True Lies

There are a couple of Arnold Schwartzenegger movies that are often considered to be "the classics". These usually include Terminator Judgement Day, Total Recall, Predator, Commando, and of course, Jingle All the Way. And sometimes, True Lies is included in that.

Now I was never really exposed to Schwartzenegger films as a kid, partly because they were a little before my time, and my parents just didn't have the fandom of Schwartzenegger that I think others did. So now I'm in my twenties and I need to catch up. And like most of the films that I never saw, I come out of True Lies saying, WTF was that?

True Lies follows the story of international American spy Harry Tasker (played by Arnold Schwarzenegger). He works for a fictional spy agency called Omega Sector and is tracking an Islamic terrorist group before they obtain a nuclear weapon (all pre-911, True Lies was ahead of its time).

At the same time, Tasker is balancing his work with his family life as his wife Helen (played by Jaime Lee Curtis) and his daughter Dana (played by Eliza Duska) don't know the truth about what he does for a living.

The movie is essentially James Cameron's take at a James Bond movie with Schwarzenegger as the one man army spy. I guess it fell right in line with the one-man army video game-like movies I've been watching today like Extraction, but True Lies was... unique to say the least.

My biggest problem with this film is that there is a definite tonal disconnect. If you think James Cameron, Arnold Schwarzenegger, 90's action, you don't think of international spy Harry Tasker abusing the national security apparatus to spy on his wife who he believes is having an affair with Bill Paxton, but somehow that ended up being the film.

I get that Schwarzenegger had a range where he was involved in comedies like this, but this movie never really decides whether it wants me to take the movie seriously or not.

And I get it, the movie doesn't have to fully be one or the other. It didn't need to be Commando and it didn't need to be Austin Powers. But the movie has hints of both in it and I'm torn on how I really feel about that at the end of day.

It's impressive that I was both laughing and thinking how bad ass it was that Schwarzenegger was chasing down terrorists on a horse and both he and the terrorists take their mode of transportation up an elevator.

I might not just understand 90's action comedies the way I do 80's action comedies. Die Hard is an action movie but it definitely has comedy peppered in so you don't lose the entertaining tempo and the likability of John Mclane. Macgruber is comedy but has over the top action to spoof the action movies its satirizing. True Lies is right down the middle and I'm still not totally sure if I love it or think it's ridiculous.

I mean the great Charlton Heston has an amazing eye patch in this movie and it's played almost 100% seriously!

The movie also takes a pretty big detour about a half hour in. We spend the first half hour or so focusing on Tasker's job as a spy. Then suddenly for at least an hour, its just Tasker pulling spy hijinxs on his wife when he thinks she's having an affair. The main plot is put entirely on hold while Schwarzenegger abuses the national security apparatus and then we're expected to pick it up where it left off like Tasker hadn't spent the last hour just screwing with his wife with the power of the intelligence services of the United States.

True Lies is incredible because its just a time capsule of a time where Arnold Schwarzenegger could do whatever he wanted, James Cameron wasn't obsessed with submarines or blue aliens, and Middle Eastern terrorists were stereotypes that while still not used in a very correct way, had a very different connotation when they were used as the bad guys.

If it means anything, True Lies is the best Pierce Brosnan James Bond film starring Arnold Schwarzenegger and if you haven't checked it out, go into it with no expectations and just buckle in for the ride. I haven't even noted half of the crazy stuff that goes on in this movie, but it's definitely a Schwarzenegger classic for a reason.

But those are my thoughts on True Lies. What did you think? How does this movie hold up almost thirty years later? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie reviews as well as random ramblings and attempts at jokes on social media.

Thanks for reading!

Extraction

Netflix has a couple of types of original movie types that they seemed to have some success in over the past few years. One of those "types" is the fast paced military action films like Triple Frontier and Underground 6. Extraction seems to be apart of that new "type" push and I'm kind of all for it.

How I assume the idea of Extraction came about was the Russo brothers were sitting on set of The Avengers with Chris Hemsworth and their stunt coordinator Sam Hargrave. Hargrave was looking to get into directing, the Russo brothers had a gritty war movie they had written but were never actually going to make along with a deal with Netflix to produce a number of movies, and Chris Hemsworth had a free couple months to star. It's kind of obvious that that's how it ended up. I could be wrong, but it sounds right.

Extraction follows the story of Tyler Rake (played by Chris Hemsworth), a former Special Forces soldier turned mercenary. The group that he works for (which is basically black water without them actually saying that) is hired to rescue the son of an Indian gangster (played by Rudhraksh Jaiswai) after he was kidnapped by a rival gangster.

While Rake is able to rescue the boy pretty quickly in the film, the mission does not go according to plan and Rake and the boy are stranded in the middle of an expansive city in India with gangsters, child soldiers, and the Indian military gunning for them.

The first and foremost highlight of this film is the action.

When you've got all the high profile names attached to this film, I get the feeling that half the budget was put into making this one of the most intense and high paced action films on Netflix today and it really shows off. I think anybody who sees this movie is going to be talking about the chase scene in the first half of the film and how graphic and intense the action is.

I really have to foot stomp that chase sequence because they try to pull it off like its one shot. It definitely isn't and when you know that's what they're going for you can start to see where the scene cuts, but it doesn't make the cinematography pretty great when they're wiping the camera around in between cars and to different perspectives almost flawlessly. Again, it's not one shot, but they do a pretty good job at making you think it is for a little bit.

The action does bring up the point of setting expectations for this film. It is one of those films where the main character is a super human who spends around two hours just getting the crap kicked out of him and it takes about a billion bullets to take him down, if he ever goes down.

If you're looking for something really serious or Oscar worthy, you're not really gonna find it here.

The acting is fine and Hemsworth and Jaiswai play off each other pretty well, as well as the other characters. But it's an entertaining movie over being a really deep one.

My favorite headline about this film was "Thanks to Extraction, We Now Know How Many Children Chris Hemsworth Can Beat Up". That should give you every inkling of what kind of movie you're getting yourself into.

Couple other notes: I like the setting of Dhaka, India. Not sure if it was filmed on set, but the setting felt alive and it was fun seeing these action sequences going on while people are walking around the streets like its an expansive game of street fighter.

The movie overall feels like a video game I can't play where Chris Hemsworth is just mowing down hoards of bad guys like he's playing Call of Duty.

You may not really love this film just because you've probably seen some of these tropes before. Hemsworth is your stereotypical tortured sympathetic killer who does what he needs to do while still having a heart of gold.

The one thing I liked about the film was that there were a lot of characters that in a normal movie, they'd just be stereotypical bad guys. And that's not to say there aren't those kinds of characters, but there are a couple of characters who have their own motivations and therefore they aren't down right evil.

David Harbour has a small cameo in this film and even though he's probably on screen for a max of 5 minutes, I still really liked him because they laid out what his motivations were and why he's in the movie.

There's already talks about a sequel for this film and some people are comparing it, especially due to its action to the John Wick movies. High paced action following a likable stoic bad ass with his own unique world.

The bottom line is, I enjoyed Extraction. It's by no means brilliant, but I definitely enjoyed the film and would watch a sequel.

The movie has tropes that it follows to create a bad ass military action movie but at the same time it has the right people who know how to put in just the right amount of effort into the film to make it something that I enjoyed.

If you're looking for a high paced, well choreographed and shot film, with just enough action, character, and a decent story to get your through, I think you'll enjoy Extraction. It's not gonna be your favorite film of the year, but it's still a fun one.

But those are my thoughts on Extraction. To say it's a little ridiculous is an understatement because this movie is batshit insane and I kind of love it. Comment and Discuss below on what you thought of it. You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks for reading!

The Lovebirds

So I know things slowed down this month. There were a couple of reasons for that. One reason was just that I was watching more TV shows and as you might know, that takes me a little more time to get out. I also had some work stuff that I needed to focus on, but I wanted to knock this movie out because it does signify some of the movies that are going to be coming out this year, the ones that would have come out in theaters but instead are released straight to streaming platforms due to the pandemic. On a side note, there are a lot of good movies and shorter series that have come to Netflix during the pandemic and I'm hoping that I can start knocking some of those things off my list sooner or later so stay tuned.

I saw the trailer for The Lovebirds and while it wasn't a movie that I was wildly excited for, I do like Kumail Nanjiani and I thought the movie would be fun to either check out in theaters with friends (that obviously did not happen) or it would be good to check out when it came to Netflix (which is definitely what happened).

The Lovebirds is not really a new concept. It's the story of the struggling couple going through a life or death scenario in a comedic fashion and finding out what they truly love about each other. You've seen it in the Steve Carrell/Tina Fey movie Date Night in 2010, Game Night was a spin on this. Usually it takes place over the course of a night for some reason. And The Lovebirds is very similar.

The story follows Jibran (played by Kumail Nanjiani) and Leilani (played by Issa Rae). The story mainly takes place four years into their relationship as they are consistently fighting and trying to figure out why they are in this relationship. Just as they decide it might not be working for them, they witness a murder by chance and believe that they are the primary suspects. They go on the run and decide the best way for them to clear their names and avoid going to jail is if they investigate the person who was killed. This leads them on a scavenger hunt of clues involving a massive conspiracy and introducing them to wacky characters.

If you've seen the trailer, you know exactly what happens in the beginning to start the whole narrative off. In the trailer, its cut together very well where Nanjiani and Rae's comedy is played off very well.

In the actual film though, the scene where they witness the murder is actually a lot more serious than I initially expected and while the two leads are trying to bright up the scene so you're laughing, it's not quite enough to get things rolling, and I think that's probably one of the criticisms I have of the film, the leads.

I really like Kumail Nanjiani. He's had a string of movies where he's the comedic straight man reacting to wacky scenarios so you'd think that this would work well for him if they keep on using him in those scenarios. And while I haven't seen much of Issa Rae, I think she's a fine actor. I just don't think these two together pair up in a way that really allowed them to push through the more serious aspects of a couple witnessing a murder the way I've seen it done in previous films.

Also, I'm not totally sold on their chemistry. They have some good moments, but a lot of them feel scripted and they spend the majority of the movie either arguing or disagreeing on the approach they should take. The whole premise of the film is that they've been in a relationship for a while and they're fighting a lot, but I got half way through the film and I almost wanted them to come to the end of the film and realize that they weren't right for one another.

On a side note, I do wonder why, despite being in a lot of these smaller formulaic comedies is Nanjiani not contributing to the writing of them? Maybe he just wanted to focus on acting for them, but I think if you're going to have Nanjiani be the comedic person in the movie maybe he can write some of his own jokes?

The movie is not devoid of humor. It just didn't have a whole lot of substance that will make it a very memorable film. Ultimately, I'm glad Netflix put it out so early because it probably would have been a couple more months before I ended up watching this.

Overall, The Lovebirds is not a horrendous film. I was looking for a light comedy to soak up an hour or so of my evening last night and that's exactly what happened with The Lovebirds. But I'm honestly probably not going to remember much of this film in about a week and while I like the main actors, I'm not sure they had the chemistry to pull off a film like this that at this point is pretty formulaic, and give it any kind of nuance.

But those are my thoughts on The Lovebirds. What did you think? Were you planning on seeing this one in theaters? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie reviews as well as my Twitter ramblings.

Thanks for reading!

What We Do In The Shadows (Season 1.5)

So I started watching this not realizing that they were in the middle of Season 2, so it made me very sad when I got to episode 5 of season 2 and there were no more episodes and I had to wait another week to watch more. This is why I almost exclusively binge watch TV shows these days. I have no patience.

If you have not see the film What We Do in the Shadows, do yourself a favor and check that movie out. You don't need to have seen the film in order to watch the show, but like I said in my review, I really can't recommend that movie more because it is so inventive and has such a unique humor to it.

The show is very similar while still distinguishing itself enough to be its own thing and not feeling like the movie in TV form.

If you haven't seen the movie, the premise that there are vampires living in the 21st century and they are letting a documentary crew film their night to night activities. The mocumentary follows a vampire house in Staten Island with three (and a half) vampires living there.

There is Nandor the Relentless (played by Kayvan Novak), Nadja (played by Natasia Demetriou), and her husband Lazlo (played by Matt Berry) who are there traditional vampires with their own funny backstories. Then you have Colin Robinson (played by Mark Proksch) who is an energy vampire. When I looked back at the film, I found Colin Robinson's character really interesting because it follows the winning formula of the film where it they have three regular vampires and one abnormal, but this one utilizes Colin Robinson a lot more than the nosforatu vampire from the film and in different ways.

And finally there is Nandor's familiar, a human named Guillermo (played by Harvey Guillen).

Like the film, a lot of the show is these centuries old vampires doing normal stuff in the modern world, attempting to blend in while any normal person would pick them out as a vampire pretty easily.

And one of the more impressive feats of the show is how it was able to create a cast of characters that feel so immensely different than the cast of the movie. It manages to capture the comedy, the dialogue, and again that fantastic visual and practical effects while creating totally new characters that are down right hilarious.

I think the really impressive thing is that the majority of the cast is relatively unknowns. Natasia Demetriou, Kayvan Novak, and Harvey Guillen really don't have much on their resumes and nothing this central. Even Mark Proksch is relatively new. I only knew him because I watched the early seasons of Better Call Saul where he was featured.

The biggest name is actually Matt Berry and most people probably don't know who he is unless they

watched The IT Crowd.

And yet they give such good performances that it is hard not just ingest all the episodes so quickly to the point where you forget to check how many episodes there are and your bingeing is stopped mid-season...

The really great thing about the show is that its able to capitalize on expanding a dark comedic paranormal universe. Obviously that's not really the point, but this show could go on forever and continue to put these really funny characters in really funny circumstances. Then you delve into Werewolves, and ghosts, and zombies, and vampire hunters, the list goes on and on. On top of that, the one thing this show has that the movie didn't is the clout of Taika Waitit to pull in some pretty big name actors to cameo for really funny bits.

It's good because the sequel to the movie seems like its pretty low on Taika Waititi's list of things to do, likely behind Thor Love and Thunder and a new Star War.

Overall, the show seems to be following in the footsteps of the movie where its probably one of those shows that not a whole lot of people are watching it, but its one of those sleeper shows that you probably should be watching.

I guess if I had one criticism, it would be that it's pretty dark and I easily fell asleep sometimes just because I wasn't totally awake for all the humor and the shadows lulled me to sleep.

But overall, its a really funny show that takes all the great parts of the movie while expanding and making itself new. I would highly recommend checking it out to enjoy some dark comedy vampire fun.

But what do you think? Have you seen the show? Have you seen the movie? How does it compare? Do you want more What We Do in the Shadows? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for shows and films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog!

Thanks for reading!

7/26 UPDATE

I finished the second season. It was fantastic. 

Solar Opposites (Season 1)

Over the past five or so years, I've really enjoyed the work of Justin Roiland just because he's been involved with some stuff that I really enjoy. He's done a lot of work with Dan Harmon who is one of my favorite TV writers and has created some of my favorite shows like Community and Rick and Morty. And one of the more interesting things was seeing what elements of Rick and Morty were Dan Harmon and which elements were Roilands. Solar Opposites is a pure example of Roiland's solo work.

Also, it came out at a really opportune time because what else are you going to watch during Quarantine?

Solar Opposites is a premise you've seen in some variation at some point in your life. It follows a family of aliens who come to earth, live in suburbia, and are the fishes out of water while they do sci fi shenanigans.

The minute I saw trailer I saw it as Third Rock from the Sun meets Rick and Morty and that pretty much holds up. It's Third Rock from the Sun in the premise of Aliens living among us in suburbia, and its Rick and Morty in the sense that they have ridiculous Justin Roiland level sci fi adventures and things get pretty crazy.

The question is, how close to Rick and Morty is it?

That's kind of hard to tell with only eight 30 minute episodes. The first season of Rick and Morty is really  good but I don't think they knew exactly where it was going to go when they did that first season so they kind of just ran with whatever to see what worked.

It kind of feels that way with Solar Opposites.

We're quickly introduced to Korvo (voiced by Roiland), Terry (voiced by Thomas Middleditch), Yumlack (Sean Giambrone), and Jesse (voiced by Mary Mack). Korvo and Terry are your polar opposite adult characters where Korvo is very mechanical and hates life on earth, whereas Terry is fun loving and thoroughly enjoys living on earth. Yumlack and Jesse are opposites in that Yumlack is a sociopathic murderer and Jesse wants to be a normal girl in high school. The two pairs have their own adventures dealing with science, or school, or glib globs or whatever word Roiland is making up these days, and then the whole thing starts again in the next episode.

The big difference is that the show is on Hulu and there really are no limits to what they can do or say.

The F bomb is dropped a lot and there is a lot of really graphic animated violence. I am kind of lukewarm on it because while Rick and Morty pushed a lot of boundaries, it still has parameters to meet to be on Adult Swim. And most of the time, it's those parameters that help shape stories. If there are no limits like in Solar Opposites, it can usually devolve into senseless violence or just a bunch of cursing that sometimes just falls flat.

It's also a little bit different because Roiland is a little more extemporaneous in his writing. He's really good at improvisation so without the story structure and writing of Dan Harmon, the dialogue and story seems more improvised and not as polished. Whatsmore, it feels like there is a lot more pop culture references just for the sake of pop culture references and again, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

The strengths and weaknesses of Solar opposites are very in tune with the strengths and weaknesses of Justin Roiland.

The stories, though scatter shot, are incredibly inventive and creative while trying to embrace the limitlessness of his imagination. At the same time, it doesn't feel very succinct yet. The most succinct parts actually have nothing to do with the aliens at all and the miniaturized humans Yumlack ends up putting in a wall in his and Jesse's room. I won't ruin that because its arguably the best part of the show, but it's hilariously done and almost feels like it was the show Roiland wanted to make instead.

The voice acting is fantastic. I think Roiland has a pretty great range of voices that are really funny, but at the same time it's easy to enjoy it even when he starts using the same voices over and over again because they are good voices.

Overall, I have nothing horrible to say about Solar Opposites. As I said, it has the strengths and weaknesses of Roiland himself. I don't know who Mike McMahan but I'll be interested to see if he is able to distinguish himself as much as Roiland did from Harmon. Overall, the show feels very similar to Rick and Morty in good and bad ways. It distinguishes itself enough to be enjoyable and not a cheap knock off, but it'll likely need at least another season to really distinguish itself as a new enjoyable thing.

I want to see a season two to give it that shot to distinguish itself, but right now it feels very much like the spiritual spin off to Rick and Morty you saw with shows like American Dad with Family Guy. American Dad did eventually distinguish itself, but it took a little bit and it never really made the same traction as Family Guy did. I could see a similar situation occurring with Solar Opposites to Rick and Morty.

But what did you think? Do you think Solar Opposites is going to be the American Dad to Rick and Morty's Family Guy? Do you want to see more episodes of the miniture people in the wall? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for shows or films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks for Reading!

Better Call Saul (Season 1)

So I was hesitant to dive in Better Call Saul, mainly for the reason that Breaking Bad seemed to be just a perfectly concise story, any additions whether they be prequel shows or epilogue movies seem a little gratuitous. I don't remember liking the character of Saul Goodman very much so I wasn't sure I was going to really like it. But after the shows been going for 5 seasons now, I've heard enough people say that not only is this show good, it might be just as good as Breaking Bad. Also, I needed a show to get into because I finished Community for the billionth time.

Better Call Saul is a prequel series to Breaking Bad and follows the story of Saul Goodman before he was Saul Goodman (played by Bob Odenkirk). Jimmy Mcgill is a lawyer struggling to make a name for himself in Albuquerque New Mexico. He is a public defender with a propensity for talking his way out of things. He's not particularly good at his job, but part of the show is his journey to figure out what he's good at, all the while running across different characters of varying repute.

On the side of Jimmy's life that is more legitimate, he has a brother (played by Michael Mckean) with an "allergy to electricity". I think when I first heard this, I thought it was kind of weird and a weird way to distinguish the show, but I think they do a relatively good job with it. And Chuck's part in the show is more centered on being a partner of a large law firm and Jimmy's relationship to the people in that law firm, especially an associate named Kim (played by Rhea Seehorn).

On the other side of things, Jimmy finds himself running in with criminal elements, most namely the infamous Mike Ehrmantraut (played again by Jonathan Banks). Additionally, they run across a drug dealer by the name of Taco (played by Michael Mando).

And this is a good place to talk about performances. I can talk more about Bob Odenkirk, but I did want to mention Jonathan Banks and Michael Mando in particular because they were my personal favorites. I think I started this season thinking that Jonathan Banks can only play one character. I said this both because I needed a refresher on Mike's character, but he also played the same role in Community Season 5. And while it's very similar, this season reminded me that while he plays the same role, its one he's very good at.

And Michael Mando, while he's not too much in the show, I think he might end up being one of my favorite characters if they develop him more. I knew Mando mainly from his role in Far Cry 3, but he keeps popping up here and there and I am glad he's getting more work.

Rhea Seehorn and Michael McKean are great along with the other actors, but Odenkirk makes this entire show happen which I did not expect. I always thought Odenkirk was a very good character actor. I don't remember disliking Saul in Breaking Bad, I just thought it was weird that he got the spinoff.

But watching this now, I can say this was a fantastic choice because the character of Jimmy is so unique and off kilter from what you'd expect from a leading person. While it's kind of similar to the formula of Breaking Bad where it's an unlikely middle aged man who has to use his wit and cunning to survive the criminal world, it makes for really good television and allows for these guys who were previously known as character actors to really shine, and that's what Odenkirk does well.

I think the other thing I liked about this season was the format. Breaking Bad was such a unique plot that it's hard to know what a follow up is going to cover. You obviously can't redo the same thing but then where do you go?

The unexpected turn they took was to make it center on Jimmy in a way that makes it feel like a Boston Legal-type legal drama, except it centers on the underbelly and lower lawyers. In fact, the big law firm Jimmy is competing against looks and feels almost like the kind of law firm that was the focus of shows like Boston Legal.

I will say, the show is a little bit scattered at times. Boston Legal was a procedural. Every week had a different case brought to the firm while Better Call Saul has pretty much two major legal cases that they focus on and the rest is the high drama that you'd expect from Vince Gilligan the show creator.

I of course didn't want a procedural and the variety in all reality is good in this show. I think my thought on it is I can't really say what the main goal of this season was. For example, Jimmy is doing his thing with those major cases, peppered in with small montages of him doing public defender work, but then they throw in an episode all about Mike. And the Mike episodes are great. Again, he's one of my favorite parts of this universe. But I get the feeling they needed to pepper his criminal connections into it to keep us engaged in the criminal underworld while Jimmy is still more on the legitimate side as he slowly "breaks bad".

If I had to make a guess, I would imagine that maybe this season was more of an introductory season to these characters and future seasons will be more focused. And if its not, that's fine.

I like this show enough to know that any expectations I had need to go out the window and I just need to enjoy it for the great writing and interesting characters.

It is far too early to decide how it compares to Breaking Bad. I rewatched some of the first few episodes of Breaking Bad a little while ago and I just recognized that that show was something spectacular and hard to compare. I hope Better Call Saul gets up there with every season, but I'll wait until I get to those later seasons to decide.

I think overall, Better Call Saul was an unexpected joy to watch. I knew it was going to be successful, but I didn't know I was going to like the first season as much as I did. I know the people behind the Breaking Bad universe know what they're doing and they're not going to do something like this unless its a good idea. And Better Call Saul is one of those great ideas. I'm not sure if I'll do a review for every season but I wanted to do a review for this season to get my thoughts on the show out.

But what do you think of Better Call Saul? Have you watched past the first season? Should I continue? Are there other spinoffs that could work for this universe? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for shows I should watch in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie and TV news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks for Reading!

His Dark Materials (Season 1)

So a lot of my thoughts on this series and the books (that I have not read) were already covered in my review of The Golden Compass movie that came out in 2007. That being said, I am glad that I took the time to watch this series. While I am worried that I might have been comparing the show to the movie (my only point of reference for the series) I do think it's been a fun comparison and it did give me a better understanding of the story than the book did.

His Dark Materials takes place in a parallel world to ours where people's souls live on the outside of them in the form of animals called daemons.

The story mainly follows an orphan girl by the name of Lyra (played by Dafne Keen). She grew up in this world's equivalent to Oxford College and is periodically visited by her adventuring uncle Lord Asriel (played by James McEvoy).

The start of this story is pretty strange because while Lyra is a strong willed person wanting to go out on adventures with her uncle, she doesn't really start her adventure. She just seems to be swept up in an adventure and her goal for quite a while is kind of muddled up in the fact that there are children being kidnapped for unknown nefarious purposes and that includes her friend Roger.  Her adventure doesn't really start until a powerful woman named Mrs. Coulter (played by Ruth Wilson) takes her to London to be her assistant while she does her work for the Magisterium, the overarching bad government. It should be noted that its not very subtlety an analogy to the Catholic church. 

As far as performances go, Dafne Keen and Ruth Wilson are very good. I'm not sure I really like how the character of Lyra is written because she's just kind of a typical "chosen one" character, though its never really explained why and it seems like she more stumbles upon other people's problems rather than having an overarching quest. This show does a good job at building up the relationship she has with her friend Roger and having that be a guiding purpose, but she seems to be more of a blank slate rather than a strong character.

Ruth Wilsoin does a really good job. I couldn't help but unfairly compare her performance with Nicole Kidman from the movie because Kidman was really kind of perfect for that role. But Wilson does a really good job and was probably one of the best parts of the show.

There are a couple of actors from Game of Thrones like James Cosmo and Lucian Msamati that did a really good job. They along with Anne-Marie Duff play Gyptians that were really interesting but get dropped from the show pretty unceremoniously.

So Lin Manuel Miranda is in this, and like Wilson, he's going up against a performance from the movie that despite its flaws, had some really good performances. So to go from Sam Elliot who just seemed like a perfect fit for a cowboy balloon pilot to Lin Manuel Miranda just felt weird. Also, they really tried to beef up his part when the story seemed to be unceremoniously leaving him behind as well for no real good reason.

Also Miranda, while not a bad actor, just felt out of place in this show. Maybe I'm too unfairly comparing him to Sam Elliot, but his accent isn't very good and he looks more like Inspector Jacque Clouseau from The Pink Panther, which seems weird.

But on a more positive note, James McEvoy did a pretty good job in this.

I remember when I watched the movie, having not read the book and knowing Lord Asriel's role in everything, I thought it was a waste to have Daniel Craig play that role to have him really be in one or two scenes and then never be seen again.

I don't know where the first book ends, if its closer to the series ending or the movie's, but this show introduced McEvoy in the beginning and I thought it was going to be a similar outcome to Craig's role, but the last two episodes feature him more and I get where he plays into the film more than before.

I think what I appreciate about this show is observing how a show that was made in 2019 telling the same story as a movie that was made in 2007 can be very different based on context. The 2007 movie is trying to be the next Harry Potter while this show is wanting to be the next Game of Thrones.

And the big benefit is that this show is able to expand on elements of the story over 8 hour long episodes where the movie could not even get close to exploring in the less than 2 hour run time it had.

I think a lot of the questions that I had after watching the movie were answered by this series that takes the same story and expands on it a lot better.

That being said, I do take issue with the claim that these books should only be made into series. I'm hearing more people who wish that Harry Potter was a TV show that divided the books up into seasons. While I would watch that, it really diminishes the work the Harry Potter directors were able to accomplish by making really good movies based on those books. I think a lot of the time its an excuse to say this book couldn't be a movie because I think it could, it just has to be done well. (He says having never made a movie himself).

I think the reason I say that is because I think some episodes of this show were much better than others. The first half of the season takes quite a bit to get going and I don't really feel like some of it was carried out the way it was being built up to. Characters like Scoresby and the Gyptians, like I said, seemed to be unceremoniously exited from the show to maybe come back in season 2, and the stuff that I did enjoy, especially when they illustrate the connections between the different worlds, seems to only be hinted at for future seasons.

Also, to me, its not totally clear who this show is for. I think that might have been a problem with the book too because while it does have balloon piloting cowboys, talking polar bears, and witches, the story also does a pretty deep dive into theology, philosophy, and critiques of religion. The subject matter is also pretty dark and if the sales pitch is to make this the new fantasy series to replace Game of Thrones, I doubt parents are going to let their kids watch this. On the other hand, it's always got a PG-13 rating so some people might not take it as seriously. It's hard to tell who the audience is.

I think the other thing that I found interesting was how this story is actually closer to Stephen King's The Dark Tower series than it is something like Harry Potter or The Chronicles of Narnia.

I think that's what continues to make me somewhat interested in it, is that there is a chance for some kind of story to be told here, but it's nothing mind blowing in my opinion. I could be wrong as this show is up for a second season and it will start delving into territory of the books that I have never seen any kind of interpretation of.

Last couple thoughts. The opening credits song is amazing. The music is very well done in this show.

Visually this show is fantastic too. I think that's been the main draw of this story is how unique this fantasy world is and a desire to see how it's used, especially because the story is so uniquely counter cultural.

I will say, in an attempt to be different than the typical heroes journey, the pacing of this show feels very odd. I mentioned before that Lyra is largely swept up in the journeys and adventures of others and doesn't take her own initiative until well into the series, but there are also some reveals that seemed to come at very weird times and the show kind of meandered with them because there wasn't really anything the characters could do about it until later episodes.

Overall, His Dark Materials was an interesting experience because it gave me more insight into a book I just need to sit down and read. But despite having a longer form, the same problems with story, pacing, and characters from the movie do carry over to the show, and I don't think that's anything on the show creators or the performers, I just think the characters are uniquely written. That's both good and bad because it makes His Dark Materials intriguing, but a little uneven. It's a beautiful show with an awesome soundtrack and a mostly good cast. I would say if you're looking for a unique off kilter fantasy adventure, His Dark Materials is not a bad choice, it's just not going to be super memorable, at least not during this season.

But those are my thoughts on His Dark Materials. What did you think? Have you read the book? Have you seen the movie and the TV show? How does the show compare? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films and TV shows I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks for Reading!