medium. They’re different art forms that offer different things. As of right now, storytelling in games is, by and large, not up to par with storytelling in cinema. But that’s changing, and it’s changing fast. As the production value of games–specifically narrative-driven games–continues to increase with each passing year, and the technology and tools available to game developers becomes more advanced, the gap in quality between storytelling in games and storytelling you see at your local multiplex gets smaller and smaller.
As evidence, here’s a scene from The Last of Us, a recent game by Naughty Dog:
Looks pretty great, right? Everything, from the acting, to the cinematography, to the directing, to the writing, to the set design…it’s 100% movie quality. In fact, this scene is better than most of the trash you’ll find at the theater. And this doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of what The Last of Us has to offer. And there are games for everybody! If you love sci-fi, you’ll love Mass Effect. If you love Westerns, you’ll love Red Dead Redemption. If you love intimate, indie dramas, you’ll love Gone Home. They hire Hollywood actors to be in games all the time now too. Ellen Page, Kevin Spacey, Idris Elba, Chloe Grace Moretz, Stephen Merchant, and Andy Serkis (just to name a few) have all starred in recent games, while movie badasses Keifer Sutherland and Norman Reedus have lead roles lined up in two huge upcoming projects (Metal Gear Solid V and Silent Hills, respectively).
The point is, video games are gradually becoming a new frontier for artists to tell their stories, and now is a better time than ever to explore what they have to offer. I’ve compiled a list of 11 games (with a little help at the end from Editor-in-Chief Dustin) that I feel are essential narrative-driven experiences. Try out one, two, five, or all eleven, and be sure to ask yourself as you play what your favorite filmmakers could do with these tools.
There are so many games that could have made the list, and this is just a small sample of the best games have to offer. Stay tuned for future installments, where we’ll talk about even more games movie lovers should play!
What are your favorite narrative games? Let us know in the comments!
Let’s start the list with a game that demonstrates something movies can’t offer: environmental storytelling. In Bioshock you explore Rapture, an underwater utopia built by business magnate Andrew Ryan. Once a bustling city for aristocrats who wanted to live outside the government system, the player finds Rapture as a desolate, collapsed shell of its former self, where most of its inhabitants have been driven to madness by a plasmid called ADAM. Piecing together the history of the city via audio recordings found throughout the game is a gripping narrative experience, and the sense of discovery when you pick one of these up and press play is something very special and totally unique to video games. The incredibly detailed, spooky environments (and their freaky inhabitants) will send chills down your spine, and the twist ending is one of the most infamous in gaming history. But to entice you for now, check out the game’s equally amazing opening above.
Now we’ll take a look at a game that is interactive cinema at its purest. Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons’ premise is simple and sweet. Two brothers go on an adventure across a fantastical land to find the cure for their dying father. It’s a classic fairy tale yarn, but what’s revelatory here is the way you control the siblings: your left thumb controls big brother, your right thumb little brother. It’s a unique, extraordinary concept because the act of controlling both brothers at once informs the story in a brilliant way. The bond between these brothers is you. You can literally feel their connection in your hands, feel them working together, and feel the heartbreak when they’re separated. There’s no decipherable language in the game (the characters speak in garbled non-words), but the way the relationship between the brothers is communicated is no less moving than any movie relationship.
Sigh…this may be one of my favorite games of all time. It was an eye-opener for me, and a big part of the reason I made this list in the first place. For years, I always thought video games were an inferior storytelling medium. The acting sucked, the writing sucked…it just didn’t feel real. Naughty Dog’s The Last of Us feels really, really real, and it’s the first game, in my opinion, that made conversations between people in games look and feel as convincing as in the movies. Set across various locales in a United States that’s been decimated by a deadly fungus that turns its hosts into cannibalistic psychopaths (mushroom zombies, kinda), you play as Joel (Troy Baker), a forlorn survivor who’s been tasked with escorting a teenage girl who’s immune to the fungi, Ellie (Ashley Johnson), across the country to a mysterious group called The Fireflies. It’s a familiar story in its broad strokes, but what’s special are the little exchanges between Joel and Ellie as they trek through the small towns and cities that have been reclaimed by nature in the wake of the outbreak. Lots of games have told great stories on a grand scale, but The Last of Us is the first to get the small things–knowing glances, uncomfortable silences, genuine laughter–absolutely right.
Before The Last of Us, developer Naughty Dog closed the gap between games and cinema with Uncharted, an action-adventure homage to films like Indiana Jones and Die Hard. You control Nathan Drake (Nolan North), a wise-ass, charming treasure hunter as he travels to exotic locales with his closest friends, beating up baddies and tracing the steps of historical figures like Sir Francis Drake and Lawrence of Arabia. Drake, unlike the tight-lipped video game heroes before him, can’t stop yapping, yelling things like, “OH CRAAAP!” as he leaps across impossible chasms, making the gameplay experience more immersive and engaging than ever before. Prior to Uncharted, no characters had ever been so expressive and lifelike in their movement and mannerisms, and the game signified a giant leap from video game hokeyness to something that approached Pixar’s level of CG mastery. You should play the whole series, but the best installment is Uncharted 2: Among Thieves.
While The Last of Us and Uncharted are direct descendants of genre cinema, Journey, by the talented people at Thatgamecompany, is an experience that doesn’t have a clear link to cinema, telling its story in a way that’s wholly unique. You assume control of a cloaked traveler drifting through a desolate desert with one goal: reach the shimmering mountaintop on the horizon. As you run, glide, and slide across the glistening sands on the way to your destination, you uncover bits of information about the backstory through visual cues and hieroglyphs that suggest you’re traversing the crumbled remains of something grander. While simplistic on many levels, the emotions Journey evokes are rich, deep, complex, and extremely moving. You’re gonna cry, and you might not know why. It’s a story not about thinking, but feeling, which is a virtue no matter the medium.
In Gone Home you play as a girl who, on a dark and stormy night, returns to the house she grew up in after traveling abroad, only to find her family missing. The entire game takes place in the house, with you searching through drawers and scanning shelves for clues as to where your family could be. It’s a frightening, paranoia-inducing experience that will rattle your soul and, with nothing more than a note on a table or a photo on the wall, trigger a waterfall of emotions. Each room is meticulously designed, and there’s a melancholy and tension to the game like I’ve never felt before. You’ll encounter no violence of any sort–no enemies to kill, no deadly traps to disarm–only riveting, interactive, environmental storytelling that can’t be replicated in any other medium and will haunt your dreams for many nights to come.
One of the most imaginative satires you’ll ever encounter, The Stanley Parable is a question within a question within a question, a glitch in the system that provokes thought, creeps you the hell out, and makes you laugh hysterically. It’s a more light-hearted affair than Gone Home, though it innovates and pushes the boundaries of narrative fiction in a similar way. You play as Stanley, a worker bee leading an existence of monotony, sitting at a computer all day where he’s told which buttons to hit and when to hit them. The game starts in earnest when you leave you computer and arrive at two open doors. The game’s narrator (Kevan Brighting, who narrates your every move) says, “he entered the door on his left”. Should you choose to contradict his statement and head through the door on your right…well, let’s just say surprising, delightful things begin to happen. With several endings and a branching format where your every decision changes the course of the story, The Stanley Parable is a revelation in design, and one of the most clever games ever written.
If there’s a godfather to artsy, minimalistic indie games like Journey and Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons, it’s Team Ico’s Shadow of the Colossus, one of the most beloved, influential games of all time. It’s a heartbreaking story of a young man who, to resurrect the love of his life, must slay sixteen colossi with the help of his trusty sword and steed. The game’s most stirring revelation comes when you realize, as you plunge your blade into your first colossus and watch the majestic, towering creature fall, that your heart is filled not with a sense of victory, but with deadening remorse and sorrow. These are innocent creatures; how much would you sacrifice to rejoin the one you love? The game’s painterly art style and fantastical setting are some of the most immaculate and timeless you’ll find in the medium, and as of yet, few games have approached Shadow of the Colossus‘ greatness. (One game that has is Colossus‘ spiritual predecessor, Ico, also by Team Ico, obviously.)
Indie games seem to be where developers have the most freedom to experiment with new ideas, but one of the most groundbreaking, riskiest games to ever be released was a king-sized sci-fi epic with dazzling visuals and endless possibilities. Bioware’s Mass Effect series is a trilogy of sprawling space adventures where decisions you make in the first game can effect the story all the way down to the final moments of the third game. You control what Shepard says in conversations with the various people and creatures you encounter, with each answer having a lasting impact on the story. The more choices you make, the more invested you are in the story. As commander Shepard, you and your eccentric squad of space explorers (which changes constantly from game to game) hunt down evil aliens, decide the fate of whole species, mine planets for resources, and even engage in a little romance, if you so choose. It feels like a blend of multiple classic sci-fi franchises, from Star Wars to Battlestar Galactica, and features a phenomenal cast including Martin Sheen, Seth Green, and Battlestar‘s Tricia Helfer and Michael Hogan. Mass Effect‘s scope is unprecedented, and the richness of its universe is something movies, with their short runtimes, can’t come close to achieving. Play all three games, but the best installment is Mass Effect 2.
If you love watching The Walking Dead on TV, and you love reading Robert Kirkman’s long-running comic book series, but you haven’t played Telltale’s video game version of the long-form zombie phenomenon, you’re missing out BIG-TIME. Taking place in the same universe as the comic books, the game sees you play as Lee Everett, a middle-aged man who travels with and protects a young girl named Clementine. The duo meet other survivors as they scavenge the zombie wasteland, and as the player you choose what Lee says in conversations, with the characters and plot evolving accordingly (the same core mechanic used in Mass Effect). Mimicking the same art style employed in the comic books (except with color), the game is incredibly well written, and the voice actors are similarly superb. Released in episodes and seasons like the TV series, The Walking Dead plays like an interactive hybrid of the comic book and the show, and the shocking finale is one of the most devastating moments in The Walking Dead history, across all three mediums.
Like other forms of cinematic experiences, video games have the ability to make us feel happy, sad, scared, confused, excited, exhausted, upset, enlightened, and even depressed, though it rarely happens in the same sitting. These wide range of emotions make The Novelist a delightful experience, not to mention a leap forward for indie narrative-driven gaming. Similar to Gone Home, the objective in The Novelist involves searching for clues in the confined space of a home. Our job is to help Dan, a writer struggling to finish his novel, make difficult life choices between achieving career goals, working to fix his declining marriage, or spending time with his lonely son. The catch? Each chapter entails collecting clues about the family and reading their thoughts then ends with you choosing only one character to help. The best you can do is make a decision that results in a compromise between two of the characters, but one will always be left disappointed. Such is life though, am I right?! Finding the right balance between accomplishing your own goals without pushing away loved ones is a universal conundrum everyone can relate to. Every decision that you make changes how the story unfolds, giving the game great replay value. Even though you’re making decisions for a fictitious family, the disappointments are heartbreaking and the unselfish compromises feel rewarding, driving a surprising amount of introspection about who you really are as a person. I never thought a game could make me a better person, but I’m pretty sure The Novelist has. [Dustin]
]]>With the help of the Internet, missing Comic-Con no longer means you miss out on all the sneak peeks and fun videos shown.
We’ve put a few of the essentials up so you can catch up all in one sitting. Of course there’s a few things that you can only see if you are there (Marvel hasn’t released the Avengers: Age of Ultron trailer), but this should tide you over for now.
In recent years the unthinkable has happened: zombies are finally mainstream. It wasn’t until the 1960s that zombies began to increase in popularity thanks to George A. Romero’s Night of the Living Dead, but they’ve always been on the sidelines of pop culture. Now, with The Walking Dead becoming one of TV’s highest-rated shows, and World War Z making over half a billion dollars worldwide, we can safely say that zombies are “in” right now.
Director Alexandre O. Philippe (The People vs. George Lucas), a self-professed zombie fan since age 6, realized that no one has made a definitive documentary about the zombie. Now Philippe has changed that with his new film Doc of the Dead, a fun documentary exploring the history of zombie culture along with how popular the undead have become today. Philippe interviews people like George A. Romero, Simon Pegg, Bruce Campbell, Tom Savini, and many more, including “zombie scholars.” The film serves as a light, breezy crash course in zombie history while simultaneously exploring all the various ways zombies have embedded themselves into pop culture.
Doc of the Dead screened earlier this year at Hot Docs 2014, and Alexandre O. Philippe was kind enough to sit down with us and discuss his film. For US readers, you can currently see Doc of the Dead right now on Netflix Instant, Amazon Prime, or Epix HD. Canadian audiences will be lucky enough to catch Doc of the Dead on the big screen though, as it will begin to make its way across Cineplex theatres in Canada starting July 11th. See all dates and locations HERE and be sure to read our full interview below!
I’m not aware of any documentaries other than yours that try to make a definitive film about zombies. What made you decide to tackle this subject matter?
I do a lot of pop culture oriented documentaries, so I always try to keep my finger on the pulse of pop culture and trends, what’s happening right now, what’s hot. A few years ago zombies were starting to get into the mainstream in a really big way and I really set out to explore why it’s happening now. I also happen to be a horror fan. I’ve been watching zombie movies since I was 6 years old, so it seemed like a perfect fit.
How long did it take you to make the film?
Two years. I had the idea initially 5 years ago but I was finishing People vs George Lucas and I had committed to The Life and Times of Paul the Psychic Octopus, so really I didn’t get to start until 2 years ago. It turned out to be a really good thing because I was able to catch the wave of The Walking Dead becoming so popular, along with World War Z coming out in theatres. So now I think it’s the perfect time to release a zombie doc.
With this and People vs George Lucas you seem to be making documentaries some would describe as “geeky” or “nerdy.” Are you naturally attracted to these kinds of topics?
Yes, I’m naturally a geek if that’s your question [Laughs]. I’m proud of it. I’m really fascinated by pop culture. I think it’s an extremely important cultural aspect to study and take seriously because it’s fun, and it brings people together. There’s a lot we can learn from pop culture in terms of who we are. When 2 billion people download “Gangnam Style” on YouTube you can’t call it trivial. You have to look at it and say “What is it about this thing that people are so crazy about?” It’s just as valid as some of the heavier or darker topics in other documentaries. That’s why I do it.
Your film covers a lot of ground with such a short runtime. You zip through a lot of information in a very accessible way. How do you structure your film and decide on what to cover?
We had to look at the milestones of zombie culture, the milestones that are part of the answer to the question “Why are zombies so popular today?” This is the way pop culture works. You have several milestones, and then you have a tipping point. All these milestones pile up and they lead to that moment where suddenly it goes from fringe culture to mainstream. This is exactly what happened with zombies.
What are the milestones? Obviously 1968 because of Night of the Living Dead and the other Romero movies coming out after that. Return of the Living Dead because the idea of zombies eating brains comes from that. The Walking Dead was probably the tipping point, as well as World War Z being the first huge Hollywood zombie movie. It’s the first PG-13 huge zombie movie. That’s a game changer. Whether you like it or not it changed everything for zombies.
Did you have any difficulties deciding what areas of zombie films you couldn’t include in the film?
I had to make some really tough decisions in terms of what to include and exclude. People have asked me “Why didn’t you include Lucio Fulci?” or “Why didn’t you include Nazi Zombies?” or whatever. The problem is that if you start getting into that you’re going to have a five hour film. I had to take the shortest route to get to the point of zombie culture. Zombie walks, zombie car washes, zombie runs, all of that stuff right now.
You have a lot of interviews with big names in zombie culture. Was there anyone you really wanted to include but couldn’t?
To be honest I think we got all the important ones. The one I was hoping to get was Danny Boyle, but I knew we wouldn’t get him because he doesn’t think he’s made a zombie movie. So if you approach him saying you’re making a documentary about zombie movies he’s not going to talk to you. I’m not entirely surprised we didn’t get him, but [I think] he made a zombie movie. Sorry Danny! [Laughs]
You dedicate some time to the debate between fast and slow zombies in your film. Where do you stand on fast and slow zombies?
I tend to be very inclusive. There is no one definition of the zombie. I would actually argue that Invasion of the Body Snatchers is actually a form of zombie movie. I’m not talking about the modern flesh-eating zombie we know from Romero’s movies. To me the zombie is the idea that you’re looking at someone you used to know who no longer is capable of thought or emotion. Heck, the Borgs in Star Trek are a form of zombie. I enjoy them all if they’re done well.
Was there anything in your research that surprised you?
When we found out that there’s a clause in the Haitian penal code stating that turning people into zombies is prohibited by law. It’s pretty freaky stuff. When we interviewed Max Beauvoir, who is essentially the Pope of Voodoo in Haiti, he talks about zombification as if it’s just something they do. It’s a spiritual thing is what he says. If that’s not evidence that zombification exists, then what is? It’s pretty freaky stuff.
You let your interview subjects speak a lot on what they personally find fascinating about zombies, so I wanted to ask you the same thing. What is it about zombies that resonates with you?
The obvious answer is that I’m a horror fan and it gives me thrills. Besides that, I think the zombie is really interesting because they’re us and, in that sense, a blank slate. You can project anything you want [on them]. You can think of any theme and use zombies as a story to express that theme. That’s what’s really exciting. I think they’re much more versatile as a movie monster than vampires and werewolves. I think that’s what the world is waking up to right now, their versatility. And I don’t think we’re seeing the end of it, either. Not by a long shot.