Movie Night: Pacific Rim

Kaiju. Jaegers. Badassery.

AKA "Charlie Hunnam Should Never Open his Mouth Again"

Hollywood doesn't make enough monster movies. This is a fact. (That I substantiate on my own.) So when word broke that Guillermo Del Toro was directing a large-scale blockbuster with giant robots facing off against giant creatures, there was a shriek of glee from nerdom. And there was a shriek of glee from my seat the first time I saw a Jaeger (robot) throw down with a Kaiju (monster). Without being melodramatic, it was EPIC.

It's also pretty. So pretty. It's like watching a live-action Gundam Wing/Godzilla mash-up with the highest quality of special effects. Del Toro's creature design, while maintaining an extremely similar style to past flicks, stands out and delivers extraordinarily well against the city-scape backdrops. (This movie gives me unimaginable hope for what a modern Godzilla flick could accomplish.)

Any action sequence was extraordinarily well crafted and never lacked for interesting twists or turns. Two-on-one's, energy weapons, swords (whether attached to the Jaeger or held in hand as a boat is), flying Kaiju, and so many other little tweaks make each fight exciting and unique. And effing awesome. Let's not forget that.

Pacific Rim succeeds so often in its breath-taking fight scenes that its shortcomings are nearly forgivable Unfortunately, the majority of the acting is so piss-poor that it can't help but detract from your experience. Charlie Hunnam, a cross between Channing Tatum and Liam Hemsworth (both of whom are profoundly better actors, relatively) emotes on the lowest level possible. I've seen characters in Mario Kart that exhibit emotion better than he does. Every time he uttered a word during a fight scene I found my rage bar filling up. JUST STOP GIVING HIM LINES!

"Okay Charlie. In this scene, I'm going to need you to act LIKE A FUCKING HUMAN BEING."

Rinko Kikuchi plays his eventual partner/love interest/friends with benefits, bringing all the skill of an awkward anime girl. Seriously, sometimes I thought her eyes were going to balloon up and fake cartoon tears were going to appear. It's too stereotypical a performance, much like early Godzilla flicks where the ladies were... not taken too seriously. And the cast is rounded out by typical appearances from "the douchebag that doesn't trust our hero," and "Russians who like to hit things" and "Asians whose robot designs should be obviously the best but somehow can't last five minutes."

The acting isn't all terrible, mind you. Idris Elba does his thang and does it well. Charlie Day is welcome as the neurotic Dr. Newton Geiszler. Ron Perlman showed up to play off Day and be Ron Perlman. And there was much rejoicing. It's really too bad Elba had to act in all these scenes opposite dreck.

Still, with all the gripes and numerous poor performances, the buck could be passed upward. The dialogue is mediocre at best. (Can we stop using "We/I/You got this!" six times a movie?) Del Toro was probably too concerned with his precious Kaiju to stop and shoot a scene more than once. (Because there's no way I let some of these line readings go in my finished cut.) So he has to share blame for some of the sharp drop in quality.

The Sentencing:

If you're used to monster movies like I am, you'll understand and forgive the bad dialogue. (Even though it was way worse than any monster movie I've seen. It was THAT F*CKING BAD.) You'll instead focus on the unbridled violence on-screen as someone plays with their toy collection in front of you. At least half of Pacific Rim is the greatest monster movie you've ever seen. And that was good enough for me.

Judge Nerdd has spoken! I AM DA LAW!

Judge Nerdd: Reactions to Man of Steel Upset Me

Upon my exit of a midnight showing of Man of Steel, I couldn't help my delight. After five prior efforts, I finally got to see a Superman movie that legitimately put his super-powers on display. He heat-visioned, super-punched, and zipped across the screen in flashes of red and blue. I enjoyed Man of Steel. I truly did. And the main reason for my enjoyment is that it feels much more like a Sci-Fi movie than it does a four-color superhero one. Because that Supes movie has been done. Five times. And the last one flopped terribly, despite its charms. But before you think a Judge Nerdd sentencing is coming on, it isn't. This isn't a review. I’ve decided that I probably don’t want to write my opinions on nerd flicks for free. Because unless someone gives enough of a crap that they pay me to do it, putting up with the negativity that exists on the ole’ Internet isn’t worth the trouble. And in the days following Man of Steel’s release, I’ve witnessed negativity in true nerd-herd fashion.

"They do move in herds."

What annoys me terribly about the complaints I’ve seen regarding Man of Steel is that they’re from the same people who vent over Superman’s utterly bland personality and repetitive stories or have never actually read a Superman comic in their life. And I’m part of the prior. He’s boring. Always has been. It’s why I don’t buy any monthly Superman series and instead read what my dad picks up. (Which is still everything, bless him. He’s attached to Supes like I am to Spidey.) Superman is essentially Captain America without any life-or-death stakes whatsoever. They have to invent ways for him to be hurt, otherwise you’re stuck facing him with bad guys he can’t lay his fingers on. (Hey Lex.) This is why making a movie based on the most powerful being in the universe is such a hassle. 

So David Goyer dutifully makes an attempt to make this character not SUCK, and everyone has to rip him for it, as nerds are wont to do. Everyone bent themselves over and allowed The Dark Knight series to happen, even though that representation of Batman hardly mirrors the comic book. (Batman don't take eight years off, yo. And despite every supporting character's claim that he was married to his job, his decisions clearly spoke otherwise.) But guess what? That's what happens when you adapt a character like that to film. You make some alterations that make for a more interesting two hours and twenty minutes, as opposed to figuring out how to piecemeal exact and precise aspects of a lengthy print history.

What’s difficult to ignore is the sheer disdain people have for “choices” the director/writer makes. I know YOU wouldn’t write Zod as a soldier whose only driving force is the protection of his race. You’d make him a complex, emotional character who was torn apart by the fact that Kal-El IS a Kryptonian, but one that just murdered his own race. Zod would also have lost his mother at an early age to a terrible biking accident. And he’d also wear a sunflower necklace signaling his love of things that grow. He’d still have heat vision and super strength, because well, duh. Otherwise how is Supes gonna fight him? Oh, and you’d give him an hour of screen time all to himself for those necessary soliloquies. 

But guess what? YOU didn’t write this movie. Someone else got paid a crap-load of cash to pen this flick and this is what came of it. Just like someone in the 70’s wrote a terrible three issue arc of Superman where he battles wits with a chess prodigy. (Okay, maybe that wasn’t an actual plot, but it’s probably not too far off base.) Superman is a tremendously difficult character to make interesting, and he has the added dilemma of being an integral part of Americana. I give credit to Goyer for making an attempt at it, despite the always impending tongue-lashing. I’m honestly surprised ANYONE works on these movies. If there wasn’t a healthy pay-check involved, these flicks would be merely self-inflicted wounds on anyone of note that was involved. Because you know somewhere on the ‘net some a-hole is vehemently complaining that Lois Lane is a redhead in this movie. AS IF IT GODDAMN MATTERS. 

I love you Amy Adams. Pay these nincompoops no mind.

***SPOIL ZONE***

A metric ton of the arguments against Man of Steel stem from its conclusion, where Kal is forced to kill General Zod. After the destruction of his people, Zod has no other purpose than to now obliterate the people of Earth. Superman is forced to make a terrible choice in order to save the inhabitants of his adopted home-world. I don't have a problem with this ending in the slightest. 

If we actually analyze the character arc of a being that was still figuring out his true power level as well as the level of his own humanity, don’t you think he would accidentally/deliberately killed someone in his formative stages? (Which this Superman clearly is in when he decides to snap Zod’s neck.) Yeah, because his waiting 60 years to decide to kill someone makes a LOT more sense. It happened in the comic books people. Superman executed some perps. Deal with it. I’d much rather see him come to terms with his decision in the next movie and struggle to deal with his exponentially increasing power. Instead of all the teachings from his father (who isn’t actually his father), what if THAT moment of killing Zod is the traumatic experience that leads him to never kill again? Isn’t that a way more interesting character? Instead of just saying "Superman doesn't kill" and leaving it at that?

Oh, and sorry if his sorrow and post-death-dealing rage wasn’t dragged out enough for you, but would audiences have set records buying tickets for a 3 hour Superman flick? Nope. And even if you saw that version, you’d complain that there was too much “mopey Superman.” That’s a Kobayashi Maru if I’ve ever heard of one.

This story had to be told in one movie, because who knows if we’ll get another one? If you think the original Christopher Reeve Superman is perfect (and I see the argument), then WATCH THAT ONE OVER AND OVER AGAIN UNTIL YOUR EYES BLEED. That production was a perfect storm of qualities that can almost never be recreated. Man of Steel is supposed to different. It's supposed to take chances.Superman Returns flopped, and it was a near perfect translation of the Christopher Reeve/Richard Donner universe. (Super-kid aside.) It failed because we need to see Superman punch things on-screen and because the Donner universe made sense for film-making in the 70’s. The casual audience in 2013 don’t cotton to that family-friendly shit. So guess what? The studio took your opinion (evidenced by Dark Knight box-office totals) and flipped the switch on Supes for his latest on-screen iteration.

The studios have to make a movie that people will actually PAY TO SEE. God forbid that interferes with 75 years of a stale character’s development and continuity. I swear, I’d have an aneurysm if I got as worked up as some of you guys over comic book movies. We should feel lucky we even got another Superman movie after the way the last one performed. As far as superhero flicks go, there are some egregious offenders out there (Catwoman anyone?), but Man of Steel isn't one of them. The effects are top-notch, the dialogue isn’t clunky, the acting is solid (Cavill is excellent), and there aren’t gaping plot holes. Which makes it, by default, better than 70% of superhero flicks. Man of Steel isn’t terrible. YOU ‘RE terrible at making a coherent point without overtly exaggerating. (Also: your mom’s terrible.) 

I do understand that Metropolis' epic level of destruction is certainly over-the-top. I thank Zack Snyder for that one. But honestly, I loved it. We don't get to see anything like that in these movies. Even the buildings in The Avengers had it easy compared to MoS. It was a slug-fest between two outrageously powerful beings. It's just cooler if it happens in the middle of a city. If you guys want epic realism, don't watch comic book movies. (You'd think you'd know that by now.)

So my question really ends up being this: if everyone hated Superman Returns and everyone hates Man of Steel, what Superman flick would everyone NOT hate?

Oh, I know. The one that’s not about Superman.

I’m sorry to you upset fanboys/girls that can’t handle your shit when talking about MoS (or any other comic movie, for that matter), but you’re forgetting a real important point:

THESE MOVIES AREN’T JUST FOR YOU.

And know what else?

THEY NEVER WERE.

Almost no studio makes a film that is intended to appeal to ONE type of audience. Are there dumb action flicks that mostly appeal to guys? Totally. But those make a crap-ton of money and therefore keep being produced. But releasing a comic flick isn’t a license to print money yet. (Hi Green Lantern.) You have to hire a decent director. You must assemble a legitimate ensemble cast, otherwise Fandral fans are going to be up in arms. (Not that it stops them anyway.) Funds are drained in post-production on the special effects.

Because 75 minutes of flaming skull ain't cheap.

Money is poured into marketing so that nerds aren’t the only subset of the movie-going populace that knows about the film, because they won’t be enough to offset the $120 million budget. At this point you have a hella-expensive movie that needs butts in the seats. Making a Clark/Lois love-story deeply woven into a plot of intrigue, space exploration, and an examination of the human/Kryptonian psyche isn’t going to put said butts where they need to be. Especially if Superman doesn’t punch things into oblivion. And it doesn't even stop there!

Most nerds feel so entitled regarding their favorite character(s) that they actually are angered by a related film’s success. “Oh man, now everyone else likes him too.”

You’re an idiot. THAT”S THE BLOODY POINT. You know why fans of Booster Gold will never get a Booster Gold movie? Because he looks like a douche, is only mildly amusing, has barely any powers, and has a backstory that never comes to fruition. But the guy that created him? He thought Booster was the best. He wanted everyone to be a fan of his creation. He is disappointed that his intellectual property only rates as a mid-tier hero (at best) that can’t hold down an ongoing series, no matter how often DC pushes him.

But let’s get a little more personal with this example.

I love Spider-man. Anyone who has ever been in my bathroom knows this. (I’m not joking.) But I don't ever feel like I OWN Spider-man. (Even if I do.) When Spider-man 3 came out, I was a bit disappointed. It certainly hadn’t lived up to the previous installments. But I didn’t go on a ridiculously worded and inaccurate tirade about how TERRIBLE it was. At the time of its release, it was still a well above average superhero movie. It wasn’t Dolph Lundgren’s Punisher, for Odin’s sake. So I felt happy that at least I got another Spidey movie, even if it wasn’t THE BEST THING EVER. I always feel lucky that my favorite superhero is popular enough that he has an insane amount of merchandise for sale and has managed to be the focus of FOUR major studio releases (three of which are pretty damn good). Can you imagine if your favorite hero growing up was Speedball?

Good luck on getting that made into a pencil topper, much less a feature film.

I’m sorry if this sounds like I’m railing and ranting on everyone I know. But I am, for the most part. My sister (who is a true-blue Supes fan, obvious to anyone that’s been in our apartment) and I came away from Man of Steel with the same sentiments. Still, we find ourselves alone in a sea of criticism and bitchery. Can someone just throw me some Spidey arm-floaties? Is being a tad positive SO hard?

That's what I'm talking about!

I’m not writing this to incite a flame war or to talk down at anyone. All I want is for my friends to be able to actually enjoy these movies while they’re in vogue. I lived through about fifteen years where the only decent comic movies were Batman and Batman Returns. As for Spidey? Fuhgedaboudit. I had to rent the 70’s live action Spider-man TV specials if I didn’t want to watch a cartoon. Other than that it was a crap-shoot. And I didn’t even have to wait that long. I feel bad for my dad. That guy went forty years with only Superman I and Superman II to hang his Super-hat on. (Also that he had to wait a decade and a half to get the stank of Superman III AND Superman IV: The Quest for Peace out of his mouth. Now THOSE were bad movies.)

Worst of all, I actually feel bad for liking Man of Steel. I do. Because none of my “nerd friends” that have seen it have anything remotely positive to say about it. Am I a bad comic nerd because I can actually enjoy this movie and understand that the director made a few different choices? Should I feel bad for being more easily entertained than my brethren? If your answers to those questions are “yes,” then so be it. A comic nerd I am no longer. I’d rather get out of that group before I too turn into a cynical jerk that sees everything as shit. I like being entertained. It makes me happy. I’m sorry none of you can enjoy these movies for what they are: fun.

Now if you’ll excuse me… I’m going to try and figure out how to not be a comic nerd while maintaining a room like this:

Judge Nerdd OUT.

Movie Night: The Dark Knight Returns: Part I & II

Does it live up to the legacy of its graphic predecessor?

When I originally saw the preview for The Dark Knight Returns animated movie, I was wrought with nerdish emotion. I've been impressed with the DC animated offerings thus far, but none of them (aside from Batman: Year One) have tackled a storyline so revered. But unlike prior entries in the series, DC didn't force this story-line into one 75 minute movie, instead opting for two parts, amounting to one 150 minute saga.

After releasing Part One in November, DC finally got Part Two out in early February, letting us view the longest animated comic epic ever. (I think. Someone can check me on this one if they want to spend the time on it.) Per usual with these animated flicks, my dad and I sat down to watch Part Two over the weekend and came away overly contented.

I won't go into the whole plotline (because you should just read the damn book like a good nerd), but The Dark Knight Returns follows the story of a retired Bruce Wayne/Batman, who's in his later years. When he is confronted with the rising gang called the Mutants, he decides he can no longer sit idly by and watch as innocents suffer. He once again dons the cape and cowl and begins to clash with foes both new and old. In it's physical form, this story is regarded as one of the greatest graphic novels of all-time and one of the significant factors in Batman's transition from the cartoony nature that inspired the Adam West show to the dark and grim version that accounts for Christoper Nolan's The Dark Knight Trilogy.

I was pleasantly surprised with how much made it into the final cuts of both films. I may not be bombarded with the on-air "news" segments as I am in the comic, but there are still plenty to go around. Bruno still walks around with swastikas painted on her exposed (and probably plastic) chesty bits. The Mutants still talk with weird syntax and sentence structure. We've still got Ronald Reagan as President. So it's nearly identical to the book you've already read.

Try looking at this as a kid. So messed up.

There are a few differences here and there, but nothing of extraordinary note. For example, Joker's return to crime during his talk show appearance comes under differing circumstances. There is no female doctor accompanying him and Dr. Wolper onstage, so he doesn't end up kissing her with his poisoned lipstick and driving her insane as she raves about sex. (Something I assume was edited to maintain a PG-13 rating) Instead, he gashes Dr. Wolper across the throat with a broken mug handle. While the change may not deliver disturbances on as many levels, it's highly effective nonetheless. But as there are so few alterations of this kind I have to tip my hat to DC for staying as true as possible while attempting to reach such a wide audience.

The assemblage of voice talent for The Dark Knight Returns is most impressive. Peter Weller (Robocop) stars as the aged caped crusader, giving him a threatening ambiance that almost no other voice could bring. It's his performance that anchors the movie. Ariel Winter (Modern Family) plays the young and talented Robin/Carrie Kelley. Her exuberance throughout plays as a great contrast to her grizzled super-boss. Mark Valley (Hard Target, Boston Legal) is featured in Part Two as Superman, who is now essentially an agent of the United States government. Michael Emerson (Lost) appears as a Joker that seemed to lose a bit of his creepiness in translation from the page. The bigger moments were there, but I have issues any time the Joker sounds "normal."

Maria Canals-Barrera (you'll know her as Hawkgirl from the Justice League series) steps in as Commissioner Gordon's replacement, Ellen Yindel. She sounds just as bad-ass as she ever did. Michael McKean (the Christopher Guest flicks) plays Dr. Bartholomew Wolper, which makes me tremendously happy. A - He's working. B - He's great. Even Conan O'Brien pops in for Part II as talk show host Dave Endochrine, in about as perfect a casting as you can find. It's this thoughtful attention and creativity to filling these roles from Casting Director Andrea Romano that makes her one of the best in the business.

And as we've come to expect from DC Animation, The Dark Knight Returns features an art style that is very much in line with the original comic series, which in this case means the illustrations of Frank Miller. Batman has a hulkish form to him, lumbering across the screen when he's not flying around it during action sequences. The art direction is dead-on, perfectly adapting this 80's masterpiece for a new medium.

The Verdict:

From start to finish, The Dark Knight Returns Part I and Part II form an animated epic of truly wondrous proportions. Fans of the original series will not be disappointed in the slightest, while newcomers will find themselves entrenched in this gritty feature. I can't wait to watch them again.

Nerdd judgement rendered! I AM DA LAW!

Judge Nerdd: Spinning Off Star Wars

Who puts the "star" in Star Wars?

On CNBC, Disney Chairman Bog Iger confirmed what the interwebs has been buzzing about for some time: 

In addition to Episodes 7,8,& 9 (which will start in 2015), Disney will be drafting entirely new stand-alone films based on "great Star Wars characters that are not part of the overall saga." 

So the question is immediately asked: which characters?

Ain't It Cool News first reported that Yoda could be among the characters to get his own story.

Then Entertainment Weekly broke the story that Boba Fett and a young Han Solo are the candidates for their own flicks.

It's time for Judge Nerdd to weigh in. 

Yoda

Look, as much as Lucas tried to make Yoda the ultimate badass in Episode II: Attack of the Shitstorm, I'm not watching him butcher through sentence structure for an entire movie.

Boba Fett

Now we're talking! How better to take the Star Wars saga to a "dark and gritty" place than with the bounty hunter with all the hype in the world and about eight minutes of total screen time! (Maybe now we'd be able to justify our rampant love of the Fettster.)

Han Solo

This one makes the most amount of sense. Cast a dashing young gent as Captain Solo (or maybe even before he got the Falcon and therefore isn't Captain) as he meets Chewbacca, Lando, Jabba the Hutt, and all sorts of colorful characters for the first time. Han obviously had countless crazy adventures as a "smuggler with a hear of gold" way before Luke and Obi-Wan stumbled into his cantina.

But what are we missing here?

How about any hint of a female presence.

What about some Mara Jade action? She could bridge a bit of the gap between flicks, depending on how long of a time frame we're talking about. She is wicked cool to boot.

For a movie universe light on strong female characters, these spin-off rumors are even more barren. Here's hoping that the actual trilogy comes to the sexism rescue. Otherwise, WTF Disney?

Judge Nerdd has spoken. I AM DA LAW!

Judge Nerdd: Prometheus

I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For.

We finally have another installment in the Alien universe. But was it worth the wait? In my several discussions with friends and contemporaries in my short time since seeing Ridley Scott's Prometheus at midnight, I keep going back to one word to describe the film: muddled. But before I run through all my criticisms, there are some clear positives.

Visually the film is stunning. I could even notice several parts where seeing it in 3-D would have been a desirable experience. Michael Fassbender is fantastic (as always) as the android David, who is the first of his kind. Noomi Rapace has chilling moments as Elizabeth Shaw, fighting her way through sequences that will likely leave you cringing or heartbroken for her. Idris Elba, as always, is too school for school as the ship's captain. Charlize Theron gets in on the fun as the corporate pitbull Vickers. And let's not forget Guy Pearce, who for some reason was cast as the old man Peter Weyland instead of an actual old man.

There are plenty of call-backs to the original flicks, ranging as far as the "We are leaving!" exclamation to the film's sign-off that is unabashedly the same as Alien. Some of them work seamlessly into the film while others feel contrived as a way to give Prometheus a similar aura. Scott caves (likely at the hands of the studio) into giving a sequel-teasing tag-on at the end of the flick. I cannot tell you how forced that scene felt to me. It went on for WAY too long and was utterly unnecessary. And now the evolution of the xenomorph makes no sense to me.

***Now for the questions to which I'd like answers. If you haven't seen it, avoid this next paragraph. I'm gonna spoil the crap out of some parts.***

SPOIL ZONE

How the hell does PILOT Idris Elba know what everything is before all the SCIENTISTS do? After racing back to the ship, Elba's Janek walks right into a room with our main character and spells out everything there is to know about the ruins and its contents with little explanation as to how he possibly came into this knowledge. So it's a biological weapon? And they wanted to send it to Earth? But it turned on them so they buried it here? Uh... okay. 'Cause you shouldn't really know any of that.

That wasn't the only odd character development we saw either. Don't ask me why Noomi was willing to go along with the recently revealed old man (who clearly has an "evil" vibe) just for the sake of seeing this new life form. Whether she was "seeking answers" or not, I feel like she should have sat that out. (Not to mention she probably would have needed to, judging from the fact that she just had major surgery. But it's the future. Whatever.) And speaking of David, why DID he poison Holloway? I can only assume it's because they wanted a quick way to figure out what the black goop was, but that was extraordinarily unexplained.

And why does the Engineer have to get right up out of bed and start killing everything? It seemed like such a convenient horror movie cliche to depend on in order to get the action ramped up. Was that Engineer not in the least curious or willing to speak to his genetic kin once they proved capable of speaking in his language? No? He'd rather just take the black ooze and fly it to Earth? Sure.

It's obvious that that planet was not LV-426 and that was not the ship that the Nostromo discovers on their fateful trip. And the alien showcased at the end of the flick is not the final iteration of the Xenomorph that we saw in the previous installments. So it's very clearly a series of movies being planned. Now instead of one film, I need three to get me to where Alien picks up? Somehow that alien needs to be taken off the planet by another Engineer's ship which then has to crash land on LV-426. Hey 20th Century Fox, I know how your final movie needs to end. Do you wanna pay me to write it?

SPOIL ZONE ENDED

THE VERDICT

Ultimately, Prometheus is probably a solid movie, apart from the (sometimes major) plot gaps. It looks gorgeous, has a eerie feel to it, and has a tremendous cast of actors that fill their roles to the best of their ability. However, the movie gets bogged down and falls short of its own lofty expectations, which are heavily tied to the franchise of which it is now a part. I'm sorry, but I can't treat it as a standalone entry. It takes too many nonsensical jumps in plot and character motivation to be a great movie and is weighed down by its desire to be approachable by the non-Alien crowd while satiating the hardcore fans.

Am I being too hard on Prometheus? Probably. Do I feel bad about it? Not really. It should have been better. For someone who is deeply entrenched in the Alien lore and mythos, I came away from Prometheus sorely disappointed. I find it to be an amazing achievement that Scott gets lost up the ass of his own mythology. If you can get past those connections (or don't care about them), then I would recommend the theater trip. 


Nerdd judgement rendered! I AM THE LAW!

Judge Nerdd: Dragon Age: Redemption

A red-headed Elf? Hot.

Anyone who knows me relatively well knows my love of all things Dragon Age as well as staring at Felicia Day in any media format. When Bioware decided to bring Day into the Dragon Age world via an original web-series, I just about went insane with nerdy-glee. Felicia Day as an Elf-assassin? YES PLEASE!

After months of waiting, the first episode of Dragon Age: Redemption has finally arrived, timed to release with the Mark of the Assassin DLC for Dragon Age II, in which Day's character Tallis is also prominently featured. As a Elf enslaved by the Qunari, a race of grey giants, Tallis is sent on a mission to recover a mage (a magically endowed individual, for those of you who don't speak RPG), a dangerous and exploitable commodity in the Dragon Age realm. She runs into a loud-mouthed warrior and a good-lookin' Templar (mage hunter, employed by the church) and the plot thickens...



First of all, Redemption has a well-rounded cast for a low-budget web-series, but it still looks like a low-budget web-series. It has its qualities, but the camera-work needs well, work. They still take too long drawing focus on the simple stunts that they think are going to look impressive. When you give us time to look at a mediocre or non-involved stunt, we can recognize it as such.

With long-time hard-ass Greg Collins as the axe-wielding Brom and Doug Jones (of Pans Labyrinth/Silver Surfer/Abe Sapien fame) as the Qunari mage Saarebas, I've at least SEEN the actors before. The sets and costumes are fitting enough for the Dragon Age setting and experience, but aren't overly impressive on anyone besides Day. (Who looks really hot in it, by the way.) I'm also not sure how I feel about the Qunari's look at this point. As far as the weaponry goes, I wasn't buying it. Brom's axe looked incredibly fake and the CG-work on the blood... looked like a video game. The fight choreography is well-executed, but not every actor looks at ease with their equipment. (Looking at you Adam Rayner.)

After only one episode, I'm very mixed on Redemption. I really enjoy Felicia Day's work, but she could be a little looser and more creative with character choices. Still, she's the strong point of a series that hasn't really hit the ground running. It surely has time to recover, but it needs to quickly distinguish itself from fan-made films.

Judge Nerdd has spoken. I AM THE LAW!