Tag Archives: The Twilight Zone

I gotta explain the situation in my drawers.

I habitually break my reading glasses by either stepping or sitting on them.  So I stocked up on a bunch of cheap pairs at the start of the Covid pandemic, because I am totally not down with any of that “Time Enough At Last” horseshit.

I even fell into the habit of tossing the broken pairs into the same drawer, in hoarder-like fashion.  (Am I supposed to repair them someday, maybe?  Glasses repair is not really a thing with me.)

Anyway, that drawer has reached the point where I look like a serial killer who bludgeons nerdy, frugal, fashion-blind men over the head and then takes their glasses as trophies — like some pathetic riff on the alien “Predator” (1987).

I need to leave a note in that drawer to exonerate myself to the police — in case I die in my sleep or something.



burg

A friend of mine wrote me a “Twilight Zone” intro and I love it.

His name is J. Sebastian Cunningham and he is a damn fine satirist.  This still cracks me up every time I read it.  (The James Woods reference is a nod to my resemblance to the actor.)  Thanks again, J.

What was old is now new again.

Enter a complex yet unassuming man.  One, well versed in word, both written and spoken.  A man followed modestly by a people hungry for prose.  A man that didn’t disappoint.  Enter the writer’s mind, if you will, into the dark recesses of a James Woodian insanity that no Shakespearean play could duplicate, let alone imitate.  Enter the mind of greatness and madness. Enter a mind living in…

The Twilight Zone.

 

the-twilight-zone

A few quick words on “Fractured” (2019)

“Fractured” (2019) is essentially a “Twilight Zone” episode presented as a feature-length film.  Like many movies of this type, it would be better suited to a 40-minute television script; it takes too long here to reach its denouement.  It suffers just a little because of that.

That isn’t to say it’s a bad film — it was pretty well executed, despite its unnecessary length, and the final minutes had me squirming.  It certainly held my interest, and I’d rate it a 7 out of 10.

Brad Anderson’s directing was quite good — this is a well visualized psychological horror film that capably builds tension with its unsettling angles and strange lighting.  Sam Worthington does very well in his lead role as a man who has his family admitted to a hospital emergency room, only to see them vanish altogether.  He’s upstaged just a bit by two actors in small supporting roles — the priceless Stephen Tobolowsky and the superb Adjoa Andoh as doctors at the mysterious hospital.

 

fractured-netflix-review

A few quick words on the premiere of “The Twilight Zone” (2019)

If the premiere is any indication, then Jordan Peele’s relaunch of “The Twilight Zone” (2019) looks to be quite decent.  It’s got Peele’s fingerprints all over it (he even serves as the narrator here), and that’s a very good thing.  I’d rate it an 8 out of 10.

This first episode, written by Alex Rubens and directed by Owen Harris, channels the same muse as Peele did with his outstanding “Get Out” (2017) — it’s got clever characters, snappy dialogue and gravely dark humor.  I suppose it’s impossible to gauge the quality of an anthology show by its initial episode, but I’m on board.

And one of the upcoming episodes is penned by Glen Morgan, of “The X-Files” fame.  I’d say that’s an auspicious sign too.

 

rs_1024x759-190221103529-1024x759.the-twilight-zone-jordan-peele-lp.22119_fit_inside_900_auto_output-quality_90

Subtracting Google+

Quick site update — if you happen to enjoy this here bloggity-type thing, and you’re following me on Google+, then please be aware that Google is shutting down that platform on April 2.  If you’re not a WordPress subscriber (and therefore can’t follow me in its newsfeed), then you can always just bookmark my site.  Or you can sign up for e-mail notifications with the button bottom left under the menu bar at this site.

Or, if it’s easier to follow me on social media, then you can find me on FacebookTwitter, Pinterest and LinkedIn.

Finally, my author’s page at Amazon.com is right here, and I also participate in the Goodreads Authors Program here.

I’m not really clear about why Google selected April 2 as a termination date for its social media platform.  (The 1st falls on a Monday.)  It occurs to me now that if they’d chosen April 1, then at least some people would think it was an April Fool’s Day joke.  (People see hoaxes and conspiraciese everywhere these days.)  I myself am looking forward to Jordan Peele’s reboot of “The Twilight Zone,” and that’s scheduled to debut on April 1.  But that show sounds too good to be true, and  at least part of me is suspicious that it’s all an elaborate April fool’s joke.

 

20161216_180500 (2)

A review of the “Black Mirror” episode, “Bandersnatch” (2019)

“Bandersnatch” is a difficult episode of Netflix’ “Black Mirror” to review — it isn’t really an “episode” or a “movie;” it’s more of an interactive online game that is reminiscent of the “Choose-Your-Own Adventure” young-adult books of the 1980’s.  (I believe they are actually name-checked in “Bandersnatch’s” main narrative, before it branches off into multiple stories.)  This main narrative follows a troubled young computer programmer (expertly played by Fionn Whitehead) as he begins to question his own reality while struggling with demons from his past.

From there, “Bandersnatch” unfolds according to the viewer’s choices.  (Netflix has configured the episode so that viewers control the protagonist simply by clicking options with their computer’s cursor.)  The meta-fictional twist here is that Whitehead’s protagonist is himself developing a groundbreaking multiple-choice style video game for his employer.  (The episode is set in 1984, when interactive games had not yet developed alongside arcade-style games.)  What follows is a seemingly indeterminate number of stories, with “Black Mirror’s” predictably disturbing surprises.

I’ve read that there are four “main endings” at which the show’s writer, Charlie Brooker, thinks most viewers will arrive.  There are supposedly a great number of other endings, as well — and the viewer can reverse the course of a narrative and follow a different path.  It’s all interesting stuff, even if it’s a little complicated.

So I’m not sure how to review it.  And I’m not sure I’m the best guy to offer such an opinion, as I am not the target audience for an experiment like this.  I’ve always been a “movie guy,” and not a “video game guy” — I’m the kind of milquetoast man that would rather be passively entertained by a story than involved, in real-time, in its creation.  I want a cohesive story with a clear denoument that was intended by the writer and director — not a mongrelized story that I helped come up with myself.  (Yes, I know that makes me sound like the precise opposite of cool and fun and creative, but I’m just being honest.)   I trust “Black Mirror” to knock my socks off with it’s storytelling — Brooker is a goddam genius, and this show is nothing less than the 21st Century’s “Twilight Zone.

I certainly liked “Bandersnatch.”  A key expository sequence in the first pathway I selected made me smile and laugh (due to the show’s intended black humor, of course).  I’d rate this viewing experience an 8 out of 10, for the fun I had with it.

But I do hope this is the only episode of its kind.  There are disadvantages that this experimental format probably cannot escape.  Pacing, plot structure and story cohesion all typically go right out the window after “rewinding” and story options are introduced.   I also had the compulsion, upon completing my first story arc, to return to the action and find an ending that was “correct” or possibly better.  And when my next narrative meandered, I wondered whether I was “doing it right.”  This lacked the cinematic quality that is characteristic of “Black Mirror” episodes, and ultimately felt like a video game.

I had another quibble too, and it’s admittedly a strange one.  Many elements of “Bandersnatch’s” 1980’s setting here are garish, bizarre or unpleasant.  (Some of the characters — particularly the father — were so off-putting that they made revisiting a story sequence almost irritating.)  I suppose that this was probably a deliberate choice by Brooker and by episode director David Slade — possibly to capture the vibe of the Philip K. Dick stories that are this episode’s obvious inspiration.  But I don’t think it was necessary to the plot.  Consider how different a story like this might be if it were filmed with the starkly beautiful visuals of the 2017 “Crocodile” episode directed by John Hillcoat.

Postscript — there was one metafictional twist that only I could enjoy.  And that’s a shame, because it was pretty neat.  When Will Poulter’s character here tells Whitehead’s that they’ve “met before,” that struck a chord with me personally — because Poulter, who has blond hair here, looks a lot like an old pal of mine from college.  That was weird.

 

maxresdefault-2-1-1068x601

A short review of “Bird Box” (2018)

Netflix’ “Bird Box” generally pleases — I’d rate it an 8 out of 10, and I’d recommend it to anyone looking for a creative and effective apocalyptic horror film.  A few reviewers call it a “high-concept” horror movie because of its MacGuffin — an invasion of otherworldly beings causes anyone who looks at them to hallucinate and become suicidally depressed.  (A handful of survivors escape the chaotic mass suicides because they are lucky enough not to lay eyes on the mysterious, mind-bending creatures which can become images of their victims’ worst fears.)

It’s a hell of a setup — it reminds many people of this year’s “A Quiet Place” and 2008’s unfairly maligned “The Happening.”  (Hey, I really liked that movie.)  For some reason, “Bird Box” reminded me of the 1985 “The Twilight Zone” episode, “Need to Know.”  (It’s a great ep.)  And the plot device pays off — “Bird Box” is genuinely unsettling, and the whole story comes across as a blackly inventive end-of-the-world tale.

Sandra Bullock is good here; supporting actors Sarah Paulson and John Malkovich are even better. (Malkovich is mesmerizing whenever he plays an intense or unpleasant character.)

The film suffers somewhat from puzzling pacing problems — sometimes the story appears to be unfolding too quickly, but by the end of the two-hour movie, it feels too long.  “Bird Box” was adapted from a structured 2014 novel by Josh Malerman; I strongly get the sense that it tries to squeeze too much of its source material into a the running time for a movie.  I honestly think I would have enjoyed it much more if its frightening plot device and interesting, well-played characters were explored in a mini-series.

There’s another disappointment too — we learn very little about the story’s antagonists, beyond one character’s hypothesis that they’re archetypal punishing figures from a number of the world’s religions.  I wanted to know more.

 

Bird_Box_poster

A short review of “Black Mirror” Season 3

“Black Mirror” (2011) remains the best science fiction show on television; I’d rate the six-episode third season a perfect 10.  The show continues to succeed at every level with its story concepts and their execution.  And I think it’s actually getting better.

It’s getting darker and harder hitting, too.  I’d guess that this season’s blackmailing-hackers episode (“Shut Up and Dance”) would be the one that the majority of viewers find the most disturbing.  For some reason, the man-vs.-monster story of “Men Against Fire” is the one that really got under my skin.

I was surprised to learn that nearly all of “Black Mirror’s” episodes are penned by series creator Charlie Brooker.  I’m still surprised at how many clever ideas and lean, smart scripts could spring from one writer.  I was so impressed that I looked Brooker up on Wikipedia — but was surprised to discover I’m unfamiliar with nearly all of his other work.  The one exception is “Dead Set” (2008) — the truly fantastic British zombie horror miniseries that I’ve been recommending to friends for ages.  That makes sense.

Anyway, I am fully and happily converted to “Black Mirror’s” cult following, and I enthusiastically recommend it to people who ask about it.  (The show’s popularity is still growing — I believe it appeals to the same kind of fans as those who flocked to the various iterations of “The Twilight Zone” and “The Outer Limits” of generations past.)  But I might actually suggest that newcomers begin with the second or third season, rather than the first.  Season 1 is terrific, but it’s three episodes are more subtle and thematic, while the latter seasons follow a more conventional story structure that might better appeal to more mainstream audiences.  (They have more satisfying twists and emotional payoffs, too.)

And a quick caveat — I’ll reiterate that this show is indeed dark.  There is a strictly human element to most of “Black Mirror’s” twists that is intended to surprise the viewer by provoking anxiety or dread.  For a show that relies on technological story devices, it succeeds even more with its old fashioned psychological horror.

 

1_m1

A very short review of “Coherence” (2013)

James Ward Byrkit wrote the screenplay for “Coherence” (2013), then filmed and directed it on a shoestring budget in his living room.  And the result is pretty impressive — this a trippy, unusual, and unusually cerebral science fiction thriller.  I’d rate it an 8 out of 10.

The movie portrays eight friends at a dinner party who find their sense of reality frighteningly altered after a comet flies overhead.  I really can’t write much more than that without spoilers — even this movie’s central story device is best arrived at as a surprise for the viewer.    I don’t even want to name which “science” serves as the basis for the “science fiction” here, as that would be a big hint as to what transpires.

It’s pretty good.  The thriller elements here are creepy.  And it’s a wonderfully intelligent “what-if?” story that other reviewers have compared to “The Twilight Zone” episodes.  (I myself … mostly kept up with it — I was sometimes a little murky about the strategies adopted by the group to address their predicament.)

The closing minutes are damned good.

I’d recommend this to sci-fi fans looking for a unique, dialogue-driven brain-buster.

Hey, just for fun, consider this — the refreshingly intelligent “Coherence” employs the exact same MacGuffin as one of the stupidest, overrated cult “classics” of all time — 1984’s “Night of the Comet.”

 

coherence-poster

A very short review of “10 Cloverfield Lane” (2016)

“10 Cloverfield Lane” (2016) is a capably written and well performed thriller; it might not be quite worth the high praise it seems to be receiving elsewhere, but I’d still give it an 8 out of 10.

Mary Elizabeth Winstead actually is terrific actress.  She has far more to do here than her one-note heroine in 2011’s underrated “The  Thing” prequel, and she performs beautifully.  John Goodman is perfect as a mentally ill, dubious savior.  John Gallagher, Jr. does just fine as a good-natured everyman in over his head.

I did think that “10 Cloverfield Lane” ran a little long for its content.  This could have easily been an especially well executed episode of a one-hour show like “The Outer Limits” or “The Twilight Zone.”  It’s feature-length format felt a little padded.  We don’t need the prologue explaining why Winstead’s character is traveling.  Nor do we need the movie’s slowly building character arc for Goodman’s “Howard.”  (We know to suspect his stability from the trailer.)

This appears to have very little to do with “Cloverfield” (2008).

 

10cl_poster (1)22