Are Movies Worse Today? 1967 vs. 1987

As mentioned in a prior post, Anne Thompson commented recently, in a post about changes in the number of films the Academy will review for Best Picture, that "bottom line though, the Academy had more quality films to choose from then than they do now." We're putting this claim to the test.

A respected commenter added a clarifying note regarding the "Are Classic Movies Better" post. Professor Nokes reminded Cinerati of the importance of specificity when using language, by pointing out that by definition Classic movies are better. Classic movies, by definition, being old movies that have withstood the test of time -- the canon of film if you will. Since our contention is not that Classic movies are no better than Modern films, rather that films made in prior decades are not on average better than Modern films, this is a useful correction.

I would have been better served to use the post-structuralist "Classic," rather than the literal Classic, as that use has the implied irony I was attempting to bring to the front. That a film was made in some bygone era doesn't automatically mean the film is a genuine Classic, at least that is the assertion of this series. Though I would love to use the ironic post-structural word in the future, I won't use it. In order to remain clear, I will now call films made during prior decades Older films rather than Classic films. Certainly, some of the films are Classics (but so are some Modern films), but all of them are Older.

Now that I have clarified the purpose of this series, let's move on to the first comparison.


Below is the list of the 1967 nominees for best picture with the addition of Anne Thompson's film historian friend's +5. This list will be followed by some Cinerati commentary, the list of the 1987 nominees plus my +5, and some closing commentary.

1967 original nominees

• In the Heat of the Night [winner]
• Bonnie and Clyde
• Doctor Dolittle
• The Graduate
• Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?

PLUS

• Camelot
• Cool Hand Luke
• In Cold Blood
• The Dirty Dozen
• Two for the Road

There are two things that become clear from looking at the list of films above. First, 1967 was a pretty good year for movies. Quite a few of my favorite films are in that nominees+5 list. I am particularly enamored of Doctor Dolittle due to memories from my childhood of watching the film on VHS with my grandfather. Second, one can quickly see just from the films that 1967 was a year where the USA was undergoing some cultural shifts. The massive violence of Bonnie and Clyde was shocking to some audiences, two of the films deal heavily with race issues, the role of sexual liberation in Camelot's portrayal of Guenevere, are all indicative of the changes the society was facing at the time.

I would argue though that two of these films would be laughed at by modern critics, if viewed without the rose colored glasses of nostalgia. I love Doctor Dolittle and think it is a great film. But if it had come out in 2009 rather than 1967 (as exactly the same picture), the film would be derided as frivolous childhood fare not worthy of artistic consideration. If this weren't true, we would see films like Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone nominated for Best Picture. Potter received three Oscar nominations, had a stellar cast of brilliant British actors, but was not nominated for Best Picture. My guess is because as children's fare it is taken less seriously, this is further evinced by the fact that the BAFTAs nominated it for Best Children's Feature. Surely, one can argue that I am overstating things, but based on my discussions with current film critics I don't believe it to be the case. The older critics seem too "sophisticated" and the younger critics are often too "gothtentious" to consider a film like Dolittle for an Oscar nod -- particularly over a film like Cool Hand Luke.

I could make a similar argument for why modern critics would overlook Camelot, not for its childishness. In this case, Camelot would be overlooked for being "over done." It's a very good film. I find its representation of Guenevere to be extremely unsympathetic, and think it flawed in that regard, but the acting, singing, and narrative are extremely compelling.

I can take or leave The Graduate. For me it is a film too deeply rooted in its era to inspire or challenge me. It's well shot, well acted, entertaining, but in the end uninspiring. I'll watch Cool Hand Luke over The Graduate any day of the week.

All in all, 1967 was a still a very good year for movies. How does 1987 compare?

1987 original nominees

• The Last Emperor [winner]
• Broadcast News
• Fatal Attraction
• Hope and Glory
• Moonstruck

PLUS

• Empire of the Sun
• Raising Arizona
• Full Metal Jacket
• Good Morning, Vietnam
• Cry Freedom

Looking at the list above, one might believe that I stacked the deck against Anne by choosing 1987. I should also note that the +5 part of the list comes not from my own opinions, but from Tim Dirks of Filmsite. When I saw his discussion of overlooked films, I found I agreed with him and thus used those rather than create my own +5 which would have looked pretty much the same. With the exception of the over-rated at the time Fatal Attraction, 1987 is a very good year for films receiving Academy consideration -- and would be with the +5 rule as well.

Like 1967, one can see the social issues of the day reflected in the important films of the year. Broadcast News was an entertaining look at news media that demonstrated how society was beginning to see that what was presented to us as "news" was in many ways mere show business. One thinks that James L. Brooks wouldn't find something like TMZ suprising, upsetting maybe but not surprising. The Last Emperor is a touching tale brought to the big screen in the final years of the Cold War. It is a touching film that looks at humanity and the transition of a culture from Empire to Revolution to Stability -- a culture that is still undergoing the process depicted in the film.

Hope and Glory is ostensibly about a child living in England throughout WWII, but one can easily see reflections of Cold War sentiments underlying the tensions of the film. While most Gen X-ers hadn't undergone drills showing them what to do in case of a nuclear attack, as Boomers had experienced, but they still lived with an underlying dread rooted in the potential of nuclear war. Hope and Glory in depicting life in a London suburb during WWII, demonstrated that while war is a time of constant upheaval it is also a time that can be endured.

Two of the films in the +5 are narratives that take place during the Vietnam War, a conflict from which America was very much in need of healing in the 1980s (and still today). The movies come at the conflict from different narrative perspectives -- one is a drama and one is a dramedy -- but they each have power.

Cry Freedom is as politically important a film as one can imagine. Denzel Washington's performance as Steven Biko makes one wish this was more a film about Biko and less a film about a heroic journalist (played by Kevin Kline) who will tell his tale.

If you don't recognize Raising Arizona as one of the all-time great comedies, you lack a sense of humor. In the film, the Coen brothers put their ability to tell epic stories about mundane characters on high display.

Looking at the Academy films (and +5s) from 1967 and 1987, I don't think the Academy had remarkably better films to judge in the earlier year. Both years are very strong. One can make an argument that 1967 is stronger, but I think one could equally make an argument that 1987 is stronger.

I'd also like to go a little deeper into the respective years. The quality of the film industry shouldn't merely be measured by the "Academy worthy" films of a given year. Many genuine Classics are films I would never argue should win an Oscar. One doesn't immediately think "Best Picture" when one is watching Bringing Up Baby, but one does certainly think it is a Classic. It is simply one of the most entertaining films ever made. How do 1967 and 1987 stack up when it comes to the entertaining films offered?

Cinerati's 10 Best Non-Oscar "Entertainment" Films of 1967 in No Particular Order

• A Fistful of Dollars
• Valley of the Dolls
• Bedazzled
• The Jungle Book
• Point Blank
• To Sir With Love
• You Only Live Twice
• In Like Flint
• The Good the Bad and the Ugly

That's a pretty good list of entertaining films. I am particularly fond of the Moore/Cook comedy Bedazzled. Most of these films are films that people still watch and most are considered classics. It should be noted that Barefoot in the Park and For a Few Dollars More were also released in 1967. You Only Live Twice is arguably the first use of Ninja in a "Western" film. Point Blank has a darkness that the more recent Mel Gibson version of the story Payback lacks. Unarguably, 1967 was a good year for movies in general and not just Award worthy films. But it is also the year one of my least favorite films was made. The lame and contrived Casino Royale comedy was released that year, a film to metacognitive for its own good.

What about 1987?

Cinerati's 10 Best Non-Oscar "Entertainment" Films of 1987 in No Particular Order

• Lethal Weapon
• Evil Dead II
• Predator
• The Untouchables
• The Princess Bride
• 3 Men and a Baby
• Overboard
• Near Dark
• Dirty Dancing

1987 also saw the release of La Bamba, Robocop, The Secret of My Succe$s, River's Edge, Inner Space, Baby Boom, No Way Out, and The Monster Squad. It's hard to compete with the Spaghetti Western trilogy of Clint Eastwood, so 1967 wins for being bad ass. But it should be noted that much of the entertaining fare of 1987 is very entertaining. The Princess Bride is a wonderfully enchanting tale that people will be watching for generations to come. Overboard is a romantic comedy that ranks up in my enjoyment factor with Bringing Up Baby -- as are Baby Boom and 3 Men and a Baby for that matter.

Kathryn Bigelow's Near Dark is one of my favorite vampire films and is must see for any fans of the HBO True Blood series. The vampires in Bigelow's film are a refreshing alternative from the sexy and alluring vampires typically presented, these are stone cold killers on a rampage. It's also an important film because Bigelow demonstrated, as she continues to demonstrate, that women directors can very ably direct things other than "women's films."

1967 wins because of the Spaghetti Western trilogy, but 1987 is one heck of a fun year for movie fans.

Are Modern Films Really Worse than Classic Films? A Blog Series Introduction

On the 24th of June, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced that Academy members would vote for Best Picture from a selection of 10 films rather than the 5 that had become standard. They assert that this is a return to an older Academy tradition and are pitching the change by doing a bi-coastal screening of the 10 films nominated in 1939 -- an amazing year for movies.

In response to the announcement, Anne Thompson shared the contents of an email a film historian sent her which listed an "imaginary" additional five nominees for the years 1967 through 1979 as a demonstration of films that had been overlooked by the Academy in years past. It's a fun read, filled with some pretty keen analysis.

In her introduction to the email, Thompson asserts, "Bottom line though, the Academy had more quality films to choose from then than they do now."

Such a statement immediately begs the question, "Really?! The Academy had more quality films to choose from then than they do now?" I find the statement to be on the face incredible -- traditional definition -- and a bit knee-jerk in the certitude of the statement. Certainly, my own reaction to the statement is knee-jerk as well. My assumption is that Thompson is wrong, but is she? The only way to find out is to do a year to year comparison continuing from a date after 1979 and comparing it to past years. One could easily write a book on the subject if one wanted to do an in depth analysis, one could probably write a book merely on what the best methodology to use for comparison.

I have neither the will, nor the luxury of time to do that. So I offer the following. I will create my own "nominee+5" lists for each year starting in 1987 and compare that year to the year twenty years prior. Thus 1987 will be compared to 1967. Each list will be done in a single blog post. After I have completed the first set, I will begin again in 1997 and compare to a year 30 years prior. The +5 "best of year x" list will be one of my own choosing, and thus will hopefully spark conversation as you may believe that some other films deserve to be in the +5. The merit of a given year won't merely rest on my own +5, but include those anyone else can think of as well. After all, we are measuring whether the "now" holds a candle to the "then." That, and not whether my specific choices are the best, is the question that should be discussed.

Stay tuned to this blog for 1987 vs. 1967, the first in a series of posts.

I Can Stop Pretending to Like Dollhouse

According to Variety, Tim Minear will be working on an updated version of the science fiction classic Alien Nation for Fox 21. The show is being developed for release on the Sci Fi network in what Fox 21 hopes will be another successful "franchise revival" from the Sci Fi network.

As was mentioned earlier on this blog, I am a fan of Tim Minear's. I'm so much of a fan that I have been lying about how much I like Dollhouse. I watched every episode, out of love for the creators, but I often found myself asking the television, "Really?!" Dollhouse just never seemed to figure out what its core conflict was and never really convinced me why I should sympathize with the corporation behind the Dollhouse.

I firmly believe that Minear is the right creator for an update of Alien Nation. In the Variety article Minear states, "Twenty years (after 'Alien Nation'), TV as a whole has evolved, and you can explore issues and go deeper with subject matter than you ever could before. On cable, you can play with ambiguity. This is a place I want to be."

If I were one who believed in omens, I would certainly say that cable -- in particular Sci Fi -- is a place that Minear belongs. Minear's shows have a long history of being aired on Friday nights where they wither and die under the curse of the Friday Night Death Slot. Unlike other networks, most of Sci Fi's most successful shows air on Friday nights and this may well include Minear's reinterpretation of Alien Nation.

Sci Fi may be crazy for attempting to change their name to Syfy, but between hiring John Scalzi to work on the next Stargate show and having a show for their network being developed by Minear, the network is well on its way to once more becoming a Sci Fi network instead of a "Ghost Hunters" network.

Origins Awards Winners and Commentary

Those of you who wander into this blog from time to time know that I was one of the finalists for the position of Program Director of the Game Manufacturer's Association (GAMA). One of the duties of that job would have been the organization and running of their annual Origins Game Fair where the Academy of Adventure Gaming Arts & Design annual awards are announced. It looks like John Ward's first convention for GAMA was a success, especially given the state of the economy.

The Academy of Adventure Gaming Arts & Design awards are the American gaming hobby equivalent to the Oscars, as opposed to the Spiele des Jahres which is the European board gaming version of the Oscars. Over the years, the award's prestige has fluctuated in the minds of consumers but it is now pretty clear that the Origins Awards are the industry standard and that other awards -- while worthy of note -- hold places similar to the People's Choice award. The one exception is the Diana Jones Award which is more like the MacArthur Genius Award of Gaming -- without the money.

This year's Origins Awards had an exciting list of nominees and as a devoted gaming fan who "came this close" to running the con (only the board knows how close I actually came, which might not actually be that close -- but I was in the finals dammit, so I'll claim that I only "missed it by that much") I have some strong opinions about a number of the nominees and the eventual winners. The net was a buzz over the weekend after Critical Hits shared the list of winners, but I wanted to have my say -- especially after having a brief twitter conversation with Ron Blessing about the controversial Best Role Playing Game selection.

Play By Mail

* Atlas Games Play by Post Forums by Atlas Games
* Heldenwelt by SSV Klapf-Bachler OEG. (Austria)
* Hyborian War by Reality Simulations Inc.
* Starweb by Flying Buffalo Inc.
* The One Ring Legends Module by Harlequin Games

WINNER: Hyborian War

Of the games listed above, I have only ever played Hyborian War. It is one of the classics of the Play by Mail medium and is very deserving of accolades. It should be noted that Hyborian War has never won an Origins Award before, unlike the multi-year winner Starweb. The fact that a prior winner (or a long standing game for that matter) was nominated in this category is not surprising, especially given the small number of participants in the medium. Play by Mail's heyday was in many ways the 1980s and very early 90s, but Play by Post and other internet transformations of the format are clearly enabling a transition into new technologies. Do yourself a favor and try a few months of Hyborian War. Me? I'm going to try Starweb. I've never played it before, but after checking out the website and seeing that it has won the Origins Award multiple times has sparked my curiosity.

The subject of what constitutes "new" and what should be nominated will come up again later, but let it be said that I don't think the same criteria for what is nominated should be used for all Award categories.

Collectible Card Game Rules or Expansion

* Chaotic: M’arrillian Invasion Beyond the Doors Booster Pack 8 TC Digital Games LLC MRN, To Be Continued LLC, Sam Murakami, and David Baumgartner
* Highlander the Card Game: Search for Vengeance 11 HighlanderTGC
Mike Sager
* Magic the Gathering: Shards of Alara 1 Wizards of the Coast
Bill Rose and Devin Low
* Portal Score Entertainment
Aik Tongtharadol, Josh Morris, Dan Posey, and Carl Braun
* World of Warcraft the Trading Card Game: Servants of the Betrayer 2 Upper Deck
Mike Hummel, Antonio DeRosa, Ken Ho, Jeff Liu, and Patrick Sullivan

WINNER: Magic the Gathering: Shards of Alara 1

The fact that Magic the Gathering won in this category should be of little surprise. Magic is the giant among Trading/Collectible Card Games. I would have liked to see some representation from the "Living Card Game" class of games. I am a fan of the modular, but not random, nature of the LCG which allows players who do not have trust funds to put together effective decks for play. I now prefer to leave the "random assortment booster pack" in the 90s when I was younger and had more disposable income to spend on multiple packs to get one card. I understand the financial model and why it works, but I am outside the demographic. I like to play a wide variety of games -- and am an insane completist when it comes to needing to "have 'em all" -- so the CCG model isn't one that I fit in with.

As an aside, I also think that the tournament play of various trading card games needs to better educate judges regarding the various types of "card manipulation" that is possible. It is very easy to stack a deck while appearing to be randomizing. Professional card tournaments would do well to have "dealers" who shuffle the decks. There's a reason they do it for poker, this game class would do well to follow suit.

Magic and World of Warcraft are strong games that are very fun to play at the casual level. Aside from the "collectible" aspect of the game, they can be affordable if you are only interested in casual play. I haven't played the others and was surprised to see that Highlander was still in print. Good for you Highlander, I might just have to pick up a couple of decks now.

Children’s, Family, and Party Games

* Backseat Drawing
Out of the Box Publishing
Peggy Brown
* duck! duck! Go!
APE Games
Kevin G. Nunn
* Extraordinary Adventures of Baron Munchausen, The
Mongoose Publishing
James Wallis
* Living Labyrinth
Bucephalus Games
Julie Haehn
* Rorschach: The Inkbot Party Game
Bucephalus Games
Dan Tibbles, Jeremy Holcomb, Joe Huber, and Stephen McLaughlin
* Say Anything
North Star Games
Dominic Craphuchettes and Satish Pillalamarri

WINNER: Say Anything

It's nice to see the Origins Awards nominating and awarding games that are targeted more at the general market, rather than the "gaming" market. There are some strong games in this category and one of the companies nominated is a brand new gaming company (Bucephalus Games).

Out of the Box Publishing makes a number of wonderful games (Apples to Apples and Ninja vs. Ninja jump quickly to mind) and I will certainly be running out to purchase Backseat Drawing for my twin daughters before the year is out.

duck! duck! go! looks and sounds remarkable, but the fact that it is collectible, you only get 6 out of 100 rubber duckies in any pack, is a major drawback for me. I would much rather have clear packages where I can know what ducks I am buying. My twin daughters are at an age where they like duckies, but the random assortment here makes me less likely to buy many packs. The fact that I can "make a set" at the Ape Games website makes me more likely to buy them direct, which isn't the best business model. One should either have a model that encourages small retailers to support you, or one where the big box stores want to carry you, and not a model which makes the customer avoid the retailer. Your store front is still the best place for word of mouth, especially with a family game.

James Wallis' Munchausen is one of the most entertaining role playing games written to date and can be played in a manner appropriate for all ages. One can play it as an evening storytelling game with their children, as it provides wonderful story ideas to spark a night's bedtime story. One can also play it with adult friends and listen as the stories get bawdier as the participants get drunker. Good times for all.

I eagerly await my copies of the two Bucephalus games above. They are a new company, but I am very excited about many of their games. As for Say Anything, I can't say anything. I don't usually buy the "party game" as I already own enough of them and find that Scene It! is one of the best to play with my groups of friends.

[EDIT -- added 7/01] One of the thing that frustrates me about the internet is when people make flippant comments and then when "called" on them proceed down the path of snark and venom fueled by an inability to admit error. I try to not be one of those people. So when Dominic Craphuchettes posted a comment on this blog regarding my dismissive comments about Say Anything, I figured I should review what I wrote. Dominic was right, I was too dismissive and didn't actually write what I meant to write. So here is another try at what I intended.

"I haven't had a chance to play Say Anything, so I cannot comment about it. I haven't purchased it yet because I own a lot of party games and am currently in a phase where I try to purchase games by smaller companies, older games I missed out on, and obscure war games. Bucephalus games caught my attention because they are a brand new company and the fact that I've had the opportunity to meet their Sales VP. I'll likely pick up Say Anything around the Christmas season when my purchasing habits gravitate back to party games."

At least that's what I should have written. After having Dominic comment on the blog, I'm going to buy the game today on the way home from work. I'll try it out with friends at my annual 4th of July BBQ and hopefully review it next week.

Historical Miniature Figure or Line

* 28mm Imperial Romans
WARLORD GAMES
* King Philips War 28MM
Brigade Games Inc.
* SS-Panzerdivision ‘Das Reich’ Panzerkompanie (GEAB06) [15mm Line]
Battlefront Games
* 28mm Celts
WARLORD GAMES
* 15mm Ancient Saxons
Splintered Light

WINNER: SS-Panzerdivision ‘Das Reich’ Panzerkompanie

Flames of War is one of the great miniatures war games and consistently has some of the best looking miniatures, the SS-Panzerdivision is no exception. If I had time to paint, I could easily become obsessed with the Flames of War line.

Historical Miniature Figure Game Rules Supplement

* RISE OF ROME (Fields of Glory Supplement)
Osprey Publishing
* Operation Cobra, The Normandy Breakout –FW206 Cobra FLAMES OF WAR
Battlefront Games
* WWII Eastern Front Skirmish Scenarios
Britton Publishers
* STARS AND STRIPES FOREVER
Test of Battle Games
* AGE OF EAGLES: Napoleon Vs Europe 1813 – 14, AOE Scenario Book
Quantum Printing

WINNER: Rise of Rome Fields of Glory

Osprey Publishing has long been the go to publisher for the historical wargamer -- whether miniature or counter based wargaming. Osprey's publications are well researched and accessible. Their books are great touchstones for researching a particular time or place and are often written by renowned scholars of the given area. It was a long time coming for Osprey to release their own miniatures war game rules, but it was worth the wait.

Historical Miniature Figure Game Rules

* Fields of Glory Miniature Rules
Osprey Publishing / Slitherine Software
Richard Bodley-Scott
* Volley & Bayonet: Road To Glory
Test of Battle Games
Frank Chadwick and Greg Novak
* Cold Steel and Canister
Decker Game Company
Jack Decker
* Song of Drums and Shakos
Ganesha Games
Andrea Sfiligoi
* Chevauchee: Rules for Battles with Medieval Miniatures
Skirmisher Publishing LLC
Michael J. Varhola, Robert “Mac” McLaughlin, and the Skirmisher Games Development Group

WINNER: TIE between Fields of Glory and Songs of Drums and Shakos

It's nice to see both a small publisher -- who sells strictly through Print on Demand and PDF -- as well as a long time historical book publisher -- who just made the jump into gaming -- both receive recognition. I was impressed with Osprey's Fields of Glory, but the Origins nomination is going to get me to purchase a copy of Songs of Drums and Shakos in the next month.

Historical Board Games

* Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear
Academy Games
Uwe Eickert
* Espana 1936
DEVIR US LLC / Phalanx
Antonio Catalain
* The Battle of Monmouth
Clash of Arms Games
Rich Kane
* The Campaigns of King David
Clash of Arms Games
Robert Markham
* Pursuit of Glory
GMT Games
Brad Stock and Brian Stock

WINNER: Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear

Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear is that rarest of creatures in the war gaming hobby. It is a game that is easy enough to teach the novice, but complex enough to challenge the war game veteran. The game combines eurogaming sensibilities with traditional war gaming depth. I can hardly wait for the sequel. Shoot me an email and I'll play a game anytime.

Non-Fiction

* KOBOLD Guide to Game Design, Vol. 1
by Wolfgang Baur, Nicolas Logue
Open Design
* Lost Leaves From the Inn of the Last Home
by Margaret Weis
Margaret Weis Productions
* No Quarter Magazine
editor-in-chief Nathan Letsinger
Privateer Press
* Things We Think About Games
by Will Hindmarch & Jeff Tidball
Gameplaywright Press
* Tour de Lovecraft: the Tales
by Ken Hite
Atomic Overmind Press

WINNER: Tour de Lovecraft: The Tale

This is both a great category and a sad one. It's sad in that one of the entries is a gaming related magazine. There was a time when gaming related magazines had their own category and including the category in "nonfiction" might lead one to believe that gaming magazines are dead. They aren't. Some of the best, like Dungeon and Dragon are gone, but others like Strategy and Tactics, Fire and Movement and Knights of the Dinner Table are going strong in print. This is not to mention those magazines that have transformed into wonderful online publications, including magazines like Pyramid and the aforementioned Dungeon and Dragon. There are even new magazines like Battles, Level Up, and Kobold Quarterly cropping up to fill in the gaps.

I also question having Lost Leaves from the Inn of the Last Home in a non-fiction category. Certainly it is a quality publication, especially for Dragonlance fans, and it doesn't quite fit in as fiction since it isn't a piece of narrative fiction. But I think that "almanacs of fictional worlds" still count as fiction, even if the recipes are real.

Other than these two quibbles, this is a very strong category. Wolfgang Baur's Open Design project has turned out some wonderful products and I am proud to have been a patron on all of them.

Hindmarch's and Tidball's book about gaming is thought provoking and entertaining and is one of the better books that discuss what gaming is about. One could easily do a series of articles with each article being based on one of the thoughts from the book. It's not quite child friendly as it contains a little profanity, but that's expected from a book with any writing from Wil Wheaton. Wheaton may always let the wookie win, but he can't seem to write a paragraph without an f-bomb -- a well timed comic f-bomb, but an f-bomb none the less. Thing We Think About Games is a MUST own.

Ken Hite's Tour de Lovecraft isn't an essential addition to the gamer/gaming library. This is an essential addition to ANYONE's library. While there has been a lot of scholarship (and "scholarship") about and around H.P. Lovecraft's fiction, this is the first "reading companion" that I have found and it is a wonderful reading companion. Just pick a story, or use the order Ken Hite uses, read it and read Ken Hite's commentary, it is very much worth the time. It's like being able to discuss the stories with my friend J within moments of finishing a tale. That's something special. Ken Hite very much deserves the Origin, too bad more than one couldn't have been given out in this category.

Fiction

* Hungerblade
by Robin D Laws
Red Juggernaut Inc.
* Infernal Sorceress
by Gary Gygax
Paizo Publishing
* Killing Ground, The
by Graham McNeill
Black Library
* Pirate King, The
by R.A. Salvatore
Wizards of the Coast
* Worlds of Dungeons & Dragons Volume 2
edited by James Lowder & Mike O’Sullivan
Devil’s Due

WINNER: Worlds of Dungeons & Dragons Volume 2

This category has a diversity of medium and of genre. The selections range from e-published to comic books and they contain Gary Gygax's last story. The gamer in me wishes that they had given the award to the father of gaming and his Fafhrd and Grey Mauser pastiche. As much as I respect James Lowder, and I do, I cannot disagree more with the selection of a collection of 3 issues of a very good comic book as the best gaming related fiction of the year. James Wyatt's Eberron fiction was very strong last year, not to mention some of the weird fiction collections being released by Chaosium. I am excited to see the world of Robin Laws' Hungerblade as a Savage Worlds supplement as Robin is a creative genius, but I was unfamiliar with it prior to the Origins Awards so I cannot speak for or against its merits.

All I can say is that I strongly feel that Gygax should have won the award. He is not only the father of modern gaming, but in some ways is the father of gaming fiction.

Miniature Figure or Line of Miniature Figures

* Monsterpocalypse Collectible Miniature Game
Privateer Press, Inc.
Matt Wilson, Bryan Cutler, Jason Soles, Rob Stoddard, and Kevin Clark
* Star Wars Miniatures: The Clone Wars
Wizards of the Coast
* WARMACHINE Steam-Powered Miniatures Combat
Privateer Press, Inc.
Matt Wilson, Ron Kruzie, and Chris Walton
* WH40K: Space Marines
Games Workshop
* World of Warcraft Miniatures Game
Upper Deck Company
Justin Gary, David Baumgartner, John Fiorillo, Matt Hyra, and Anthony Shaheen

WINNER: Star Wars Miniatures: The Clone Wars

There are some very strong miniatures sets here. All of them deserve the nomination, but Monsterpocalypse was one of the most exciting new games I have seen in years and I think that it deserved to win the category. It's rare that a new game, not attached to any other IP, makes gamers go giddy, but that's what Monsterpocalypse did. It's giant monsters vs. giant robots for God's sake! The only thing that could make it better would be a manga license...oh, wait they have one in the pipeline. Sweet!

Miniature Figure Game Rules

* Classic Battletech: Tactical Operations
Catalyst Game Labs
Randall N. Bills and Herbert A Beas II
* Monsterpocalypse Collectible Miniature Game
Privateer Press, Inc.
Matt Wilson, Bryan Cutler, Jason Soles, Rob Stoddard, and Kevin Clark
* WARMACHINE: Legends
Privateer Press, Inc.
Matt Wilson, Jason Soles, and Rob Stoddard
* WH40K: 5th Edition
Games Workshop
Alessio Cavatore
* World of Warcraft Miniatures Game
Upper Deck Company
Justin Gary, David Baumgartner, John Fiorillo, Matt Hyra, and Anthony Shaheen

WINNER: Classic Battletech: Tactical Operations

The voters gave the award to the most detailed rules set. The Classic Battletech game is an enjoyable system that has been ruggedly playtested and refined into a fairly balanced system that doesn't suffer as badly as Warhammer 40k when it comes to "power creep." Most of the games in this category can be learned in detail rather quickly, not so for Classic Battletech. You can learn the basic rules quickly, but there is a lot of depth to the rules. A game like 40k has depth of play and is a fun experience, but Classic Battletech has a depth to its rules and is the only property to rival 40k when it comes to depth of narrative. The voting in this category was definitely dominated by the die hard grognard gamer and not the newb friendly one. I would have voted for Monsterpocalypse as it is fun, easy to learn, and actually new -- as promised more on the "new" criteria later.

Game Accessories

* Chibithulhu
Steve Jackson Games
* Classic Battletech: Record Sheets 3039
Catalyst Game Labs
Randall N. Bills, Bjorn Schmidt, and David L. McCulloch
* D-Total
Gamescience
Dr. A. F. Simkin, Frank Dutrain, and Louis Zocchi
* Duel Decks: Jace vs Chandra
Wizards of the Coast
Erik Lauer and Ken Nagle
* Living Arcanis T-Shirt
Paradigm Concepts, Inc
Pedro Barrenechea, Henry Lopez, Nelson Rodriguez, and Eric Weiner
* Wicked Munchkin Bag & Die
Q-Workshop
John Kovalic and Patryk Strzelewicz

WINNER: D-Total

This is an odd category. Personally, I like the Chibithulhu. I don't know how it will help my game, but it will entertain my twin daughters while I game -- and that is the definition of a useful accessory. Apparently, cute wasn't enough to win...it seems nothing can overcome the gamer obsession with strange dice.

Role-Playing Game Supplements

* Buccaneers of Freeport
Green Ronin Publishing
Ari Marmell, Anthony Pryor, Rodney Thompson, and Robert Vaughn
* Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide
Wizards of the Coast
Bruce Cordell, Ed Greenwood, and Chris Sims
* Hero Lab
Lone Wolf Development
Rob Bowes and Colen McAlister
* Serenity Adventures
Margaret Weis Productions
Alana Abbot, Billy Aguiar, James Davenport, Ted Reed, and James M. Ward
* Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic
Wizards of the Coast
Rodney Thompson, Sterling Hershey, John Jackson Miller, and Abel Pena

WINNER: Serenity Adventures

This is one of those categories where the voters and I are very much in disagreement. First, Hero Lab belongs under accessories and not supplements as it isn't a rules supplement or expansion of an existing game. Hero Lab is a character creation accessory. Second, I think this is the first category where we are beginning to see the "intra-gamer" squabble between the anti-Wizards of the Coast crowd and the anti-3.5 crowd. Both Buccaneers of Freeport and The Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide are very strong products. The Forgotten Realms book is so strong that for the first time since high school I have thought about playing in a Forgotten Realms game. The old Forgotten Realms books suffered from an over abundance of deus ex machina style characters, so many it made me wonder as a player just how heroic my own characters can be. This isn't true in the new Forgotten Realms as all the old heroes are either dead or unable to help.

It seems to me that the Serenity Adventures vote was a vote to be non-controversial. It is a very good product, Jamie Chambers is the second friendliest person in the gaming hobby -- Matt Forbeck is the friendliest -- and a lot of gamers are big Joss Whedon fans. You can include present company under Joss Whedon fan -- especially when he and Tim Minear team up. I am such a big fan that I actually watched every episode of Dollhouse and kept making excuses for how it is almost entertaining and so should be renewed. I'll still make excuses for it, but that doesn't mean that the Serenity Adventures book is the best role playing supplement of the prior year. It isn't. My vote would have gone to the inspired Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide and if those old fans of the FR, who felt betrayed when they changed so much, would actually read the book they would likely agree.

Role-Playing Games

* Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition Players Handbook
Wizards of the Coast
Rob Heinsoo, Andy Collins, and James Wyatt
* Mouseguard Role-Playing Game
Archaia Studios Press
Luke Crane and David Petersen
* Trail of Cthulhu, The
Pelgrane Press Ltd
Kenneth Hite, Robin D Laws, Jerome Huegenin, and Simon Rogers

WINNER: Mouseguard

This is the category where I am most disappointed with the voters and with GAMA. Let me state for the record that I believe that all of these are excellent products, but Mouseguard is not the best role playing game of 2008 -- not by a long shot. Before I go into why I believe that the Player's Handbook should have won, let me say that my vote would have gone to Trail of Cthulhu as it is the most brilliant game design to come through the pipeline for some time. But I can only explain the fact that the Player's Handbook didn't win by pointing at the politics of the gaming industry where there is a huge, and I mean HUGE anti-Wizards of the Coast bias. It's a bias rooted in a selfish "I want stuff for free and for big companies to fail" mentality and it is total crap.

This is the game that brought about a discussion between me and Ron Blessing on twitter yesterday. I have a lot of respect for Ron. We both love Savage Worlds -- deeply -- and I recommend his podcast unreservedly. Before I continue with why I think D&D should have won -- even without my vote -- here's the brief conversation between me and Ron:

CINERATI: Mouse Guard, which uses a retread rules system, beat D&D 4E for the Origins award. Stupid anti-Wotc bias.

CINERATI: Oh, and for you haters. I own Mouse Guard, Burning Wheel, Burning Empires, and Jihad.

TGTT_RON: @cinerati 4E didn't belong in the awards because it is a new edition of an old game. MG belonged because regardless of system, it was new.

CINERATI: Couldn't disagree more @TGTT_Ron Mouse Guard is Burning Wheel. It deserves to be awarded as much as 3.5. 4e was a major shift in design.

TGTT_RON: @cinerati Origins' rules state a new edition of a game doesn't qualify. It's clear they made an exception due to the changes in 4E.

CINERATI: @TTGT_Ron I consider a change in setting to be a new edition as well. Oh, and Mouse Guard is awesome, just really impressed with 4e.

TGTT_RON: @cinerati That said, I think Mouse Guard is a better game. 4E is a fine game, which many I respect enjoy, but I agree with the award to MG.

TGTT_RON: @cinerati I agree with you about much of the WotC hate going around, but in this case I think the games were judged on their merit by fans.

TGTT_RON: @cinerati And if WotC cared about the Origins Award, they would have been at the con promoting their game. That snub didn't help, I think.

CINERATI: @TGTT_Ron I think we can agree that WotC PR doesn't deserve any awards.

First, Ron is incorrect that the "rules state a new edition of a game doesn't qualify." Specifically, the rules state, "If a product is a new release of an older product version, the new version must have been changed over 50 percent from the old version (including artwork, packaging, and design—design is given the most weight) as determined by the jury." Re-releases of products are officially allowed, as are repeat winners as the Play-by-Mail and Trading Card Game categories (among others) demonstrate. A product need not be new to be considered, it must merely be "released" during the 2008 calendar year.

Second, as I wrote above Mouseguard is as guilty as Dungeons and Dragons of being a re-release. It is the application of an existing rules set -- in this case the excellent Burning Wheel System -- to a new setting. This is as much an original role playing game as the Steve Jackson Games Hellboy and Discworld role playing games were -- which is to say, "not much of an ORIGINAL role playing game." There are fewer systematic changes to the Burning Wheel engine in Mouseguard than there were changes to the underlying Dungeons and Dragons engine in 4th edition. 4th edition, which is the first edition of D&D to be denied an Origins award -- even the unpopular 2nd edition won for its year -- is a radical shift in game design and deserves to be rewarded.

It is true that the Burning Wheel engine's focus on narrativist gaming was a significant shift when that systems revised edition was released in 2005, but it is also true that the Burning Wheel engine was an influence on 4e. The skill challenge system in 4e is a direct descendant of the system in Burning Wheel -- a game half a decade old. Mouseguard represents a simplification and new presentation of an older system -- and is awesome -- but it isn't anywhere near as innovative as 4e. Burning Wheel on its own was that innovative, but its first release was five years ago. One might ask which is a better descendant of Burning Wheel? Luke Crane is a great designer, and deserves recognition for all of his influences which include 4e's design, but I cannot see Mouseguard beating 4e without the huge levels of hate among a certain contingent in the gaming community.

I write all this even though I believe that Hite and Laws created the most exciting role playing game I have seen in some time. Not since Feng Shui -- another Laws project by the way -- have I been so amazed by a game. It is true that like Mouseguard the Trail of Cthulhu game uses an existing system (in this case the Gumshoe system) and uses that system as a framework to emulate an existing intellectual property (in this case the writings of H.P. Lovecraft). Two things set it apart from Mouseguard. First, Trail of Cthulhu's system is a "complication" of an existing system and not a simplification. Second, Kenneth Hite managed to make a better version of one of the best role playing games ever made. Kenneth Hite and Robin Laws managed to out Call of Cthulhu Chaosium's Call of Cthulhu role playing game. They made a better emulation of the fiction of H.P. Lovecraft. I cannot imagine using the Basic Role Play system to run Cthulhu after reading Trail of Cthulhu. After reading Mouseguard, I'm still not convinced that Ironclaw wouldn't work better.

When the Burning Wheel engine was converted to SF with the Burning Empires game, I pretty much wrote off any other system for running science fiction -- at least until Thousand Suns came out. I didn't experience that with Mouseguard.

I also think that these awards should take into consideration impact on the hobby. Not many people will be playing Mouseguard in five years, but a lot will be playing 4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons and a lot of future games will be influenced by its system. While Burning Wheel will still be influential in 5 years, I doubt this particular version will be. Mouseguard seems to me to be an excellent product based on a hot "indie" comic and won more on "cool" factor than on its merits as a game.

Just how many people are actually going to play this game?

I think that question matters most of all. In fact, it is the answer to that question that makes me believe that 4e deserves the award over Trail of Cthulhu even if ToC is a better game design.

Card Games

* Dominion
Rio Grande Games
Donald X Vaccarino
* Monty Python Fluxx
Looney Labs
Andrew Looney
* Red Dragon Inn 2
Slugfest Games
Geoff Bottone, Colleen Skadl, and Cliff Bohm
* Ticket to Ride Card Game
Days of Wonder
Alan R. Moon
* Trailer Park Wars
Gut Bustin’ Games
Lisa Steenson

WINNER: Dominion

I'll just say that as good as all the games on this list are, Dominion is a remarkable game. Oh, and it won the Spiele des Jahres too.

Board Games

* Agricola
Z-Man Games, Inc.
Uwe Rosenberg
* Ninja vs. Ninja
Out of the Box Publishing
Tushar Gheewala
* Pandemic
Z-Man Games, Inc.
Matt Leacock
* TOMB
Alderac Entertainment Group
John Zinser
* Wealth of Nations
TableStar Games
Nico Carroll

WINNER: Pandemic

All of the games nominated are very good games. I particularly like Agricola and Tomb, but I agree that Pandemic should have won. The thing that truly sets Pandemic apart from the other games, other than its topicality, is the fact that the game is cooperative in nature. It is rare to have an exciting and challenging cooperative game. Sometimes its better to play a game where everyone wins or everyone loses. If you want a game with super viruses and one winner, there's always Nuclear War.

VANGUARD AWARD

WINNER: Flames of War Firestorm Campaign

The Vanguard award is supposed to go to something truly innovative, unique, or in a class of its own. Looking over the Firestorm Campaign system, I have to agree that Battlefront have done exactly that. Games Workshop has been creating campaign systems for its various miniatures games for some time, but none have managed to integrate strategic representations -- that a traditional counter based war game would use -- with the tactical action of a miniatures battle as smoothly as the Firestorm campaign system. The most remarkable aspect is that you can run the entire campaign in four to six weeks, a relatively easy commitment for the father of twins or the busy professional.

Introducing "The Most Medieval Man in the World"

Picking up on a sometimes entertaining ad campaign about "The Most Interesting Man in the World," Professor Richard Scott Nokes of Troy University is running a series of parody commercials entitled "The Most Medieval Man in the World." So far he has posted the first two mockumercials featuring Professor Nokes superheroic alter ego Professor Awesome, PhD. Like the taglines in the Most Interesting Man campaign, the individual quotes are hit and miss -- but the overall effect is quite funny. On an aesthetic note, one wishes that Professor Awesome had used a hand held digital video camera for the live action sequence. Apparently the Most Medieval Man in the World also owns the Most Medieval Digital Camera in the World. The grainy, skippy, blurriness, of the live action ending diminishes a very entertaining idea.

As an aside, I'm still waiting for the tagline, "The D&D Module the Temple of Elemental Evil is based on what happened during one of his 6 week Mead drinking binges."

Films Christian Loves: THE LADY VANISHES

I once asked a dear friend what her favorite Hitchcock movie was. Without a second's hesitation, she stated that it was THE LADY VANISHES. We talked about the strengths of certain Hitchcock films, the weaknesses of others, and why we preferred certain films in his catalog to others.

I have never really bought into the whole "Master of Suspense" label given to Hitch. Certainly, he has directed some wonderfully suspenseful films, and his television show consistently featured suspenseful tales. That's all well and good, but the one thing that all of my favorite Hitchcock films -- save one -- share is a wonderful romance. THE LADY VANISHES contains one such romance. Ostensibly, the film is a mystery, but in reality the film is a wonderful romance -- romantic comedy even.

During the set up of the narrative a young woman named Iris meets a charming older lady named Miss Froy while on a train ride through a fictional central European country. The two hit it off splendidly. But when young miss Iris awakens after passing out on the journey, she awakens to find that Miss Froy is missing. From here the mystery, including some international espionage, begins. This is also when the romance begins. Due to the nature of Iris' earlier unconscious spell, most people write of "Miss Froy" as an hallucination. This is not true for dashing young Gilber, a student of music who has been studying the folk songs of the region. There is something about the young woman's confidence in describing her encounter with Miss Froy that makes Gilbert skeptical of those who dismiss it as mere hallucination. The mystery follows a standard format, but the romance is what makes the tale worth watching. The same is true for most of my favorite Hitchcock films, from To Catch a Thief to The Man Who Knew Too Much (the original version without Jimmy Stewart). Hitchcock's ability to bring romance to the tale is what gives these films their verisimilitude and allows the audience to forget how "setty" the Hitchcockian world appears. The people are real, so we don't need a real looking world.

Sit back and enjoy a masterful film, thanks to Hulu.



THE LADY VANISHES is a great film, but if you were wondering if it is the answer to a question on my "How Well Do You Know Christian?" Facebook quiz -- it isn't.

It should also be noted that the underlying basis for the mystery in this film is likely inspired by real events. During the 1867 Paris World Exposition a woman disappeared and authorities refused to believe the woman's daughter that the woman was ever in attendance at the fair -- a fictional version of the tale is Verwehte Spuren. The 1867 event also served as the inspiration to one of my favorite pulp series, The Avenger.

Marc Bernardin and I Agree. Buffy Doesn't Belong on a List of Women Who Shook Sci-Fi

Marc Bernardin, Cinerati/Geekerati friend and writer for Entertainment Weekly, has a brief discussion of Total Sci-Fi's "The 25 Women Who Shook Sci-Fi." Bernardin asserts, and I strongly agree, that Buffy has no place on a list of Science Fiction leading ladies.

Fantasy and Science Fiction are not the same thing. Yes, Science Fiction is technically Fantasy -- even hard science icon Isaac Asimov had the Mule with his psionic talents and his PSYCHOLOGY using leading man in Second Foundation. Like it or not, there is no real scientific evidence of mind control powers, even when possessed by sterile genetic mutations. Science Fiction often deals with the fantastic, because it is a sub-genre of Fantasy. This means it is more specific, it deals with science. If the vampires of the Buffyverse were the product of a disease as in Richard Matheson's I am Legend, or The Last Man on Earth starring Vincent Price which was inspired by that tale, then she might qualify. But that isn't the case. You see, there is this thing called the Hell Mouth in the Buffyverse and that's straight from the Fantasy playbook.

But my beefs aren't limited to the inclusion of Buffy. I'm peeved at those who were left out of the list in order to include Fantasy characters like Buffy and Willow.

What about Wilma Deering (as played by Erin Grey)?



Or how about Lornette "Mace" Mason?



Or, if you want to reach into crossover genre territory, Emma Peel?



And that's just some of the important TV and film leading ladies left out. Don't even get me going on how egregious it is for any list of SF&Fantasy heroines to leave of Jirel of Joiry. Not to mention real life heroines of SF&Fantasy like Catherine Lucille Moore and Leigh Brackett (to mention only two).

New Collectible Miniatures Game to Debut at Origins Game Fair

A number of gaming titles are premiering at Origins Game Fair this year and among that list of titles is one potentially exciting new game. Game designers who worked on the very successful HeroClix, Pirates of the Spanish Main, and Mechwarrior skirmish based miniatures game are set to release a collectible unit level miniatures war game entitled Arcane Legions.

The game will include armies based on alternate history versions of the Roman Empire, Egyptian Imperium, and Han Dynasty. In addition to the standard historical units one might expect in a traditional historical miniatures line, Arcane Legions will include figures based upon creatures of legend that each faction can use in battle.

Wells Expeditions, the company manufacturing the game, promises retailers and gamers that the game will be less expensive to collect than your typical collectible miniatures/war game. If their press release is to be believed, it certainly will be. According to the release:

Arcane Legions was designed to keep the number of products that need to be stocked and purchased to a minimum by making figures available by faction and offering a two-player Starter Game with more than 110 figures, plus rules, dice, bases and unit cards. Common figures have been removed from randomized Booster Packs and placed into fixed Cavalry and Infantry Army Packs, and sets have been made intentionally small to make collecting even easier. In fact, a player can buy a "Legion Bundle," eight faction-specific Boosters, and get every collectable figure in that faction - guaranteed! Keeping a player's investment low and their enjoyment level high makes Arcane Legions the ideal miniatures game.

As someone who has had to fork out untold dollars buying sets of D&D miniatures from retailers who are willing to break open packs and assemble them, I am very grateful to hear that a collectible game manufacturer is making an effort to satisfy me as a consumer. Based on the pictures posted on the Wells Expeditions update blog (one of those images is included below), the figures look to be within the industry standard for the market. Given the inclusion of some previously underrepresented eras, these figures will have applications beyond use in Arcane Legions games. My D&D game can always use some Egyptian or Han styled figures.

Fantasy Flight Games to Publish Warhammer Fantasy Board Game

Over the past couple of years, Fantasy Flight Games used their game publishing agreement with Games Workshop to revise and republish a number of classic Games Workshop board games from the late 80s. Among these classics are Fury of Dracula, Warrior Knights, and Talisman. Old editions of these games were grabbing onerously high prices on eBay and preventing new gamers from discovering these gems and it has been a blessing that Fantasy Flight Games has brought them back into the marketplace. Some of us are still hoping that Fantasy Flight Games will release a new edition of Space Hulk or Warhammer Quest, though we're not holding our breath as Doom and Descent are pretty good replacements for those hard to find gems.

Following up on the success of these reprints, Fantasy Flight Games will be releasing an original board game based on Games Workshop's Warhammer Fantasy line of products. The game, entitled Chaos in the Old World, puts players in the role of one of four gods of chaos who are descending upon the world in order to remake it as they would see fit.



As Fantasy Flight Games' website describes it:

Chaos in the Old World makes you a god. Each god’s distinctive powers and legion of followers grant you unique strengths and diabolical abilities with which to corrupt and enslave the Old World. Khorne, the Blood God, the Skulltaker, lusts for death and battle. Nurgle, the Plaguelord, the Father of Corruption, luxuriates in filth and disease. Tzeentch, the Changer of Ways, the Great Conspirator, plots the fate of the universe. Slaanesh, the Prince of Pleasure and Pain, the Lord of Temptations, lures even the most steadfast to his six deadly seductions. Yet, as you and your fellow powers of Chaos seek domination by corruption and conquest, you must vie not only against each other, but also against the desperate denizens of the Old World who fight to banish you back to the maelstrom of the Realm of Chaos."

The description implies that the players compete not only against one another, but against the mechanics of the game itself. As in Reiner Knizia's Lord of the Rings -- also published by Fantasy Flight Games -- this can be a rewarding play experience. I eagerly await seeing how Eric M. Lang applies his excellent card game development skills to a competitive board game. The hardest part, other than the waiting, will be choosing between the "six deadly seductions" and the Blood God.

The games first print run will also include two cards that will interact with the Warhammer Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game. The Signet of the Cursed Company lets you wander the battlefields of the Warhammer Online MMO as a fearsome skeletal warrior. The Call to WAR will instantly teleport you to your capital city.

Movies Christian Loves, But Shouldn't #1: Vision Quest

A couple of weeks ago, Nancy Rommelmann -- who put this interesting piece on a question of journalistic ethics up Tuesday -- had a post on her blog asking her readers to post links to songs they should hate, but find immensely enjoyable. Naturally, this prompted me to post a Rick Roll in the comments section. I did this for three reasons. For the fun of it, because the post was essentially begging me to, and because it genuinely is a song that always gets me to do the embarrassing "sway the arms while driving" dance. Her post also prompted me to check out the new Tinted Windows "supergroup" CD, which I have found I enjoy in that Oneders kind of way. Tinted Windows is fronted by Taylor Hanson, of Hanson fame, so I should despise them -- but I find my mp3 player playing a disproportionate number of songs from the album.

Needless to say, Rommelmann's post reminded me of one of the two songs that I truly cannot turn away from -- John Waite's Change -- and the film that contains the scene that always jumps to the forefront of my mind when I hear the song.

Excuse me, I'll be right back. I have to work out before I finish this post.

Click the second link in the above paragraph to watch the scene while I jump rope for two minutes.

Whew...back.

Now that you have clicked the last link, you know that John Waite's Change reminds me of the film Vision Quest. If someone were to describe the plot of the film to me in order to see if I would be interested in watching it with them, they'd have to wake me up a couple of seconds after they began their synopsis. The story is the typical coming of age high school male story that usually leaves me cold. Very rarely do they touch upon anything I find meaningful. I usually find the protagonists alien and the world they come from foreign.

Take White Water Summer, starring Sean Astin, as an example. I'm supposed to sympathize with Astin's character, and the fact that I like the actor should make this easy, but I never have. I see Astin's "city kid forced to endure the tyranny of a psychopathic camping enthusiast" as a lying cheating wuss. I always root for Kevin Bacon, who plays the mentally unstable youth counselor. Astin's character just needs to suck it up. And don't even get me going on how The Karate Kid's Daniel-san deserves every Karate kick to the gut he gets after he lied about knowing the martial arts. If you lie to be cool, you'd better be willing to face the consequences -- even if they mean your leg gets swept.

Vision Quest is the tale of Louden Swain (Matthew Modine) who decides to attempt an impossible task. He decides to leave his wrestling weight class, where he is likely the best wrestler in Washington state, to go down two weight classes and wrestle an inhuman wrestling machine named Shute. Shute is so inhuman that his workout regimen includes carrying a massive log on his back while he walks up and down every step of a college football stadium. It is a boring and predictable plot that we've seen done better in the classic Breaking Away where the actions of the protagonist speak for the frustrations of an entire socio-economic sub-culture. Swain isn't a proxy for the frustrations of blue collar Americans who have watched their hopes and dreams disappear as the economy has made the trades of their parents -- and what their future might have been -- obsolete. Swain's character lacks that depth, so I should hate the film.

But I don't. I own the DVD, and whenever Vision Quest is on cable I am compelled to watch. In the case of Vision Quest, it isn't the story that keeps me coming back, it is the characters. Louden Swain was one of the first characters I saw that seemed like a real person to me. When he talked about why he did one thing or another, it made sense and Matthew Modine's performance captured the sense of confusion I felt throughout my teen years.

Then there's Linda Fiorentino. I'd like to take a moment to thank the movies of the '80s for bringing Linda Fiorentino to the big screen. Her performances in Vision Quest and Gotcha! are two of the sexiest performances I have ever seen in film. The 14 year-old boy I was when I saw this movie quickly learned how powerful teenage hormones can be, and he had Linda Fiorentino to thank. This isn't to say that Fiorentino's performance is all "beauty" and no substance, it is the enigmatic depth of her character that makes her so appealing. Here is a women who simultaneously displays interest and disdain, certainty and confusion, naiveté and experience. She's quite a character, and leaves a lasting impression on any viewer.

Even the films minor characters leave lasting impressions. From Daphne Zuniga's performance as the plucky young editor of the school newspaper to Michael Schoeffling's performance as Kuch, one gets a sense of having met real people when the film has ended. When I saw Gross Anatomy years later, it was easy to imagine that the Matthew Modine and Daphne Zuniga characters were the same people from Vision Quest four years later. It should be noted that Zuniga's cute and quirky performance in this film so impressed the 14 year-old me that it is she who I have had a crush on ever since and not Linda Fiorentino. Yes, Fiorentino is a sexual force on the screen, but Zuniga is who I wanted to date.

Even though I should hate it, I can think of far worse things to do with 90 minutes than watch Vision Quest.

Beowulf: Prince of the Geats, Popular Medievalism, and You

Cinerati friend, and Medieval Scholar, Professor Richard Scott Nokes of Troy University (the other Trojans) has post today where he discusses an editorial dilemma faced by a scholarly publication when they were deciding how to publish his paper "Beowulf: Prince of the Geats, Nazis, and Odinists." His article touches upon why the study of popular medievalism is a vital component of any serious scholarship regarding Medieval literature. His paper begins with a discussion of how important Beowulf -- the poem -- has been to various groups for the purposes of national identity, and posits that scholars (and I'm reading a little into Dr. Nokes' words here) need to be able to look at their valued literary artifacts from outside the ivory tower and take seriously popular uses, and misuses, of their beloved tomes.

Professor Nokes' discussion of the moral dilemma the publication faced, and the paper itelf, are worth your time. Stop over and give them a read.

Speaking of worthy reads/plays, here is a glimpse at some of the items Cinerati thinks belong in everyone's "popular medieval" library/game room.

Fantasy Flight Games' Beowulf: The Legend, is an excellent game that mechanically attempts to emulate the rhythm of an epic poem.

I have always enjoyed the TSR Minigames SAGA and VIKING GODS. It should be noted that if you choose to play the Aesir in VIKING GODS, your chances for victory are very slim. The game is very fun, but you must go in with the proper sense of doom. Hela is no ally to the Aesir in this game.

I also enjoy RAGNAROK by SPI, a game that was originally published in an issue of Ares magazine. The Aesir aren't nearly as doomed in the game, so you don't need to be as fatalistic when you begin play.

Over the past two years, White Wolf Publishing released their excellent Scion role playing game. In the game, the players assume the roles of the descendants of ancient gods who have been at war with the Titans for millenia. While the premise of gods versus titans leaps straight from Greek mythology, the game assumes that many pantheons are participating in the same struggle. Naturally, the Giants and other monstrosities from Norse legend fit perfectly within this paradigm and the players can play the Scion's of Thor, Odin, Tyr, or even Loki. The game was originally planned to be three books, which contained a campaign where the players progress from Hero to Demi-God to one of the Gods in the struggle against the Titans.

The success of the Scion title led White Wolf to publish a companion, with more pantheons, and an alternate campaign book entitled Ragnarök. We here at Cinerati cannot wait to play in a Ragnarök game. Ever since hearing tales of our friend Roger Frederick's modern day Ragnarök campaign in the early 90s/late 80s (it used the GURPS Supers system), we have been on the lookout for a well constructed offering that approached the quality hinted at by Roger's players. Sadly, Roger wasn't a part of the writing of this project, but it is an excellent read.

As an aside, I have always wondered if the Völuspá was operating at the behest of Odin in order to fool the giants into thinking they would eventually win in their struggle against the Aesir and Vanir. By giving them a "prophecy" where the trickster betrays the gods in favor of the giants, Odin delays the war and increases the tenants of Valhalla. It would be a grand trick indeed if the Völuspá were a lie.

Thanks George Lucas, Because 10 Years Ago You Killed My Childhood Forever

Marc Bernardin reminds me why today is a sad day for Gen X.

When I was really young, I used to spend the night at my grandparents house every Saturday night. It was a magical time. Like most kids who visit their grandparents, my time with Oma and Opa was spent reading, picnicking, washing cars, getting to sleep in to ridiculous hours on Sunday, and experiencing the love of one's elders -- which included a very different set of social norms from life with my parents. My Opa was a retired career Sergeant Major in the Army who had served in WWII, Korea, and Vietnam. And when my Opa returned home to the United States after his tour with the US Occupation forces in Europe, he brought my Oma from Germany to our fair shores.

For the most part, my Oma and Opa were serious people. After dinner, we always watched the news and Oma and Opa were always interested in my opinions on the issues of the day. This was true when I was 14 and it was true when I was 7.

But the times with Oma and Opa weren't always so serious. Some of my favorite times were when my very serious Opa would, almost at random, tease my Oma with some sarcastic remark or jibe. His giggle was infectious and watching Oma go from red with anger at being criticized to laughing out loud and poking Opa when she realized it was only a jibe, is one of my fondest sets of memories from childhood.

The other time things weren't too serious at Oma and Opa's was late Saturday evenings. My Opa would stay up with me and watch the old Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers serials on some UHF bandwidth local station. I hadn't seen anything like them, and I was immediately addicted. Opa also introduced me to the glorious films of Ray Harryhausen. So in the summer of 1977 when STAR WARS was released in the theater, I had the perfect background of experience having spent a good part of 1976 and early 1977 watching the old serials with Opa. The movie captured the feel of those classic tales perfectly, and even borrowed some scenes. I dare anyone to watch the Flash Gordon serials without experiencing moments of "déjà cinema". I was 6 years old and STAR WARS was a joy to see in the theater. I watched it over 20 times in the theaters -- I am certain that is a conservative estimate. The serials fostered my love of narrative storytelling, but STAR WARS cemented my love for movies.

This is a love that continues to this day, but a part of the childhood wonder I brought to every movie I watched died ten years ago today. You see...on that day ten years ago, George Lucas released STAR WARS EPISODE ONE: THE PHANTOM MENACE. The movie was the single largest pop culture disappointment I have ever experienced. It was worse that when DC killed Superman and broke Batman's back. It was a worse disappointment than the Joel Schumacher Batman movies (though not a worse movie than those movies).

THE PHANTOM MENACE wasn't that bad of a movie, all things considered, but it did lack one thing that the original had in spades. The new movie lacked "heart." It didn't contain the same sense of wonder that inspired the first films, it seemed more workmanlike than inspired. The original series of films has a number of flaws, narratively and cinematically. For example, ust how long does it take for the Sarlacc to digest you? But the original films had an aura of enchantment that the franchise has failed to recapture as it has become more about continuing STAR WARS and less about sharing the wonder of a tradition of Space Opera tales.

Since THE PHANTOM MENACE, my movie viewing has become a little more cynical and I don't go in expecting to feel enchanted anymore. Sometimes a film can make me feel slightly enchanged, STAR TREK and QUANTUM OF SOLACE come close, but I no longer watch previews expecting that they even come close to representing the wonder (or lack thereof) that a particular film will offer.

Don't even get me going on how much I think WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE will suck.

Books Every Gamer Should Own: Rick Swan's The Complete Guide to Roleplaying Games

In November of 1990, the world of role playing games was still largely a mystery to the majority of mass culture. Most people "knew," thanks to the culture wars, that D&D was devil worship and it made you go crazy like Tom Hanks in "that" made for TV movie. There had been some products released in the 1980s that attempted to convey to the lay person what role playing games were about and what some of the best role playing games were. These products did a good job of introducing the concepts, systems, and assumptions underlying role playing games as a hobby. They also provided great information to those who wanted a better understanding of these games than the evening news was providing them -- sadly not enough people read these books and some of the misconceptions regarding rpgs linger into the modern day.

While the concept of what role playing games are was a mystery to the majority of the public, the vast array of products available and whether they were of good quality or not was largely a mystery to the majority of gamers. Unless you subscribed to THE SPACE GAMER, WHITE DWARF (before it became all Warhammer all the time), THE DRAGON, or some other gaming magazine -- most of which were fairly obscure and weren't available at your local bookstore (THE DRAGON being the exception) -- you had no source for thoughtful and accurate reviews. Since the creation of the role playing game hobby, circa 1973 with the publication of D&D, literally hundreds of new games -- in a wide variety of genre -- had been published. Some were still in print, others had come into print and faded away. Unless you had a phenomenal hobby store in your local community you were likely unaware of the majority of these games.



Into this product rich and information scarce environment arrived a perfect catalog for the role playing aficionado, Rick Swan's The Complete Guide to Role-Playing Games. Even if the "complete" in the title was a bit of an exaggeration, there were many games excluded from the book, the volume is was an invaluable resource for the gamer who wanted to know what was available in 1990 and whether it was any good or not. The fact that the book is topical today is a testimony to the insightful reviews provided by Rick Swan. The majority of the reviews are "true reviews" and not merely product recommendations. This is because the reviews don't merely provide a recommendation pro or con a particular product, they also give a glimpse into the history and mechanics of the game. One can determine whether a particular review is a "true review" or a mere product recommendation by asking themselves one simple question about the review, "does this review add value to the 'art' in addition to evaluating a particular product or work?" In the case of games, a "true review" would include meaningful discussion regarding game design -- from either a mechanical or narrative perspective. Many of the reviews in Rick Swan's book meet this criterion.

This isn't to say that I agree with every review, I don't, but it is to say that the vast majority of the reviews in this book are a worthy read for gamers of any generation.

An example of an argument that Swan presents in the book that has shaped the way I view my hobby (how often can you say a review has shaped the way you view a particular medium?) is this section of his review of the Dungeons and Dragons Game -- in this case the Red Box Basic Set and not AD&D:

Purists grumble that D&D isn't just simple, but simple-minded. The rigid character classes give players little freedom in customizing their PCs, and advancement by levels is arbitrary and unrealistic. The magic system and combat rules are illogical, Armor Classes represent the chance of being hit rather than offering protection from damage, experience points are meaningless and abstract, the adventures are juvenile... you get the idea.

These grouches completely miss the point. Complaining that Dungeons and Dragons is an unrealistic RPG is like saying that chess is an inaccurate wargame. We aren't talking about delving into the social structure of medieval Europe here, we're talking about tossing fireballs at lizard men and swiping gold pieces from ogres. Dungeons and Dragons provides a streamlined, easily mastered set of rules that emphasizes action and adventure. And as a bonus, it's an excellent introduction to the entire hobby.

This is only a small section of Swan's review of the D&D game, which he gives 3 1/2 stars out of 4, but within these two paragraphs you can begin to see an underlying philosophy of what role playing game design should focus on. In this case, the argument is that it is perfectly appropriate for a game to focus on fun at the expense of realism -- an argument that Gary Gygax often made in THE DRAGON while defending his creation. Amazingly, many of the criticisms launched at Basic D&D can be heard in the criticisms many people are making of the newest edition of D&D (4th Edition). It is often said that the game is overly simple, for MMORPG obsessed teens, for those too stupid to understand the complex rules of 3.5, and a score of other statements that echo the sentiments that Swan so easily pushes to the side. Like the Basic Set, 4e is an excellent introduction to the entire hobby.

As I wrote earlier, Swan's review of D&D is one of the things that helped shape my appreciation for the gaming hobby and helped me form my underlying philosophy. My philosophy is simple, the system should serve the intention -- an adaptation of form follows function. But in the case of my gaming philosophy, ornament isn't necessarily a crime -- ornament can be the purpose; and in the case of games the narrative "fluff" can be said to be the ornamentation surrounding the mechanical design. The ends of gaming is "fun" and though that word can have many definitions, it is the goal of the game designer (and the DM and players in interactive role playing games) to play toward the goal of fun. Needless to say, fun trumps verisimilitude at every turn in my gaming philosophy. I'm not a purist. I like elements of chance introduced into my games. But then again, much to the dismay of Adolf Loos, I adore art nouveau.

It is this love of "form follows fun," that also points to the review where I most disagree with Mr. Swan. He is unkind to the classic Pacesetter game Chill. According to Swan Chill is:

a horror game for the easily frightened...While most of Chill's vampires, werewolves, and other B-movie refugees wouldn't scare a ten-year-old, they're appropriate to the modest ambitions of the game...Though it's been out of print for years, Chill remains as popular as ever on the convention circuit. I'm not sure why...Chill is too shallow for extended campaigns and lacks the depth to please anyone but the most undemanding of players.

I guess for Mr. Swan it's okay for a fantasy game to be about throwing fireballs at lizard men, but it isn't okay for a horror game to be based on the Universal Classic Horrors or the glorious Hammer films. Mr. Swan, it seems, is only satisfied by the deeply nihilistic horror of the Lovecraftian kind exemplified by Call of Cthulhu where life is meaningless. Too bad, Chill has some wonderful fodder for the Game Master well versed in the classic horror tale who wants his players to be ghost hunters like the Winchester Brothers rather than gibbering lunatics who have seen what man was not meant to know. I have always been struck by how an individual can defend the simple gateway game on one hand, but then dismiss another because it isn't high art. And that criticism can apply to any number of critics.

Disagreements aside, the book is a wonderful and necessary edition to any gamer's library.