And I wouldn't be so defensive if actual, multi-billion dollar studios weren't weaponizing their fans against each other, gaslighting their audience trying to rewrite history (looking at you, Woman King and Cleopatra the "documentary"), or accusing their audience of racism or sexism just for not seeing a bad film.  If a film looks bad, I won't see it, regardless if it's lead by a female ensemble (Ghostbusters, 2016).  Make a good film first, focus on your checkboxes later.

This roiling landscape of shifting blame and shattered integrity, gaslighting and gatekeeping, crushing otherwise decent humans for the simple sin of not being interested - terrifies me on the grand scale of the entertainment industry.  It is rare to find something without an agenda.
  To which you reply, "It's entertainment, everyone has an agenda!"  And yet, in the quiet corners of Hollywood, far from the bastions of scandal and woke, we get a Top Gun: Maverick - a film that makes no promises other than to be entertaining (and it delivers).  Or a masterpiece like Puss In Boots: The Last Wish - a beautifully animated fairy tale with a lot to say on life, death, and happiness, if you just take the time to watch it.  And though it was released before this string of years that feel like an eternity burrito wrapped in guilt, Spider-man: Into the Spiderverse is STILL lauded as one of the greatest animated films of all time.  No messages or agendas...just stories.

And that is why I am so sad for Hollywood.  The mainstream studios are precise and ironic examples of having so much potential, literally BILLIONS of dollars in resources, and not knowing how to use them.  Disney walked into Star Wars without a plan, and it SHOWS.  How embarrassing for them.  How shameful.  After decades of entertainment, the execs didn't think far enough ahead to avoid becoming a laughingstock in the industry.  
  Disney's stock dropped by 50% and HAS NOT RECOVERED.  If you feel the same as I on their business practices, we could literally collectively buy them out, and start over.  It is baffling the rate at which the fandom has turned on Disney and others like them; no matter the remaining projects, it is clear that one of the biggest studios on the planet is mishandling a beloved franchise, and burning the other to the ground.

Remember, inclusion and diversity are not a bad thing.  Vilifying specific groups to raise up others...is.  
Thor is now a moron to laughable levels to pave the way for...Taika Watiiti?  Valkyrie?  I actually don't know.  Just seems mean-spirited for no reason.
Loki has been reduced to a moron to make way for Female Loki (Sylvie).
The Mandalorian has been reduced in intelligence, agency, and resourcefulness to make way for Bo Katan.
Hawkeye is a side character in his own show (even though I like Kate Bishop).
Bruce Banner, a literal genius, who has gone through over five films of character development and personal growth, is reduced to a montage of jokes and outclassed in every way by She-Hulk because "Go Women," I guess.

The list, unfortunately, goes on, and the House of Mouse's hate boner for their legacy characters is baffling.  It's also COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY.  You don't have to diminish or destroy one character to lift up another.  You can retain and respect where a character has come from AND usher in the next generation.  That way, you don't alienate fans.
  Instead, what we're getting is a push too hard and too fast toward certain "woke" ideologies to the point of brow-beating, scolding, and pandering.  As if we should all feel bad for liking Phase 1, 2, or 3.  That because we identified with a flawed character who grew over time (ya know, with an arc), that we're "part of the problem."  That if we can't connect with a flawless, superpowered, rude heroine that belittles and conquers the weak men around her with little effort...then we're just sexist, and should shut up.
  This is backfiring while these studios double down.  It is appalling, and a complete waste of time.  Better scripts, better films, better plans.  That's how you win us back.  I will not be guilted into watching a crap product.

​Most of what I see, I'm not excited for.  I don't look forward to many films.  The system is currently broken.
But there are glimmers; rays of possibility, stretching outside the echo chamber to actually make art again.  And, as I've stated, that is one of our fundamental truths.   

Thank you for reading this long.
Stay safe out there, nerds.
-Adamus

In 2002, shortly after wrapping filming on Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, acclaimed Irish Actor Richard Harris passed away.  Known for numerous rolls dating all the way back to the 1950s, Harris was fondly remembered in his later years for his stoicism and calm, commanding presence - most notably featured in his roles as Albus Dumbledore and Marcus Aurelius (Gladiator, 2000).  His fellow actors mourned his loss with reverence and respect.
  In 2004, Harry Potter and Prisoner of Azkaban released and Michael Gambon took on the mantle of Albus Dumbledore.  He received expected criticism and praise for his rendition, and he did his best to honor the groundwork laid by the late Harris.  The collective audience also mourned Harris, and we understood; it sucked, but the show must go on.
Actors are people.  And sometimes those people die.  

Characters are immortal.

On August 28th, 2020, accomplished and iconic actor Chadwick Boseman passed away.  Unbeknownst to the larger public, Boseman had been battling colon cancer throughout most of his career.  His charisma and professionalism was intoxicating on and off the set, landing iconic roles of heroes real and fictional alike.  Most notably before his death, Boseman was instrumental in bringing a faithful and powerful face to Black Panther in 4 films, one of which his own flagship.  
  Black Panther both as a film and a character were startlingly successful.  Not unlike Robert Downey Jr., who no one could see as anything but Iron Man, many people had cemented Boseman in the role of Black Panther.  At the eve of his death, amidst the mourning, came the question: Who would replace him?  The character's story was meant to continue - who could wear the mantle?

But in Modern Hollywood, actors are intrinsically bound to their characters.  If Boseman weren't around to play him, then there would be no T'Challa.  
  Now, comics offer storytelling branches too numerous to count.  Ways to lift the mantle of Black Panther and place it upon another; these stories do it all the time.  The character of Shuri (played by Letitia Wright), for example, takes on the mantle at some point in the character's history - so this is certainly an option, and, spoilers, is precisely what happened.
However, in the 20 years between Harris's death (who was beloved as Dumbledore) and the release of Black Panther: Wakanda Forever in 2022, something fundamentally changed.  I think Wakanda Forever still did its best to honor Boseman and what he brought to the character...but something just didn't sit right about it.

Actors are NOT their characters.

In Star Trek: Beyond (the third film in the Abrams reboot franchise), the character of Hikaru Sulu was shown to have a husband and a daughter.  It wasn't a big deal in the film, just a few passing shots, but it struck a strange chord with people.  John Cho, the new Sulu, leaned into the idea without issue.  However, the change was in homage to George Takei, the original actor known for the role, who is now openly gay.  Thing is, Takei calls the adjustment, "unfortunate."  Hikaru Sulu is canonically straight in the original Star Trek series.  To make him gay just because the original actor is, is weird and misplaced.  In fact, Zachary Quinto, who plays Spock in the reboot, is openly gay, but his character is in a heterosexual relationship with Nyota Uhura.  The former is strange, the latter is fine.  The difference is in blurring the lines between actor and character.
  Now, it's a reboot, so romances, sexualities, even genders can be changed, swapped, whatever.  It is not, inherently, a bad thing.  But it did set a strange precedent.

I wonder sometimes on the parasocialism of television and film.  How engrossed some of us are in the visions depicted on screen: who is acting, who they are, their lives and struggles, separating them from the character they portray, or mixing it all together.  When a portrayal really connects, do we unconsciously place an undue weight upon it?  We enjoy them so much, that if they were to ever leave...it would be akin to a death in the family.  And that to live through that pain would fill us with fear that we may never connect in such a way again.
  I understand the difference between life and fiction.  I grew up in the theater - I was an understudy often, stepping up and stepping in when others were sick.  I did scene work, and props, and sets.  I sang backup, I sang lead, I harmonized.  Portrayals change all the time.  Each one is a gift and a curse, and each one I welcome.  
There is a nuance to acting, and there are many actors.

Am I sad that Chadwick Boseman left us?  Absolutely.
Do I think he is the only person on this planet that can play T'Challa?  Absolutely not.

And I am concerned about the death grip that some studios tighten on actors for the characters they play.

For 17 years, Hugh Jackman depicted the role of Logan/Wolverine in all X-Men films.  His star power became the key draw to the franchise, launching the character to center stage.  After Logan (2017), it seemed that Jackman could put the character to rest.  Currently 54, Jackman had been undergoing intense physical training just to MAINTAIN the strength and aesthetic of The Wolverine, which has only become MORE insane as time has gone on.  
  Jackman, during a late night talk show after Logan's release, was asked how he achieved the "ripped and beaten" look of his character, to which Jackman replied, "Well, there's thing called dehydration..."  I laughed, but the audience was silent, so Jackman continued to explain to the idiot audience that he would DEHYDRATE himself to the point where the layer of moisture in his skin would deplete, so we can see all his muscles.  The extra bit we don't get in the interview is the fact that he would act in his scenes and then take a tiny thimble of water so as not to PASS OUT.  (the male fitness standard for Hollywood is mile-high stupid)
  Not until the announcement of Deadpool 3 did we think Jackman would return.
But here's the thing: Wolverine is a character.  What happens when Jackman is really done?  Can the mantle be passed?  
This viewer hopes so - give the guy a break, would ya?  Let him drink some water, too.

When Robert Downey Jr. announced his last hurrah as Tony Stark, his character was killed.  When Chris Evans moved on from Captain America, his character passed away.  I don't know if that's an act of respect, like "no one could replace you," or an act to avoid the vocal minority of a fanbase that grew too attached.

Or MAYBE.  We just need a break.  Steve Rogers and Tony Stark had one hell of an arc; no question.  Endgame put a powerful, and graceful bow on that.  I'm pretty satisfied with it.  AND.  If they were to return, could I see another actor wear  the shield or put on the suit - unequivocally YES.

I just want to make sure that our actors can be ACTORS first, and characters when they want to be.  It is our job as audience members to keep them separate; they have lives too, and we would want to grant them the grace we all deserve.  To step down from a role, to pass the torch with a blessing, to keep their lives separate from their work, and to pass on with peace and grace.

I don't know what my point is today, or tomorrow, but thank you for reading.
-Adamus

Obi-Wan Kenobi had some problems.  Let's talk about it.

(Spoiler Warning for: Seasons 1 & 2 of The Mandalorian, Season 1 of The Book Of Boba Fett, and Obi-Wan Kenobi)

There is a term in film referred to as Chekhov's Gun.  It is a dramatic principle coined by one Russian playwright, Anton Chekhov.  It states that all significant details introduced into a story should serve a narrative function, and irrelevant elements should be removed.  Elements that never come into play act as "false promises" to the audience, eroding their trust and enjoyment.
  Now, Kenobi is pretty tight for its runtime, and does a decent job in setting up elements to be used later.  A Jedi's entire power set is a framework for Chekhov's Gun.  Show them studying a new power?  It should show up later in an impactful way.  They retrieve their lightsaber?  They better pull that sucker out when it matters.  
  And it works for everything.  Want a character to have an impactful, dramatic sacrifice involving a thermal detonator?  Show them clipping that detonator to their belt, or talking about it.  A character mentions their undercover experience?  Time for an infiltration!
  These aren't cheap tricks.  It's filmmaking 101.  A more broad term for this is Setup and Payoff.  If you introduce an element, there should be a satisfying payoff for it.  Time isn't usually a factor - some elements play the long game, some are a few seconds of sequence.  A change of lighting can be its own setup, and the flare of a blade summoned into being is the payoff.  Subtle and elegant, loud and obnoxious, it fits all types.  
  But you have to plan for these things.  It requires time, practice, and follow-through.  Unfortunately, it seems, Disney built many setups and either haven't paid them off yet, or forgot about them altogether (and considering there's no real reason for a Season 2, my money's on the latter).  
Below you'll find a few instances that stung - wonderful setups with either no payoff, or something less than satisfying:
1. In the first episode, we're shown Kenobi slicing meat in an assembly line and walking down the line to get his wages.  The poor guy ahead of him notices that the wage is half from the day before, but the boss is aggressive about it, so he just takes it.  Kenobi watches, gets his pay, and doesn't cause trouble.  My thought: Kenobi's in a dark, repressed place, but he's a good guy; maybe he'll check up on that guy's family later and send them some food that he caught in the wilds, or we'll see him back on the line at the end and he sticks up for the guy, using his Jedi Mind Trick to help out the workers subtly.  REALITY: we never see that old gentleman again.  Can this still work to illustrate Kenobi's state of mind on the surface?  Of course!  But it feels like a missed opportunity.
2. Somewhere near the middle of the run, Leia gets captured, threatened, and then strapped to some machine.  The Inquisitor gets called away, leaving two Stormtroopers to guard her.  Then the lights go out.  My thought: we're going to see a lightsaber blur into being just long enough to watch a trooper get cut down, the other's gonna' freak out and fire, either hitting his buddy and then getting a blaster bolt deflected into him or get cut down just as fast.  Kenobi's cut through droids and blast doors like butter before, this is going to look so cool!  REALITY: a blue lightsaber springs into being and clocks a Stormtrooper, bouncing off of him like a baseball bat (what?), then cuts him down in 3-4 swings.  The other guy, apparently too slow to notice or shoot, shouts into the darkness before Kenobi reappears and baps him around a bit before we finally see a streak through his armor.  My issue: Lightsabers don't behave like that.  They never have.  They deflect blaster fire, which isn't stopped by trooper armor.  They punch through blast doors feet thick.  Those troopers aren't my man Mando in bescar plate; lightsabers cut through them like butter.  This fact is compounded by at least three other instances where higher level soldiers are straight up STABBED THROUGH THE CHEST by a lightsaber, and a door is sliced open.  Just...why?  Stabbing's no big issue, but slicing's bad?
3. Our Inquisitor of spoilers goes by the name Reva.  She is ruthless, rageful, and trying hard to get that sweet sweet Grand Inquisitor title.  Turns out (SPOILERS) she's actually a youngling who lived through the purge at the Jedi temple.  She says she played dead, but it's unclear if Anakin just missed her or didn't deal a killing blow.  Reva has joined the Inquisitors and risen through the ranks in order to kill Vader herself; revenge for those he slaughtered during the purge.  Kenobi guesses this with previous clues and the two hatch a plan where Kenobi can get some rebels to safety and she can get her revenge.  My thought: Vader's coming and he's coming fast; I can't wait to see him wreck shop!  I heard that he can pull ships, so maybe he'll grab onto their runaway ship and Kenobi will resist him, which distracts him long enough for Reva to strike.  She'll get a few good hits in, Obi-Wan escapes, and then she's done for, but it'll be a poignant duel.  REALITY: Vader wrecks shop, ripping a ship from the sky faster than anyone I've seen, and starts tearing it apart like a cat on meth.  Then, a SECOND ship that we've never seen before lifts off at blinding speed and zooms into space (looked janky as hell).  Dude can sense everything, but couldn't tell that the ship he just turned into tissue paper was empty or that the one 5 feet from it had his old master.  So...after Kenobi and company are long gone...Reva finally makes her move.  He stops her, toys with her, it's not even a fight.  Then he stabs her through the chest and she dies.  What did she think was going to happen?  Kenobi gave her an opening and she didn't take it.
4. ...Reva doesn't die.  Lady gets stabbed literally through the chest by a freaking lightsaber and just...walks it off.  My thought: ...okay.  Well, maybe she can spin a little redemption and join Obi-Wan in the final battle; maybe she fights off the other Inquisitors so Kenobi can get to Vader!  REALITY: (In a move that feels like a quick re-shoot) Reva learns that Vader has a son on Tatooine, gets her broken ass up and over there in record time, BEATS UP UNCLE OWEN AND AUNT VARU, chases little Luke into the desert and makes him slip on some rocks and get knocked out, then draws her lightsaber with the intent to kill him.  ...Except she can't do it, she LITERALLY CAN'T.  So what stops her is that she sees herself in the boy and returns him to his family.  Not sure what they'll tell little Luke about his harrowing experience...  What a waste.

The most frustrating thing about these is that if someone just took some time and thought about the whole package, the internal consistency of their own series, took one more sweep in the writer's room...all of this could have been cleaner, stronger, and more satisfying.  In the end, it feels so rushed for something that needed to feel thoughtful and genuine.
  In a nutshell, episode to episode, the series still delivers on its emotional beats.  It does a lot of things VERY well (showing a galaxy actually occupied by troops, Imperial sympathizers, spies, and the beginnings of a rebellion), and our young Princess Leia has Carrie Fisher's tenacity down pat.
BUT.
Was it truly necessary to include Luke and Leia to this degree?

Luke's inclusion, from a distance, makes sense.  Kenobi and Owen are friends, or at least used to be.  By the time Episode IV rolls around, Owen wants Luke to have nothing to do with "old Ben", and Luke doesn't have any relationship with the guy.  He's supposed to protect from a distance and be a recluse; that makes sense.
  Leia on the other hand...  If she shared this beautiful friendship (and it is quite wonderfully done, mind you) with Obi-Wan Kenobi...then why does she feel nothing when he dies in Episode IV (it barely registers for her).  She knows OF him through her father, Senator Organa, but if this whole adventure happened in the first place, did she just forget all about him?  Do they visit, do they talk, do they learn of each other as Leia grows up? (if they're trying so hard to connect relationships, this one hits strangely for me, like we're missing something)
  And how does Luke have no knowledge of the force or lightsabers if a literal Sith chased him into the desert.  Now, Owen knew she was coming and told Luke that it was a Tusken Raider, and you could argue that perhaps he never saw the lightsaber, but again if THIS happened, other events don't add up.

Now a lot of these gripes and elements are the product of a changing landscape and an expansion of creative content.  Not everything can line up perfectly all the time, wrapped up in a nice neat bow.  I should be happy we got the show at all.  And, considering that what they're connecting is nearly a 50 year span of creative content, including sweeping changes to film and television technology, how we consume and discuss media, and how companies react to those discussions.  
And yet...
  

  WHAT IF YOU JUST DIDN'T INCLUDE THEM?
The show is about the Inquisitors hunting down Jedi and Vader seeking Obi-Wan Kenobi.  It's about Kenobi's realization that Anakin is alive, but actually dead, and that the idea of Vader killed what he once was.  It's about their clash, and Kenobi's rise from a man in hiding back to a Jedi Master.  It's about him subduing threats to himself and the boy quietly in the sand, or across the galaxy in the forests of Alderaan.  I am here for THAT story; where he can never find true connection, but must protect while he struggles with his guilt over Anakin.
Sure, Leia did great.  Props to her.  Excellent performance.
Sure, Leia's new droid will sell a million toys.  It's adorable.
Sure, Kenobi and Vader's duel will elevate other Star Wars content because it really was that good.
It just didn't push any boundaries.  Everyone acts the way you expect them, lines written that we've heard a million times before, and outcomes that MUST work out...because other content exists.  The need for Disney to CONNECT every piece of their Star Wars universe has pushed them into difficult corners.  For now, we can shrug and let it go.  But how long can they do this before they have drained every last ounce of story from known characters and they must (GASP) head in a new direction?  (let's hope they actually plan it this time)

It was good enough.  
It was safe.
And not very interesting.

May the Force Be With You.
Always.
​-Adamus