A 2025 Multimedia Roundup

Every year, I gather my media goodies I accrued throughout the year and do one big infodump. A dump is an apt way to describe it. Much like how a body will absorb the essential nutrients from food and shits the rest, this blog will save the best of this year for a later entry. And today, you guys will get the excrements. Thankfully, a few pieces smell a tad nicer than others. Let's talk about one of those right now!

Video Games

UFO 50

I got a giant bag of kettle corn a while back, and it tasted great. The texture was immaculate. It had a sweet and saltiness to it. Genuine 10 out of 10 kettle corn. The problem is that they gave a giant bag of it. I suppose that's the problem with portion sizes in America. Something as genuinely great as that kettle corn will inevitably get stale if you are given too much of it. The law of diminishing returns is a law after all, and one I feel UFO 50 can't help but break. 

If you asked me what my favorite games I played this year were back in August, I would easily say UFO 50. Each game is wonderfully designed and nails the look and vibe the designers were going for. It's a genuinely inspired game in both concept and execution. But, as diverse as this 50-game pack is, the sheer size of it worn me down. I finished about a fifth of the pack before getting exhausted and moving on to other games in my backlog. 

Of course, no one forced me to binge all 50 games. But like that bag of kettle corn, it sure feels like it sometimes. The counter tracking how many games you've completed. The presentation of the menu almost challenging you to conquer them all. 

Unless you consider every game an absolute banger (which I doubt because Combatants exist), the game will have bumps that feel like a slog. 

Still, the reason this is my gaming's front running honorable mention is because the highs were very high. Attactics and Night Manor were the standouts of the ones I played and ones where I could see giving separate honorable mentions if they were sold as standalone experiences. Keep in mind that's merely two games out of fifty that all pursue the same level of care. 

Well make that forty-nine. Fuck Combatants. 

Locomotive

*Minor Spoilers for Locomotive and Secret of Monkey Island 2

My life's work can be boiled down to two things: Writing & finding new shit that captures the old shit I like. 

Secret of Monkey Island 2 is one of my favorite games from a novelty standpoint. Very few, and I mean VERY FEW, to me have captured the magic of Secret of Monkey Island. Many have tried and some brush against the special sauce, but no other game has nailed it. 

And before you ask, Locomotive doesn't nail it either, but Ill be happy to praise its many other qualities in spite of that. 

Locomotive is a complete homage to the era of Lucas Art adventure games. The art style and writing style feel one to one. And normally, what kills homages like this is that they may get the surface level right but lack the devilish details that take it from a great game to an amazing one. 

Now to their credit, this doesn't apply to the art and animation. The creative team absolutely perfected every muscle fiber of these characters. You can put this in a lineup of other Lucas Arts games, and it would be impossible to tell the difference. 

That said, while it's got the body and mind of a Lucas Arts game, it lacks the soul. 

The writing is perfectly fine if you were to judge it by its own merits. But since it wears its influences on its sleeves, you can't help but compare it to Monkey Island. And when you do that, you noticed Locomotive doesn't have quite the flourishes that makes the first two Monkey Island games or Grim Fandango special. It says a lot that even though Locomotive lacks any of the point and click frustrations the old school Lucas Arts games have, I would still would rather play those over Locomotive. 

It's hard to pinpoint why something doesn't have the 'special sauce.' I think the easiest way for me to demonstrate is to compare two somewhat similar scenes from each game.  (Ill try to be brief, I know I got a bunch of other reviews to get to.)

In Locomotive, there is a moment where you have to thwart a thug who is cheating at roulette. You use his own method against him to get him to lose while breaking into his room to remove his failsafe. Pretty simple.

In Monkey Island 2, the first major problem involves the protagonist encountering a bully character who stole your money. The sequences involve a series of encounters that culminate in desecrating a grave and stealing his laundry. All to make a voodoo doll out of him. 

See, while Locomotive is perfectly fine, it lacks the extra mile that Monkey Island constantly goes for its puzzle design. As Yahtzee points out in one of his essays, the process to completing puzzles allow for constant opportunities for texture and creative flourishes. In the laundry bit, for example, it would have been enough for the player to simply steal an article of clothing from a closet. But instead, you have to steal a laundry ticket which you have to take to a pirate themed laundry mat ran by a demented old man. That flourish is the soul of Monkey Island. Locomotive only has a handful of these flourishes that Monkey Island has in abundance. 

So in short, Locomotive is worth playing, but it is like recreating one of your grandmother's recipe. It may taste fine but it will always lack the most important ingredient of your grandmother's love, aka the extra knob of butter she secretly threw in even though her doctor told her to watch her cholesterol. 

Anton Blast

Games like Anton Blast are hard to write about. You want to judge the game on its own merits. It's clear passionate people spent a lot of time designing the levels, composing the music, all the things we take for granted that takes hundreds of hours to make when designing a game. All that work only for my first instinct when writing this review is to merely say "Pizza Tower was better." One sentence, and it all comes crumbling down. 

It sucks, because I really want to review this properly. It reflects how much Pizza Tower impacted my life to where it's hard to separate myself from it. So, if you are hoping for a standalone review, you won't get it here. 

I suppose another problem is that it's hard to compete with perfection. When you have something as perfect as Pizza Tower, you can only go down. 

Anton Blast is a perfectly fine game with less perfect systems that stick out more due to how tightly design the Warioland genre has demonstrated in the past. The movement is probably the big sticking point for me. The movement is more rigid leading to situations where I felt the game only had one approach to beating obstacles. In Pizza Tower, even when going for perfect runs, you have an abundance of choice in how you move. It leads to a more strategic platformer whereas Anton Blast feels like a typical platformer where you merely execute on the challenge. Learning to perfect a level in Pizza Tower is like learning a dance. It's clear and any mistake can be learned. Learning to perfect a level in Anton Blast feels like herding cats, and I did not find it satisfying. 

On its own, I thought Anton Blast was a good game. On a level to level basis, where I didn't bother with the completion aspects, it was a lot of fun. Unfortunately, it doesn't get better as you push it to its limit. 

Mario Kart World

I feel like Mario Kart World is emblematic of the best of times/worst of times vibe 2025 has been. This year has been a trifecta of amazing shit. The three media that I typically cover have all turned out some quality work this year. Almost no one has faltered in this regard. 

Mario Kart World, while not the best Mario Kart, still has the polish that goes farther than most games of its kind. It's a slick and a cozy game to put on after work. I put a good amount of hours into Mario Kart World. And my God, I could hear my inner child squealing at being able to casually explore all the tracks in the open world mode. 

But that being said, all this great media, including Mario Kart, is attached to all of this baggage. The worst of times. 

Mario Kart World certainly has a lot of good qualities. It also has an $80 price tag, an online component that further proves Nintendo aren't receptive of feedback, and is only played on a console that was littered with even more controversies on launch. Yeah, it's the best of times for media. It's also the worst of times of corporate exploitation, political fascism, and all the things that make a consumer of media complicit in these practices, regardless of how disagreeable you find them. It's the year of the phrase "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism." 

It makes it harder to review Mario Kart World, at least right now. Time will tell how Mario Kart World will be seen in the grand scope of the franchise. Lord knows Mario Kart is no different from any other franchise of getting better or worse with hindsight. Double Dash was somewhat polarizing on launch only for that game to eventually be considered as one of the best Mario Kart games. Conversely, Mario Kart 64, a game highly regarded for a number of years has seen some reevaluation as the games have gotten increasingly more polished. 

Gosh, this makes me want to do a ranking of all the Mario Kart games. We'll see. I also promised more Spiderman and God of War content, and I ain't doing that shit right now. Yeah, I tried God of War Ascension, and I thought it was so boring that I didn't have anything interesting to write about. God what a waste of God damn fucking-{idk how to end this review}  

Doom: The Dark Ages

This was one of my most anticipated releases in a year with a ton of anticipated releases. Unfortunately, this one fell short. 

Sequelitis is all over this game. I imagine the coroner got a rather stimulating day giving an autospy to this disease ridden corpse. "In the gameplay, you can see the sequelitis spreading to core causing elaboration via an incompatible parry mechanic. Moving on to the narrative, we can see sequelitis bring on an interesting effect of turning the subject into a Warhammer plot." 

So yeah, it's a standard case of the third entry of a trilogy being the weakest. But that being said, it's still pretty fun. Sure, it is nowhere as good as Doom 2016 and Doom Eternal. However, most FPSs aren't as good as Doom 2016 and Doom Eternal. And in the grand scope of the genre, The Dark Ages is a perfectly serviceable game. The game feel is still great. The weapons, while less elegantly designed, are creative and fun to use. And while Im sort of down on the sign posting of secrets being blatant, I don't know if that's worse than having to comb through an environment blurred by particle effects, dim lighting, and obscured ledges.  

And while I gave some shit to the parry mechanic, it had a few moments to shine. I think if the game had more faith in its audience, they would have made more challenging situations where using the shield would have been gratifying. Similar to Doom Eternal, there could have been some opportunities for some rock-paper-scissors combat. But aside from a few moments, the shield feels a little tacked on.

And yeah, the story is hot garbage. I understand this is a prequel which makes me want to replay Doom 2016. But if I had to venture a guess, there is absolutely nothing to indicate this game is a prequel. Maybe the lore hounds see something I don't. Ah who cares, if you are playing Doom for the continuity, you probably also play Super Mario Odyssey for the nuance interpersonal relationships. 

Other Mentions:

Ace Attorney Investigations: Im resigned to the reality that an Ace Attorney game won't ever blow my mind again. However, that doesn't mean I can't enjoy them like a flavorful bag of potato chips, like the luxury ridged kind. 

A Highland Song: It suffers the same problem I have with a lot of these artsy games where I feel the game would fit better as a movie. Though, it is not nearly as bad as Gris or other games like it.

Born of Bread: A Paper Mario clone that doesn't quite reach Bug Fables tier. 

Crypt Custodian: A perfectly serviceable Metroidvania.  

Hellboy: Web of Wyrd: I know there are far worse games out there. But, I can say with some confidence that this is one of the worst rogue likes ever made. 

Is This Seat Taken: A simple puzzle game that did enough to stimulate my aged brain. 

Miiside: It's got some neat ideas, but the narrative didn't do much to impress me. 

Powerwash Simulator 2: Know that there are certain synapses in my brain that thinks this is the best game ever. 

Sorry We're Closed: This will either be a solid Resident Evil clone or one of the best games you will ever play. Kind of depends on how Catholic or gay you are. 

Tomb Raider Remastered: Was great until the second one turned the gameplay into awkward Uncharted. 

Movies

Wake Up Dead Man

Let's explore the mystery of why I love this stupid series. 

Not that these movies are bad, but it is strange the first two movies both got placements in my best of lists. Glass Onion even got number one, and Knives Out would have been ranked the same if Sound of Metal didn't blow my socks off. These movies outranked movies that I have since grown a deeper bond with. Movies like Pig and Videodrome still live rent free in my head while the Knives Out movies have long moved out to San Francisco or wherever liberal movies go. 

So after watching the third entry, I felt my opinion on this series has tempered. Granted, that's in part because Wake Up Dead Man has more flaws that stand out more. The writing is clunkier with a 2 and half hour runtime that stems from a bloated narrative. Josh Brolin and Jeremy Renner felt miscast which stands out in a series that's generally been great with their casting choices. 

But it's also just me???

Part of my bias as a reviewer is that I crave a unique experience. If something gives a new experience, I am more forgiving of their flaws. Lord knows Knives Out has flaws that I have crucified other movies for. The dialogue is on the nose. The humor is overly broad. The social commentary has an air of Rian Johnson getting some feelings out the way; the way my Facebook friends do whenever a new unprecedented thing happen that week. 

Yet, Knives Out taps into a clear childlike love of Agatha Christie and dignifies it with some of most talented actors in the industry. The social commentary, while on the nose, resonated with me and was used as a framework to tell an interesting whodunnit. It's cool that immigration, the hero worship of public figures, and the role of religion (things I massively connect with) are used in a genre that I deeply love. 

It's a novelty that a third iterative entry can't hope to have. The Anais Nin quote of "we see things as we are" is very applicable to these movies. I saw this movie with the eyes of a curious person hoping to see something new, and I didn't really get anything new. Like sorry Rian, Conclave kind of already explore the themes you were tackling. You are treading on a mystery that's already been solved. 

Still, it's pretty good. I just hope the series finds a way to surprise me in the future. The magic of the mystery genre is to celebrate the unusual and unprecedented. And no Daniel Craig, that hairdo doesn't count. Get a haircut. 

Friendship

I don't like to brag about being fairly stoic when it comes to horror movies. One, because it's silly to take pride in lacking a very human emotion. But more importantly, I don't brag because something like this comes around that will turn me into a driveling coward. 

A few years ago, I watched All My Friends Hate Me, and this movie taps into the same fears that this movie does. And because of that, I felt more scared by this movie than movies that try to be horrific. Like, I watched Titane this year, and that movie was no where close to affecting me the way Friendship does. 

This is a weird thing to discuss when reviewing a movie labeling itself as a comedy, but that's the magic of social horror. They defy genre by virtue of their subject matter. One group won't even flinch at the movie. But people like me, they will feel every insecurity and catastrophizing reflected back at them. Unfortunately, it doesn't leave the same impression as All My Friends Hate Me, so Friendship wasn't the lightning struck twice I was hoping. 

That said, one thing I will give to this over All My Friends Hate Me is that Friendship has moments where it's actually very funny. Tim Robinson is great. And while I felt the movie doesn't make full use of his performance, the moments where he is allowed to shine created some impeccable highlights. 

Tim Robinson has all the essentials to have a comedy run similar to Steve Martin and Eddie Murphy, and I hope and PRAY we get that. There are so many genres that can benefit from throwing a Tim Robinson flash bang into it. Can you imagine a spy comedy starring Tim Robinson???? Melissa McCarthy wishes she can create the type of hype that last sentence did. 

Superman (2025) 

James Gunn was so close to joining exclusive club of movie directors that have made two appearances on my Best of Movies lists. 

I think what keeps me from putting it in the Top 10 is that while it's a great comic book movie, it's not a great movie. Let me explain the distinction. 

Before Superman (1978), comic books were considered children's entertainment. And so, it was groundbreaking that a renowned filmmaker gave a seemingly childish genre dignity. Comic book movies owe a lot to Richard Donner for his attitude to Superman. If he didn't have the insight to treat the character as seriously as any other movie character, we wouldn't have the insufferable Snyder bros we have today.  

This leads to James Gunn, while an excellent director in his own right, is more so a comic book fan. And as a result, it leads to a movie that feels like it was made by a comic book fan than a filmmaker. The cinematic flourishes that made Superman so compelling in the 70s is not really here in this new one. Much like a modern MCU film, it suffers from feeling plain at times. And coming from someone who made Guardians of the Galaxy and Suicide Squad, the fact that Superman of all things is lacking in this is odd. 

Still, I enjoyed this far more than the Snyder trilogy. You can say this movie is being praised for what it doesn't do. It doesn't have characters lacking in humanity nor does it wank itself with obnoxious action and half-baked themes. It's NOT a fundamental misunderstanding of one of the most basic ass superheroes in existence. 

So in short, James Gunn made a fun movie. I just hope he refreshes himself on the depth cinematic language can offer. If he can do that, then I am all in at whatever he does next. 

Fantastic Four: First Steps

Going from one basic ass superhero to a group of basic ass superheroes. 

Like Superman, I have a weird unironic love for Fantastic Four. I suppose like vanilla ice cream, I like their simplicity. It's the kind of thing that most genres couldn't get away with. But when it comes to superheroes, I don't mind an occasional wallowing in pure fundamentals. 

And like Superman (2025), First Steps suffers from a case of a director not making good on the material. It's worse so here because the script is pretty rock solid. Yeah, there are some corny quips and usual MCU stumbles. But otherwise, the premise is interesting and sets a good foundation for an exciting superhero movie. 

Except, it isn't? The scene that comes to mind is the action sequence where the Fantastic Four have to escape Silver Surfer. In concept, it should have all the fixings of an instant classic action sequence. The visuals are creative. The superheroes have to do something out of the box that isn't just punching people. The stakes are multilayered creating tension. All of that is fantastic!

Unfortunately, it doesn't feel that way, and most of movie is the same way. Despite having everything that I should theoretically love, I found the movie kind of boring. Not so boring where it was a painful slog, but boring in the you are waiting a little too long at the dentist office. 

I have to put the blame on the direction. I had a sneaking suspicion this was a first time director based on the whole feel of the movie. And after some research, he hasn't done anything else besides TV and one other movie. It feels like there is a layer of inexperience where they weren't able to make good on the material. Granted, he at least he didn't make bad on the material, so credit where credit is due. Considering the Fantastic Four as a movie franchise has been one case after another of dumpster fires and missed potential, a movie that is merely alright is exceeding expectations. 

War of the Worlds (2025)

You know we are a witness to something extraordinary when my semantic ass has to revaluate what it means to be the worst movie of all time. 

I made a whole ass blog about these types of movies. And in short, the best Worst movies are A.) professionally done B.) interesting and C.) leave some sort of negative impact. By that metric, it meets two of those three categories. It's arguably a professional product. I say arguable since the director did crappy music videos before doing this movie. For all we know, he was way out of his depth working on this film. Like, I can totally see the director of Fergie's Clumsy is going to shit the bed. But at the very least, this has professional actors, and it was distributed by one of the largest media companies in the world on a streaming platform owned by one of the largest corporations in the world. Also, it is called War of the Worlds. 

I know some people might think this will leave a negative impact. There is cynical product placement and feels like reflection of the dystopian we are in. But honestly, this movie will be forgotten about in a year. It's not even hard to watch. Despite how bad it is, it's watchable and never angered me at any point. 

HOWEVER, despite not meeting the third category, it exceeds the expectations of the second category so much, that the third category almost doesn't matter. 

Earlier I was defending the movie somewhat, saying it's at least not painful to watch. But then, you look at the movie Im defending, and it speaks for itself. 

In terms of the actual execution of filmmaking and visual story telling, I struggle to think of a movie worse than this one. Maybe the Garbage Pail Kids movie, but that has at least interesting costumes. I cannot think of a single thing this movie does right. No actor gives a good performance. The writing is god awful. The movie lacks any interesting cinematic flourish because it is trying to do that crappy screen life thing which is the cinematic equivalent to a book without punctuation. 

I challenge anyone to find a redeemable quality for this movie. The best I could do is that it wasn't painfully bad. But other than that, this movie has nothing. Paradoxically, it's a movie not even good enough to be a Worst movie, so does that make it worse than a Worst movie? Now you see why this is a thinker. 

I guess to paraphrase Marlon Brando, what do we gain at all by pitting art and artists in a competition of who's better and who's worse? The simple answer is that it's fun Marlon, but I suppose there is something to be said about not overthinking something that can't possibly be objectively measured. 

All we can say objectively is that if there was a competition, regardless of what the competition is, War of the Worlds would likely lose. 

Other Mentions:

Anora: You know I had a stacked year for movies when I had to snub Anora.

Bill Burr: Drop Dead Years: Glad I got to enjoy this before he sold out to Saudi Arabia. 

Chainsaw Man the Movie: Reze Arc: I relate to Denji in that I would have made every mistake he made in this movie. 

Flow: I hope this team does a dinosaur movie next.

K-Pop Demon Hunters: Wake me up when you guys get Future Funk Alien Detectives or some shit like that.

Thunderbolts*: This movie proves that any movie can be great if you set expectations low enough. Thanks MCU! 

Titane: I watched a handful of French Extreme films this year, and this is the best out of the ones Ive seen. Like Anora, it would have cracked the Top 10 in a less competitive year. 

Tura!: An ok documentary about the woman who invented step-on-me energy. 

The Return: A dry mid budget adaptation of the Odyssey shouldn't be great comedy fodder for a movie night. But alas, the riffs were constant. 

Wallace & Gromit: Vengeance Most Fowl: A few moments that reach the heights of the first movie, but it overall doesn't soar as high. 

Other Stuff

Sakamoto Days

Some shows work better as a stand alone movie. 

For the record, I liked Sakamoto Days quite a bit. It was cute and did the job of appealing to those who want something cozy to watch after work but could use some ultra violence they can project their coworkers onto. 

However, I got the nagging sense that if I wanted to love this story, it should have been a movie. The premise starts to wear out its novelty pretty quickly right around when a typical movie runtime would finish. And after that, Sakamoto Days starts to be merely serviceable. Granted, it was at least serviceable enough to where I finished the entire show. It made for some great brain dead television. But at the same time, I have seen other brain dead television with cleverer writing and more interesting characters. 

Still, I enjoyed it. In fact, if I wanted to convince someone to get into anime, this would be a safe bet. It's just weird enough to give people a sample of anime weirdness, but it's not overwhelming. And it's similar enough to Western storytelling that I can see this show being a good gateway. Of course, like any gateway, the idea isn't to keep them at the gate. And if you like this, there are plenty of shows that are way better than this even if you are looking for something as easygoing. 

A movie would be better. I would love to see Keanu Reeves do a live action adaptation of this if only to see what Keanu Reeves looks like when he is fat. 

So yeah, if you want a less sad depiction of John Wick, this does a fine job and is worth watching. But if you are expecting something as slick as John Wick, I don't think this is it. 

Go Go Loser Ranger

Let's shift gears from anime that would worked better as a movie to an idea that would benefit from coming out ten years ago. Eh, make that twenty. 

I think Im sick of subversive superhero narratives. Superheroes have benefitted from a back to basics approach like with the aforementioned Superman and X-Men '97. A subversion of the formula is now the expectation in this genre which I think defeats the purpose of the concept of subversion. 

So yeah, a show about a putty goon from Power Rangers infiltrating the heroes didn't compel me to watch beyond the pilot. 

For me, the failing comes from how surface level the narrative is. It seems the meat of the show is commentating on superhero tropes, and that's it. There's very little in terms of characterization. It has a depth of a Youtube animated parody. 

To be fair, it at least has some new ideas. The premise that an alien army has been reduced to being props to a live show is morbid and fun. The scene where the grunts are conceptualizing monsters as if they're in a writer's room was a fun little scene. I just don't think these ideas can sustain an episodic narrative. 

I also feel the anime art style holds the story back. Maybe it's a personal thing, but I don't feel a real change when the main character changes his appearance to a human being. I mean sure, there is an obvious physical change to how they look, but it doesn't feel any different. I think that's due to the writing and performance. Despite being aliens, they don't act like aliens. And while that's amusing in some respects, it doesn't help the crux of the premise where the protagonist has to pose as a human. Maybe they explore that in later episodes, but that aspect feels too important to neglect in the first episode.   

So, not for me. I think this premise would have more of an impact if it were an actual Power Rangers storyline. But as it is, it's a thin albeit fun premise that didn't grab me. 

Wednesday

Let's go from two anime shows to two Netflix shows. Both trying their own interesting mix of dark and comedy that unintentionally made me reflect on a meta aspect of storytelling that completely overshadowed the actual story itself. 

Now, I'm no stranger to the Addams Family franchise. It's the poster child for when you want something ghoulish but wholesome at the same time. 

The beauty of the Addams Family is that it's unequivocally an American show. When people think of Americana in television they may gravitate towards cop procedural shows or traditional family sitcoms, but Addams Family deserves that same level if not more so. 

A humble comic turned media franchise that reflected different cultures intersecting, and the friction and beauty that creates. It's more American than Westerns I'll tell you that much. 

I feel that's why Addams Family has endured for so long. We are talking about a cast of characters that's been around since before WWII. From a cultural standpoint, Addams Family perfectly represents a lot of the struggles that served as the narrative for America in the 20th century. 

So with Wednesday, I couldn't help but noticed for the first time an Addams Family narrative adapting to the world we live in now for better and for worse. 

For the first time, the culture Addams Family represents is now commercially viable. Many may disagree as we live in a culture war where those are trying to suffocate the influence of the LGBT+ community and people of color, but that culture war started because of the vast increase of acceptance of these communities. 

That leaves a peculiar position for Addams Family. The cultural clash that to me is the heartbeat of the Addams Family is not really there in Wednesday. It's in part that we don't live in a monoculture anymore. The show represents this as Nevermore is segregated from the rest of the town, and it's only connected via economic means. The most Addams Family moment is at the very beginning where Wednesday is in a traditional public school, and the result isn't the Addams trying to mend the relationship but punting Wednesday off to a place that's more accepting of her. It reflects an era where everyone is more willing to create walls instead of bridges which is depressing to see in an Addams Family story. It's extra depressing when the cultural clashes throughout the show are mere surface level. Granted, the priorities are clearly on being more a YA story, but it overall leaves the show feeling rather unchallenging and missing potential. That episode at the formal where *spoilers* a white guy reels at the guilt of doing a bad thing towards a minority is undercut by a Tiktok dance, and a later similar conflict in that episode feels equally thin and under explored. I guess it's frustrating that a show that teases an interesting exploration of how different cultures relate to one another nowadays is set aside in favor of a mystery lacking intrigue and teen drama lacking in substance. 

Now, this isn't to say Wednesday is bad. The show has some good qualities. And at the very least, they're worse shows for younger people to latch onto. However, speaking as a man about to turn 30, I begin to worry about what we're losing by this new approach to the Addams Family. It's a small thing sure. And in the year 2025 and through 2026, there are much bigger fish to fry. I guess I can't help but grieve a little about how the times are a changing. It's a small symptom to a much MUCH larger problem. One that I will probably need to expand upon in a standalone entry or with my therapist. 

Baby Reindeer

I don't know if Netflix darling is an official term at this point in media discussions, but I feel it should be with how common this pattern is. There is a specific type of vibe they gave off. They're one-off affairs. Often steal the limelight in the year they come out only to fade into obscurity once the novelty has worn out. And while they're well made, you can't help but feel these were made not to be lasting works but as a subtle form of exploiting a hot button subject matter to nab as many trophies during awards season. I once described Queen's Gambit as a flavor of the week. I said that in 2021. Yeah, remember when Queen's Gambit was the most talked about show? And now, this may be the first time in years anyone has bothered to bring it up. 

Im conflicted because Baby Reindeer has some good in it at least from a technical aspect, but I almost resent it purely for the cynical aspects of what these types of shows represent. I suppose that reflects the commercialism aspect and how easily it can ruin a piece of art. 

Theres a saying everyone has one good story in them. Richard Gadd clearly had one in the form of Baby Reindeer, and he turned it into last year's Netflix darling. Yet, the authenticity that Richard Gadd likely approached the story with as it's obviously coming from a real place is muddied by the circumstances of sensationalism and Netflix's need to make this show commercially viable. It says a lot that I didn't watch this show until a year later because I was more fascinated by everything surrounding the show rather the show itself. The lawsuits regarding the real life equivalent of the main antagonist. The touchy subject of interacting with socially stunted people and the potential dangers that can bring. All of that is more interesting than the actual craftsmanship on display. And like many others, once Im satisfied, I move on leaving a show many people spent hundreds of hours on making onto the pile of other media hoping to leave some kind of lasting impact. 

Shows like these remind me how difficult it is to make great art, especially in the world of film and television. The tragedy attributed to Vincent Van Gogh. That the work, one you put your heart and soul into, can be deemed a success or failure purely on luck. I suppose the relieving thing is the good art will find a way. Whether it be after death like in Van Gogh's case or some other factor, great art will rise from the sludge of our terrible society. Maybe Baby Reindeer just wasn't good enough to pull that off. Who's to say. One, that's entirely subjective. And two, who's to say Baby Reindeer won't captivate an audience fifty years from now. These are all pointless musings not worth overthinking over, and I did it while not talking about literally anything in the show. Classic M. Rambles stuff I guess. Let's digress and talk about our final thing so I can go to bed.

One Punch Man Season 3

What the fuck happened One Punch Man??????

There is a common saying in art that they're no "bad ideas." People often and commonly retort "well there has to be at least one bad idea," but I feel they're missing the point. 

The point of the saying is that if you have talent and put in the right effort, you can take what should be a terrible idea and make it excellent. For anime fans, I imagine the first time they experienced that in practice was when One Punch Man debuted back in 2015. A man who kills any obstacle in one punch feels like a total misunderstanding of how to tell a captivating story. Even as joke, the idea only seems to go so far. But, Tomohiro, and all the creatives involved, demonstrated capability. And with the talent at Mad House, they were able to create a first season that not only defied odds but created a new gold standard for action anime. 

Season 3 feels like an alternate timeline where none of that happened. If season one looked and paced itself the way season 3 did, One Punch Man would not be where it is today, and the people who deride the "no bad ideas" mantra would have another example to point to. 

I gave season 2 some slack. One because Im more forgiving towards bad animation as long as the story is good, and I enjoyed season 2 for what it is. And secondly, I figured transitioning to a new animation team would be rocky for anyone. I figured that maybe just maybe they would learn the right lessons and come back stronger for season 3. Instead, Im genuinely baffled how season 3 ended up the way it did. 

The bad animation is not only more noticeable, I feel it affects the pacing of the story. And while Im forgiving when it comes to animation, Im the exact opposite when it comes to pacing. It doesn't help that the writing feels weaker. The exposition is delivered in a clunky way. Characters are static. Story develops at a snails pace. I can't speak for the manga. And from what I heard, the manga fares a lot better. But from just watching the anime, Im left with the impression that either the manga takes a significant dip in quality or they were not equipped to adapt the narrative. Judging from what I know, Im assuming it's the latter, and it's tragic that a narrative that began as a lightning in a bottle is now a reminder of another common saying. That lightning strikes never strikes the same place twice. 

Other Mentions:

All-Devouring Whale: Some solid moments throughout as well as a helping of tedious and trope heavy moments. 

Brandon Jamar Scott: My standards for music videos have forever been raised. 

Delicious in Dungeon: Im sorry yall. I just don't understand the appeal.

Fruit Baskets: I don't consider myself as having refine tastes, but Ill make an exception for romance anime. This shit was mid. 

HaHa, You Clowns: I appreciate Adult Swim bankrolling shows with experimental humor that only appeals to a niche amount of people. However, Im less appreciative when said people are friends who forced me to watch this shit. 

Magnus Protocol: The plot gymnastics just to justify the structure of a guy reading scary stories is as much hilarious as it is frustrating. 

Monk: A solid procedural show. I just didn't have the bandwidth to endure the procedural structure for 125 episodes. 

Pokemon Concierge: If the writing didn't feel so much like Nick Jr. show, I might have liked it. 

Sonic Prime: I feel sorry for the writers who have all these sci-fi ideas only to have to use them for a Sonic TV series. 

Your Friendly Neighborhood Spiderman: Like that Superman show, it's too twee to be my kind of thing. 

An Ode to More Movies I Have Missed

Every so often, I feel compelled to clean up my movie backlog, so I went through another year's worth of blindspot movies this year. I got a wide variety of reactions from this selection from enraptured, disappointed, very disappointed, baffled, aroused, etc. Needless to say, I should be able to pick out six films to talk about. 

The Film That Shows the Chick-Flick Genre Deserves Better: The Princess Diaries

Ladies. You know I love you. You're pretty, kind, capable. You deserve the absolute best in the world. So why do you gotta settle for movies like the Princess Diaries? 

This is one of the few described with the regressive "chick flick" moniker, and it is one of the few that I was interested in. You got two of my favorite female actors. You got a very fun premise. It has everything to be a spiritual successor to a John Hughes style of comedy. 

Instead, I got nothing. 

Now, I know it's too much to ask an early 2000s Disney film for a progressive exploration of white privilege, exploitation of child celebrities, and the shit you associate with royalty. But honestly, I just want something, anything more interesting than whats on display. Instead, the movie feels undercooked. 

I was very indifferent towards this movie. The comedy and drama were bland. And idk, it lacks any of the flavor I like from say a John Hughes movie. 

Speaking of which, this movie would have been a lot better if Molly Ringwald was leading. Nothing against Anne Hathaway. It's her film debut, and she would go on to give amazing performances long after this role. However, I felt she was miscasted in this. Her comedic chops lack any punch to it. Compared to Molly Ringwald or even Amanda Bynes, where their delivery, facial expressions, and physicality elevates the material and can leave an impression even if the movie itself isn't very good. I know I reviewed Sixteen Candles last time I did this. And despite hating that movie, I still remember Molly Ringwald giving a great performance. Look, all Im saying is that Anne Hatheway's performance wasn't that great. Im sorry ladies. 

The final straw is some annoying characters. Good God, I don't know what their intention was with that Lily character. I guess they were trying to do the annoying but loyal friend. But in execution, Lily comes off as extremely unlikeable. And in real life, Anne Hathaway would have every excuse to cut that bitch out of her life. Shit, I would unfriend so many people if my grandma was Julie Andrews even if they weren't like Lily. 

I suppose that segways to Julie Andrews who I guess does a decent job. Again, it didn't blow me away. Like everything else in the film, I was sort of indifferent. Granted, Julie Andrews fares better because she is Julie Andrews. She emits an aura that's immediately infectious. 

But yeah, it's hard to write about a movie when you get no emotional reaction from it. And I love these types of movies! I love romance. I love the wholesome feelings these movies try to evoke. I also know chick flicks get a bad rap cause women and their special interests are often treated as less than. And with media often appealing to male sensibilities, there shouldn't be this animosity towards entertainment that's here to offer escapism for women. 

However, more than a feminist, I am a movie buff, and this movie sucks. Fuck you. 

The Film That Unexpectedly Went the Hardest: Adventures in Babysitting

Believe or not, I enjoy being wrong from time to time. During cynical times while I aged into a more cynical adult, there are times where being proven wrong can be incredibly cathartic. 

Take Adventures in Babysitting. I was recommended this movie. And if I didn't have the obligation of watching blindspot movies, I probably wouldn't have bothered with this one. A classic case of judging a book by its cover. 

To be fair, part of why I didn't think I would enjoy this movie was because I didn't even hear about this film until this year. I figured if this movie had anything worthwhile, I would have heard about it especially since it was directed by Chris Columbus. I thought I should at least have heard about it as an obscure cult classic like other 80s cult films like Last Unicorn. 

Because in my mind, this should be up there with Back to the Future and the Princess Bride as one of the great 80s movies. The kind that's high concept and well executed throughout. The 80s were always great at doing that. These experiences that, while straightforward, are nonetheless magical for achieving the feat of genuine escapism. 

And like the great 80s movies, you get a window to the mindsets of the 1980s, and Adventures in Babysitting is one of the better glimpses. The anxieties of suburbia and their view of inner city life. That kind of thing could easily age a movie, but this movie avoids this. One because it doesn't bog down the characters in regressive stereotypes. Or at least, if you view them as mere stereotypes, it is leveraged in a way where that complements the qualities of the movie. And two, the movie gives the world an aura of fantasy. It gives this mundane world a sense of whimsy which makes me more compelled to suspend my disbelief. 

And finally, again like the great 80s movies, you got an excellent lead performance. Elizabeth Shue is delightful. I know the music and soundtrack is beloved, and it's great. However, I think what makes the music so infectious is how the characters perform with the music. And man, that opening with Elizabeth Shue dancing to the Crystals is emblematic of this whole movie. It's wonderful. Not to mention that great jazz number that took the movie from cute to classic.  

The one flaw this movie has is that Elizabeth Shue's love interest is rather weak. You get the sense the love interest was included for obligatory reasons. You want a kiss to tie a neat bow at the end. You want a character to connect with the protagonist and offer a reprieve to Shue's torment throughout the movie. But other than that, the relationship is rather weak and feels like a formality. It doesn't quite feel like two heteros creating a spark. 

But what a badass film. This movie feels like discovering a family photo album you didn't know you had. This was a hidden treasure for me of nostalgia and charm.  

The Film That Sucked the Hardest: The Pest

I initially was going to talk about the Wizard here. As technically, that was the blindspot movie that sucked the hardest. However, what hasn't already been said about the Wizard? Fucking AVGN did a review of it ten years ago. The Wizard is old news. So, Im talking about the Pest, because my God. 

Im quite privy to annoying comedies. Ive seen my fair share of Biodomes and Disaster Movies. The Pest, at first glance, seems like another instance of this type of comedy. The kind that thinks making constant noise is a suitable replacement for wit and creativity. 

The Pest stands out more than comedies of this style. It's rare that I let a movie this bad stay rent free in my head, almost like this movie is a type of organism that's a nuisance to our day-to-day lives, but enough about Fox News viewers. 

I think what makes the Pest special compared to its peers is that the movie has a frustrating amount of potential. Im going to pitch this movie to you as if I really want to sell this movie. See if this premise sounds appealing to you. "Ok let me get into my public speaking mode. ahem"

"What would happen if you take Bugs Bunny and put him in a 80s action B-movie?"

It's a great concept. Taking an archetype known for outwitting dangerous people and putting it in a context of a Rambo sequel. But in execution, well it's a two star avg. rating on Letterboxd. 

I blame the director. John Leguizamo, while terrible in this film, is not a bad actor. In fact, later in his career, he would channel a similar annoying energy quite well in Ice Age. He's no Daniel Day Lewis but he has turned in quality work over the years. 

And honestly, to even call it terrible is a bit harsh. This is nowhere near as bad as Biodome. The performance is at least striking and memorable. The shower scene at least is burned into my skull. 

I think it's a lack of restraint of Leguizamo that makes the movie insufferable, and that feels like a lack of communication between the actor and director. You can easily make this character work. His look is unique. The vibe complements the premise. You got a good and based foundation of a clever Latino annoying the shit out of a Nazi. But when the movie is a constant assault of Pest chatter and unearned visual gags, we end up having to pay for the expense of the joke. And next thing you know, you are put into a very unfortunate position of siding with a Nazi.  

I think this movie falls in the same category as Freddy Got Fingered. It's awful. But unlike Biodome which is awful for its laziness, this movie at least has an audaciousness that's slightly redeemable. And hey, I know how brain rotten some of yalls sense of humor is. The people who find Freddy Got Fingered funny might make this movie work for him too. I don't care. Though, I recommend you shouldn't vote in the next election. 

The Film That Made Me Officially Love Robert Rodriguez: Planet Terror

If you asked me who is the most underrated director, I would probably say almost any director outside the U.S and U.K. If you asked me what the most underrated director from the U.S, I would say Robert Rodriguez. 

I always had a soft spot for the man. He and I are both Tex-Mex guys. It's not often a director as high profile as this makes me feel like we are cut from the same cloth. 

While I always liked Rodriguez, I never respected him the way I would for Scorsese or Tarantino. 

And initially, I watched the Grindhouse double feature to watch the only Tarantino feature I haven't seen. I merely added on Planet Terror for completion sakes. I would have never expected that not only would I enjoy Planet Terror more but that it would elevate how I see Robert Rodriguez as a filmmaker. 

I was aware Robert Rodriguez was a trailblazer in low budget filmmaking which is another aspect that goes unsung when talking about Rodriguez. But ever since Planet Terror, that aspect can really be felt. 

Rodriguez demonstrates how passion and authenticity can do a lot that other qualities can't. Im not going to lie and say that Rodriguez is great from a technical standpoint. His stories are often sloppy and schlocky. A good chunk of his films can almost be described as intentionally dated. Yet regardless of quality, yes even including Sharkboy and Lavagirl, it's always apparent that it's a Robert Rodriguez film. 

There is a unique and infectious personality in all of his films, and that shouldn't be dismissed. There will always be movies with good cinematography, symbolism, or any quality that film buffs gravitate towards. But, there is only one Robert Rodriguez. Great art at the end of the day are merely remnants to a human experience that could only have been made in one exact place and time. 

Planet Terror feels like peak Rodriguez, second only to maybe the 2nd Spy Kids movie. I love the energy of this movie, and it nails being a B-movie homage better than any movie Ive seen. It's clear Rodriguez is one of the few who understands the essence of what makes a B-movie of that era so enjoyable. Much like how an arthouse film will explore the nuances of the human condition, these films shamelessly wallows in the id of the human condition. It's finding any excuse to showcase over the top violence and sex, and the best ones do it without feeling lazy. Robert Rodriguez throughout his career, from making Mariachi with $7000 to all the trouble he went through when making Sin City, has demonstrated he is not a lazy guy. 

Well ok, maybe Sharkboy and Lavagirl was lazy. Maybe he wasn't feeling well that day. 

However, Planet Terror has that effort, and I'm glad I decided to give this movie a chance. 

That Film That Allows Me To Talk About Robert Altman Again: 3 Women

Robert Altman is a very interesting filmmaker. Not just in the scope of the world of film. But personally, I find his work very interesting to reflect on. 

This year I got around to doing another one. And with Shelley Duvall passing away last year, I figured I know more about her work that isn't the Shining and Popeye. 

Needless to say, she's great in this film. I'd say this is her best performance. Not from an intensity or emotive standpoint. But in terms of nuance, she is given a lot to work with and she takes advantage of all of it. 

Nuance is probably the word you need to describe this film. A lot of people, mainly morons, like to besmirch films like these. And in fairness, I don't blame them. Arthouse films require a certain level of academic appreciation to enjoy them. It can be frustrating when an arthouse film is bad or seems bad. An arthouse film that's pretentious, self-indulgent, or lacking in quality still require proper discourse in order to properly express that frustration. There's rarely a clear black and white answer in judging these types of movies, and that's simply not a quality typical audience members would enjoy. 

If I were to pitch 3 Women to a layman, it would not be easy. 

Some movies get better upon a second viewing. 3 Women, at least for me, is one of the weird cases where you won't really enjoy the movie in full until seen them at least twice.  Some movies not only show their true colors after seeing the full picture but the colors won't even show unless you see the beginning again with the trajectory of the ending envisioned in your mind. It's the cinematic equivalent of an optical illusion. You are presented with the picture and it's only when the effect becomes apparent to you that you gain a better appreciation. The magic is knowing all of that was on screen from the very start. Your eyes just need a little time to *see* it.

During my first viewing, I didn't really enjoy myself. The pacing has some dips. Sissy Spacek character's is rather uninteresting early on. And since the movie is a slice of life that revolves mostly around her, it starts off on the wrong foot. Until you get to the second half, it is kind of a slog.

But man, once you *see* it, you realize that has been there the entire movie. 

The movie is about the transformation we as humans go through in order to be accepted in our social groups, and the harm that can create. It's not a unique theme. That's the rags to riches story in a nutshell. However, what makes 3 Women compelling is that it conveys that in a way I haven't seen a movie do before or since. 

I love when a movie uses the medium in a novel way. That's how a medium evolves. Lord knows we wouldn't have Ice Cube mugging at the camera in War of the Worlds without filmmakers from the 1900s willing to risk precious film material to try out these techniques. Yes I know that's a bad example, but I don't care!

3 Women has such a respect for the intelligence of its audience. It's slow and doesn't readily give you the answers but expects you to let it unwrap organically. It embraces the medium and its linearity by understanding that said linearity can be rewatched. It can be looked back on retrospect. And before you know it, you are giving undivided attention to a simple close up that's been used for several decades.

Of course, 3 Women is not the first in doing a lot of the things it does. Instead, it reflects why Robert Altman became one of the most celebrated American filmmakers. He impacted modern filmmakers to the point where Wikipedia dedicates an entire section listing all the filmmakers that cite him as an inspiration. If you want to know why that is, I think 3 Women best demonstrates it. 

David Lynch

Ok, I actually struggled to think of a sixth film. But that's ok, I think this is more important anyway. 

This year we had the passing of David Lynch. And in typical fashion, I watched most of his filmography. One, because they were a few stragglers I still haven't seen. But more importantly, David Lynch is one of the few directors I would do this with. 

One thing about David Lynch's passing that struck me was the global reaction. Many directors have passed away over the years but none I recall have had this kind of reaction. 

It speaks to what I was saying about Robert Rodriguez. One of central draws of David Lynch as a director is his ability to instill himself in every movie, regardless of genre. The man has done biopics, surrealist horror, intriguing thrillers, and even sci-fi. All of them are undeniably David Lynch. While many will appreciate David Lynch's impact with his surrealist style that has no doubt influenced many people from Robert Eggers to the fucking weirdo who made Danganronpa, I feel that ignores the bigger lesson. That any movie is an opportunity to speak through the movie. And assuming you are not a pretentious bellend, people are willing to listen. 

David Lynch's movies made us fall in love with him as much as the characters on screen. We fell in love with his playfulness, the creativity, the respect. His love of transcendental meditation layers all of his movies the way Tarantino's foot fetish layers his. 

Im of the opinion that there is a David Lynch film for everyone who is up for the challenge. I think every filmmaker, film lover, and everyone in between can grow as a human being from one of his films.

If you are familiar with my tastes as a enjoyer of all things narrative, you would know that I value characters above most elements of a story. The reason is because we are at the end of the day humans. We crave connection so much so we personify our appliances and the stars in the sky. Every facet of our culture is our strive for connection. Communication, and by extension art, reflects this very human need.

A lesson I learned from revisiting Lynch's movies is how the depth of a character can go further than any element of story telling. Many would argue that motifs, symbolism, or other artful storytelling devices can provide more depth, but I argue those are only deep because our consciousness are willing to say it is. Motifs, symbolism, etc. are mere obfuscations of commentary that humans need for the sake of challenge. At the end of the day, it's merely an indulgence. An indulgence that many enjoy including myself. Why else am I writing all of these blogs????

What I like about Lynch's work is that he deeply favors the depth of characters. His themes are simple despite his reputation saying otherwise. It's his personal touch and characters that flavors the richness of his movies. I know for me this year rewatching Straight Story, I felt truly one with the human condition. It's a movie about one man. A rather mundane man, but his story reflects that even the most mundane boring person has depth far surpassing any piece of art.   

People are beautiful. We often don't see that because of our own obfuscations: bigotry, cynicisms, and the many things that currently ail our culture. It's why empathy can be such a healing feeling, and it's a feeling movies excel at making. Roger Ebert called movies "empathy machines" for a reason. 

David Lynch's gift to humanity was opportunities to experience the most profound kind of empathy. There's plenty to love about Elephant Man, Straight Story, Blue Velvet, to name a few. You can strip all the Lynchian flourishes, but you still get the most important thing depicted on screen: humans seeking connection....

Unless you are watching Twin Peaks, in which case it's a cup of black coffee and a slice of homemade cherry pie. 

Year Walk & Limbo | A Favorite Game(s) Retrospect

This year had two games on my mind. 

I recently played Sayonara and Lorelei & the Laser Eyes. Both games developed by one of my favorite indie developers Simogo. And after a quick google rabbit hole, I realized they also developed a old favorite horror title of mine. That began a series of coincidences that compelled me to make this double bill. 

Year Walk was originally a mobile game I played during the hey day of the IOS store. It was one of the first games that showed me the potential narratives video games can explore with something as simple as a touchscreen of a smart phone. Little did I know that potential would have to migrate to Steam as the mobile market would turn into a Mad Max wasteland of shovel ware, scams, and productivity apps. It shares a similar space in my mind as another indie title, and one that's likely more familiar. Of course, I am talking about Limbo. And to add onto the coincidences, it was free on Epic earlier this year. The Game Grumps did a play through of it. This year is the 15th anniversary of Limbo's release. And as we enter a new era of indie game development, Ive seen a lot of discourse reflecting on how far we've come, and you can't talk about the roots of indie gaming without bringing up Limbo. 

So, you have two indie horror games that in my mind represent firsts in their respective genres. And in this retrospect, I will simply revisit them to see how they hold up. Can their innovations hold up against the passage of time? Are they still effective games?    

Minimalism 101

Any art form will at some point try their hand at the concept of "perfection through subtraction." 

I love minimalism. I like taking storytelling to its bare essentials while still making it incredibly sustaining. And in the world of video games, where the standard practice is littering your games with unnecessary mechanics, feature creep, and interface gooeys, minimalism can be a breath of fresh air when done correctly. I emphasize "done correctly," because there is more to minimalism than just doing the bare minimum. It's taking the bare minimum and doing the absolute maximum with it. That's what separates these games from something like Gris. 

There is ironically a wide array of approaching minimalism, and that's indicated by these two and how they approach their respective styles. 

Limbo is what I imagine most people traditionally envision minimalism. Limbo, down to its core elements, is just two buttons, a physics system, and a distinct art style. It helps that this game is a cinematic platformer which has a long history of minimalism. Another World and the original Prince of Persia are often seen as the pioneers of interactive storytelling. This lead to Ico, another influential game famous for minimalist elements. This is also the second time in a row that I mentioned Ico during these favorite game retrospects, so I guess that's a sign I need to do Ico next, but I digress. 

Anyway, being a cinematic platformer yields some advantages. Since cinematic platformers rarely if ever use a health pool, there is no need to show a health bar or other UI gooeys on screen. The emphasis on realism means extrinsic growth is either subtle or non-existant. This means there are no power ups or Metroidvania upgrades that you have to explain via text or voice over. And lastly, a cinematic platformer emphasizes ambiance so there's less emphasis on making music and non-diegetic sounds. 

Limbo does all of these. Everything you seen on screen is essential with the exception of the collectable eggs you can find throughout the game. At the time when I first played, it was profoundly resonant. It helped that it was one of the first indie games I ever played. However, I think the impact was still felt among gamers at the time even the ones who were more attuned to independent game development. 

Out of curiosity, I looked up games from that time:

As you can see, Limbo is among the first to show up via Google. But more interesting, it stands out among a list of Triple AAA games. Ones rich with polygons, cluttered with mechanics, and or full of spectacle. Not to say any of these games are bad. However, it reflects the trend at the time and why Limbo captured audiences. Limbo's existent was a statement against overproduced games and showing minimalism can create the same level of engagement. 

Year Walk is similar albeit with two different approaches. Firstly, the game's way of maximizing minimalism to by making the most out of the touch screen controls. Now, if you are playing this on PC, this will not be felt. But playing this on mobile at the time of its release, it was interesting how they incorporate movement in a way that doesn't involve using a clunky digital D-pad. Not only that, the game involves a handful of puzzles that makes the player engage with the touch controls in a novel way. It lends to a more immersive experience which is important for the horror vibe Year Walk was going for. Secondly, the game is shown in first person. This means even less things to animate. But as an added bonus, the perspective adds more to the horror by shrinking your field of vision. Again, less is more. Minimalism is maximizing. 

Ambiguous Storytelling

Now, Im of the opinion that ambiguous storytelling is really hard to do. It's the equivalent of making a house of toothpicks. 

And unfortunately, the problems ambiguous story face is a case by case basis. So to have some grounding as we go into this section, let me establish how I feel ambiguous storytelling can be effective. Oh I guess now is a good time as any that we are entering spoiler territory, not only will I discuss Limbo and Year Walk's ending, I also plan on spoiling Shutter Island and Playdead's the Inside.

 When I think of my favorite executions of open interpretation, they normally do one of two things:

1. Create conflicting or equally plausible conclusions in order to create unease. 

Ambiguity brings out an inherently helpless feeling. We like control, and things that are unexplainable creates an uncomfortable feeling. That's why cosmic horror is so effective. 

Horror tends to do this a lot, and I love in horror when an ambiguous moment creates two plausible scenarios, and both are equally terrifying. Shutter Island is a great example of this. The question on whether Leonardo Dicarprio, revealed to have a delusional disorder, is having a relapse or is faking his delusion in order to purposefully end his life, creates two equally miserable conclusions. Sure, you can arguably make a case for one outcome being the correct ending, but who cares! To me, the effectiveness of the ending is the foundation that Leo has either failed to overcome his mental illness or chose to not live in a more painful reality, and both are a tragic end to this protagonist. But hey, that's my interpretation, one of many the ending of Shutter Island creates with its ambiguity, which leads to the next function-

2. Ambiguous storytelling creates opportunities for the audience to connect with the story in their own personal way. 

If you watch any David Lynch interview, he talks a lot about abstraction in his storytelling. In short, he describes abstractions as opportunities for the viewer to use their intuition. Essentially, there is a certain power one feels when using intuition to make sense of an abstraction. That feeling correct is a more powerful sensation than being correct. When a story spoon feeds you what you are suppose to feel, it can be satisfying sure. But when a story leaves it up to you, it can create a moment where you have to engage with parts of your brain that doesn't normally interact with media. If you ever felt viscerally weird after engaging with abstractions, almost a brain tingling sensation, that's you exercising your mind like straining your muscle when picking up a heavy weight. 

Now, Limbo and Year Walk both include abstractions. And personally, they don't quite achieve the points I mention above. 

Limbo's approach feels more in line with the second idea of ambiguous storytelling but taking to its absolute extreme. The boy is a blank slate and doesn't visibly react to anything happening to him. You can count the narrative beats on one hand. You know he is pursuing a girl. There are other people inhabiting this limbo space, and that the space operates almost in a liminal way. And finally, there are other animals. Why does a limbo have an ecosystem? Who the fuck knows. 

And in those moments, that works. The setting doesn't reveal too much of its hand. While the title suggests it's a purgatory, nothing in-game confirms it. This could be a mere dream, an actual supernatural place, or some amalgamation of flashes of the boy's life. You could fit any reality to this setting, and it would likely work. And so, the setting does a solid job playing with your imagination. 

Where it doesn't quite work is the plot itself. Firstly, the game reveals too much by prefacing that you are finding your sister. Granted, this is only in the log line and not implied in-game, but this unfortunately hurts the abstractness of the story. The plot also struggles with a case of "so what" when trying to find a takeaway. As an experience, it's fine but it is lacking an emotional linchpin that a player can leave with. He finds his sister and that's it. I guess you can decipher the purpose and interpret the relationship, their motivation, and the circumstances that got them into this world. But so what? No matter the conclusion you come up with, there isn't anything that will resonant with you from that conclusion. The game is a metaphor for the boy processing his sister's death? Ok, well so what? The game is the boy trying to save his sister from the judgement of the Limbo world? Ok, well so what? The game makes it so open ended that it could benefited from something that you can emotionally respond to. Maybe he hugs her or the environment begins to change into something else that contrasts from what we've seen before. It can still have that abstract effect, but it would give us something to digest as the credits are rolling. 

Year Walk's approach is more in line with first type of ambiguity. The plot of Year Walk is fairly basic. Guy goes on a spiritual walk to get a glimpse of his future. He sees a vision of him killing his girlfriend. And in the end, we are left wondering if the guy either takes his own life or his girlfriend. Again, this is an IOS game. I can understand the plot is more a framework than being a traditionally compelling narrative. 

However, similar to Limbo, a few sprinkles at the end to leave us something to digest would have done a lot. The story does achieve an ending where both conclusions are unsettling, but they also leave with a similar feeling of being unfulfilled. I suppose my gripe is that we don't get to see much of the couple's relationship. I think the ending would have more of a punch if similar to say the Shining, we get to see the relationship before everything starts to fall apart. Unfortunately, these rewrites are harder to implement. I imagine the first person perspective and minimalist approach marred the opportunities to explore the characters a little more thoroughly. 

I suppose if I did a minimalism 102, this would be the topic of the class. While minimalism has many benefits of being less resource intensive and reminding us of how beautiful art can be stripped of its bells and whistles, an easy stumble these works can face is one of writing yourself into a corner. Both Limbo and Year Walk's narrative have a trade off of having a modular experience but lacking the flourishes that could elevate their respective narratives. 

Im also not discounting the fact both of these works are early entries in Playdead and Simogo's ludography or whatever shitty term describes a body of work full of video games. They would refine their craft and execute on ideas better conceptualized in these games. Simogo only worked on a handful of titles before Year Walk before they began their descent into more surrealist work like Sayonara and Lorelei. Meanwhile, Limbo's followup, the Inside, is a full on upgrade in everything regarding the story. You want an ending that gives you something to digest well Playdead got you covered in all of its walking ball sack glory. 

Still, I love these because they are early works. They aren't just early works in these indie studio's careers. They are early works in indie games in general. There are certainly indie games that existed before Limbo and Year Walk like Yume Nikki. And chances are, that game and a few others influenced both titles. But other than that, we are talking two horror titles completely detached from the glut off indie horror that exists now. It leads to pieces of work that feel completely authentic. 

Conclusion

 

I'll go back to my initial question. Are these still effective games? 

To be brutally honest, I don't think these games will blow people the way it did for me back in the early 2010s. Unless you are in tuned to the history of indie games or have no frame of reference to what the medium has to offer, these might not wow you especially compared to the developers' future titles. 

For the first time in a retrospect, I felt a different type of love for these games. Normally these Favorite Games Retrospects are simply a way for me to gush about my favs. But here, I feel appreciation more akin to reminiscing with an old friend. We've come a long way since the days of Limbo and Year Walk. The memories are still sweet but less so to those weren't there. But hey, that's what makes memories precious. It's what makes art precious.