tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18641540710681653792024-03-13T02:42:11.576+02:00The Bleeding ScrollA blog about RPGs, horror and other thoughts.yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.comBlogger178125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-36084768797363090332014-11-20T22:20:00.000+02:002014-11-20T22:20:00.109+02:00We Forgot to Challenge<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
A small thought for the day. We all play with house-rules. Nobody really
plays a game to the exact details of the rule-system (or at the very least-
almost no one). If there is a single thing that I saw common to all of those
house-rules, it was without a doubt the side they favored. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
All those house-rules that I've seen through the years? They were all in
favor of the player characters. They made their lives easier, they're
role-filling quicker. They diminished the challenge. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
To put it differently, it's like we GMs forgot that being fans of the
PCs doesn't mean letting them succeed without a sweat. It means putting them through
a challenge and hoping to see them triumph, believing that they'll succeed. But
they do need the challenge firstly. After all, without challenge, there's no
real point in winning, or even in playing those things, battles, intrigues etc.
And yet, we make their lives easier with house-ruling and with so much more.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
I don't know if I managed to say something, if I managed to express what
I think. But I do hope that at the very least, I'm not alone in thinking about
this, in hoping to see it changed.<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-34368515163341064732014-11-17T22:20:00.000+02:002014-11-17T22:20:00.173+02:00Making Race Important to the Game<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Over at Roleplaying Tips they're hosting a nice little <a href="http://www.roleplayingtips.com/races-rpg-blog-carnival-november-2014/">blog carnival</a>,
centered on the concept of races. And… I must say that I don't normally play
with race too much, or at the very least- not today. But it doesn't mean that I
don't have anything to bring to the table. I did run a year or two of campaigns
centered on races and our prejudices surrounding them, back in the day. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
John asks for tips and ideas about making race an important factor in
the game. For me, the number one trick, the first tip that I offer for GMs who
come to me with the same question, is to lead by example.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Think about the GM-player relationship in most traditional games- the GM
sets the stage, decides what is important and what not, and the players (at
least to a certain extent) internalize those themes and ideas, and then bring
their own versions of it. That's how we explore themes in RPGs. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
But it also means that the GM has to set the stage. If the GM will make
race an important factor in her games, like having some racist NPCs or handing a
prejudices index (just like we can find in every WOD race book), sooner or
later it will become a major factor in the game.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
If, for the sake of example, I bring to the table a Dwarf NPC who hates
Elves and think that they just stink, suddenly it is important to know if Lucy plays
an Elf or if she plays a Halfling. If I'll continue this stage-setting and the
next NPC will think that Halflings are not real men, Mr. Halfling will have to
find a way to show his manliness. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
In other words- making the concept of races important to you, as GM, and
playing to this concept, will make it important for the whole group. Before you'll
know it you'll have Dwarfs who don't like Gnomes and Orcs who want to be Elves.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that's the whole truth, actually. Make it important to you, stress
it through your portrayal of NPCs, through your descriptions ("you see an
Elf. She…"), through handouts... If it is important enough for you to
stress it, it will become important enough for them as well.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Or you can just go and play Vampire. I "heard" that they've
done it right.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
How about you? What tips and tricks do you have for making race an
important factor in your games?<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-42961008196036589562014-11-13T22:20:00.000+02:002014-11-13T22:20:00.627+02:00NPCs are just Tools<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
NPCs are just tools. They're not there to steal the limelight, they're
not there to give some amazing monologues. NPCs are just tools for the GM to
use, to nudge the game a little bit to one direction or the other, to help make
an enjoyable evening or something along those lines. As such is the case NPCs don't
need complex personalities but a way to affect the PCs and through them to
affect the players. When they've filled their roles, they're not needed
anymore, they can be discarded, or move to the reserve pile for later scenes
and/or sessions.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Drosselmeyer, in Princess Tutu understood this well. When talking to
Edel in episode 12 of the first season, he says to her: "Your role is to
add glow to the story in my place". Unlike the players, the GM doesn't
have an avatar in the game. All the GM has is everything that is not controlled
by the players. But, as we know, those things are there to serve the PCs and/or
the players. The Gm should forget herself, of course, but for now please stay
with me.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Most problems of using NPCs come
from not acknowledging this simple idea. If the NPCs are just tools used by the
GM to serve the game and players, then one wouldn’t give them amazing and way
too long monologues. One wouldn't let
them steal the limelight either. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
But it grows deeper than that, unsurprisingly. It means that trying to
give them life and complex personality is a futile intention. A gm should think
in terms of how the NPC affects the PCs and through them affect the players. This
calls for a simple motive, for example, so it will be easy to grasp. It also
calls for something that will challenge the players' perceptions, like am NPC
that divides the players and the characters to a few sides. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
It also means that one shouldn't get to attached to the NPCs. Once they
fulfill their role, they should finish they're part in the game. If the players
don't connect to them, they should be left out. And if the players like them
enough, make their part greater, make them more colorful.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
So how one should use this kind of tool? There's no one true way, of
course, but for me it always was about giving the illusion that they're far
more complex and alive than they truly are. They should sometimes be busy, or
they'll use some fancy words to describe some simple ideals. They will be
distinctive, different from one another. And most importantly, they should be
made such that I will always be able to bring them to the present scene, if I'll
ever need them. Usually, this combination does the trick for me.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; unicode-bidi: embed;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
What do you think? Feel free to write in the comments.<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-79556070217934040822014-11-10T22:20:00.000+02:002014-11-10T22:20:00.106+02:00We all have a role to fill<div class="MsoNormal" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Last
time I've covered a Princess Tutu episode, it was a really early one. Since then,
I began to question my remark that this series is a great GMing guide, but the
ending of season one showed me otherwise. In episode 11, which I'll cover
today, we are presented near the end with a remarkable scene. The annoying Drosselmeyer
shows us that he does understand stories, when he reminds each character of his
or her role in the unveiling one.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Now,
this is an interesting case, because each character in the series plays a role
in the story. To a certain respect, it is just like an RPG: each player is
assigned a role to fill in the story that is being created (this is, again, a
topic for another post). Our 4 main characters are our players, and
Drosselmeyer is our GM.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
This
scene asks about roles. What roles does each side fill in the game? What is the
players' role? What is their GM's role? To a certain respect, after almost 11
episodes, we are presented with the Social Contract of the "game".
Each player got a role to fill, assigned to him or her by the GM, and this is
their job. As long as they fill it, though, Drosselmeyer doesn't intervene. But
when they do leave the role behind, Drosselmeyer reminds them and guides them
back to their role.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
This
is one type of a Social Contract that can be made. We can also "sign"
a contract that gives the GM an even greater role in the shaping of the game, a
kind of game in which the players are only there for the ride. Or we can go the
other route, to a game without a real GM, a game in which the players guide the
game themselves. It can also, unsurprisingly, be somewhere in the middle.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
But
the Social Contract is only a part of a greater contract, the one called the Group
Contract, which also covers such things as rule-systems and the like. It answers
questions such as "how do we choose a rule-system?" "How closely
do we follow the rules presented in the rules-system?" and so on.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Both
of these concepts are there to help us play better games. They do it by giving
us the tools to describe in detail the roles, expectations and responsibilities
of each participating party. <o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-85460676324111746092014-11-06T22:20:00.000+02:002014-11-06T22:20:00.084+02:00Winning Is Not Mandatory<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Winning in the end is not mandatory. I know, I know, in most fantasy
stories, actually in most stories regardless of genre, the protagonists win. They
win and save the world, get the princes and princesses and get so much treasure
that they can just retire and even their grandchildren will be filthy rich. They
always win in fantasy.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
But it is not mandatory. It is not mandatory to win in the end and neither
it is mandatory to win in the middle. Loses makes the story change direction,
makes it fuller and richer, gives place to a huge set of emotions that we don't
normally see in our games. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Losing can also change and rewind the game. If the PCs always win,
there's no challenge, there's no need for playing. If they will always win, it
doesn't really matter that they've chose right and not left, or that they
killed the orcs and not the goblins.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
When we play for the plot, for the story, losing is what gives us those
dark moments in the middle of the third arc, the moments from which we find
something in ourselves and rise to the challenge, amazing those around us and
even us as we do so.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Losing shows us other sides of our characters, sides that we couldn't
really explore otherwise, because we didn't have those moments of loss, of
depression, of disappointment from the way the things turned out. We were about
to win, and somehow we lost.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Losing gives meaning to a learning curve, losing gives meaning to those
hard-earned victories. Because they truly are victories that were hard to earn,
scattered between all those loses.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And losing in the end is part of what makes a story into a tragedy.
Because in a tragedy, we either lose or lose what we fought for, we can't
really win. And tragedy is not the only type of story in which the end is
bleak. <o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Winning is not mandatory. Losing should be part of the outcome list. It
deserves its spot there.<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-76440952600788888622014-11-03T22:20:00.000+02:002014-11-03T22:20:00.761+02:00There's No One True Way<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And we're back to what will hopefully be my normal schedule. I've
started to watch an anime called Princess Tutu. I'm yet to say what it is
about, as I'm only 2 episodes in it, as of the moment of writing these lines.
What struck me so clear while watching its second episode was how good it is as
a GMing guide. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
In the second episode, we have a rivalry between Anteaternia and
Rue-Chan (yeah, I know that Chan is not part of the name but it's easier for
me). Anteaternia asked Rue-Chan how she learned to dance so wonderfully, for
which she answered with practice. Then Anteaternia said that she'll practice as
hard as she can so she'll does as wonderful as Rue-Chan. Rue said that it is
not possible.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that's and amazing thing, because as we watch the episode we learn
that Rue-Chan didn't say that from the point of contempt. Anteaternia will
never be able to dance as well as she can, because Andteaternia will have to
develop her own style.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that's true for our GMing. There's no right or wrong, there's no
true and false. There's no better and worse. Each of us GMs has different strengths
and weaknesses, goals and needs. And each group has a different mixture of
players with different expectations, needs, goals and abilities. Because of
that, this combination, there's no ultimate style of GMing. There's no better
way to GM. <o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
There are only two rules for GMing that are right all the time-
"don't be a dick", and "know thy players". All the rest is
just style. So don't try to copy another GM's style. Instead, try to develop
your own. Try to find your inner truth about GMing and go with it, play to it,
GM according to it.<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-4771650623662013252014-10-31T22:20:00.000+02:002014-10-31T22:20:00.198+02:00Jacob's Ladder- Knowing When to Say Goodbye<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
I couldn't find a more fitting movie to end this project. Jacob's Ladder
is a brilliant masterpiece about life and death, about the things the wars do
to ordinary people, about family. It is a horror movie, it is a drama movie, it
is a war movie, and it is a surrealist movie. It is hard to explain exactly
what it is, just that it is one of the greatest movies of the nineties, perhaps
even one of the greatest movies of all time.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
The movie chronicles the life of Jacob, a divorced man, a Dr. of the
arts and philosophy, a war veteran who fought in Vietnam. It chronicles the way
that his mind, his world, starts to fragment after 2 years of war. From
conspiracy to feelings of loss, from love to hippies, this movie has it all.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And (and from now on I'm gonna spoiler) it is also a movie about the
need to accept one's end, one's death. In the end of the movie, Jacob accepts
that he's gonna die, and just lets it happen, smiling, peaceful. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Campaigns and one-shots are going to end too. And we'll have to accept
that, acknowledge that. Everything oughta end. Nothing good lasts forever. And as
such is the case, we need to learn to let go, to know when something should end
and to ensure that it will end there. Not all games need to last 200 years. Not
all games need to last even a full single year. Some need to end after a single
session, others after 3 or four. We need to accept that, understand that, not
to stretch it more than we should.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Because it is better to let go of things, when they get to their natural
ultimate ending than to stretch it any longer and let it disintegrate into no
more than a thing that was once epic and now is… not. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Ending things is hard. It is not easy. But living isn't easy either, and
we don't give on life because of that. We make the hard choices, we choose to
live, and we choose to end our campaigns. We will end them on a high note,
sure, but they will end. And we'll know, deep inside our hearts that the
stories of those characters have ended. That now we do something else.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Because every ending is a new beginning. When a campaign ends, a new
ones starts, filling the place of the earlier one, of the campaign that ended.
I don't know if I succeeded expressing what I had to say, what I had in mind.
But I do hope that you'll understand and take from it what you want.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Thanks for reading.<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-65667685713157942272014-10-31T19:20:00.000+02:002014-10-31T19:20:00.117+02:00Pulse- In Horror, Nothing Really Happens<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
So… yeah, Pulse was nice. Or at least, it was nice in the beginning. Somewhere
after the first 30 minutes or so it just lost its mark, and what followed was a
mediocre film. The acting level went down, the dialogues became clanky, the metaphors
became way too much for a normal movie. I left the screen disappointed, way too
much disappointed.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
In short, though, this movie is a metaphor for the way that the internet
changed our society, driving us away from each other due to the internet. It is
pretty easy to see that by the time we reach the end, the director practically
says that the internet will destroy us all in one way or the other. But the
ending just feels a little bit over-the-top, and is a little too happy for the
tone of the movie up to this point. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
But it doesn't mean that there's nothing to learn from this movie. True,
it is located in the first 30 minutes of the movie, but this lesson is there
nonetheless. In the first 30 minutes of the film, almost nothing happens. And
that's one of the most important secrets in the horror genre- nothing really
happens, but it is still scary as hell.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
The trick for doing it is to say to us quite early that this is a horror
movie or game. After stressing that, we're always on the lookout for those
horror moments, because we first of all wanna be scared, and second of all we
wanna be brave. This combination makes us far more stressful and jumpy in
horror films and games.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
A great GM can utilize that. After stressing that his is a horror game,
and giving something to chew early on, it is only a matter of raising questions
in most of the time left for the session. How to do that is what all those
other horror posts are for. But firstly one needs to understand that in horror,
being gentle and graceful in the use of the tools is the trick. Nothing really
happens, or is it? The room is empty, or is it? There are marks on the floor,
but do you really wanna know what thing left those marks? Nothing really
happened here, but the feeling went out of my keyboard and (hopefully) entered your
minds. Because in horror, just like in real life, nothing really happens. We just
think that it does. And hope that we are wrong.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
How about you? What have you thought about this movie? And what have you
learned from it?<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-71162461531812131122014-10-31T16:20:00.000+02:002014-10-31T16:26:05.677+02:0028 Days Later- Changing Just a Little Thing<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that's how a masterpiece looks. I guess that I shouldn't have
expected any less from the director who made Trainspotting, but you know, when I
should give a compliment I will give a compliment. 28 Days Later is our age's
Night of the Living Dead, a movie that is so inventive and amazing that
everyone tried to copy it, yet it still tops them all.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
In short, a group of animal liberation militants free a virus throughout
the entirety of Britain, resulting in a zombie apocalypse. The zombies this
time are fast, real fast, and scary like they were never before. To that we add
the personal horrors of the last act. Oh, and did I mention that it has the
same amazing directing touch that Boyle employed in Trainspotting? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that leads us to the lesson to learn from this movie. Apart from
utilizing lessons of identification and beautiful scenery (which makes this
movie a textbook example of how to do a high-level horror movie), it practically
invented the concept of the fast-zombie.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And the zombies here are fast. Apart from being fast, they are the
normal Romero-type zombies, but their greater speed makes them so different, so
refreshing, and so terrifying. And that's a pretty good lesson to learn.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
I wrote, a long time ago, about ways to make <a href="http://holilo.blogspot.com/2013/06/3-ways-to-make-one-scene-characters.html">one scene characters unique</a>, utilizing a known, common stereotype and building upon it. Boyle gave
the same treatment to his zombies. And we can do the same- when using a known
monster, keeping it the same, just like we read or watched hundreds of time,
but changing something inherent in it, like the speed of the zombies. Or it
might be a vampire that lives on computer data, sucking hard-drives and all the
personal folders and documents.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Or we might drive a known characteristic to 11. The zombie isn't slow,
it can't move, it just lies there waiting to be found and eat. The vampire
isn't burned by sunlight- it explodes when the light touches it. And again, much
horror ensues.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Or we might add a characteristic. The vampire can change its looks so he
can look like your wife or husband. The zombie can now climb on walls. And
these monsters won't ever look the same.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
How about you? What have you thought about this movie? And what lessons
did you take from it?<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: left; unicode-bidi: embed;">
(Also published as The Bleeding Scroll's addition to the <a href="http://ofdiceanddragons.com/october-2014-blog-carnival-things-that-go-bump-in-the-night/">October Blog Carnival</a>)<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-40260485878197257742014-10-31T13:20:00.000+02:002014-10-31T13:20:12.165+02:00Black Sabbath- It's All in the Name<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
It is hard to believe it, but after this movie I have only three movies
left. Time moves so quickly, it turns out, way too quickly. Anyway, Black
Sabbath. I must say that I wasn't really impressed. Maybe it is because I watched
better movies throughout this month, or maybe it is just because after 28
horror movies one starts to feel the dreaded "please no more horror films
this month, I had to much" kinda feeling.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Anyway, Black Sabbath is an anthology film. It is made of 3 short films
combined together. The first one, The Telephone (this might be the time to say
that I've watched the Italian version and not the American one) is a story
about a woman, a prostitute, who starts to receive telephone calls from her
ex-pimp. Little by little, his threats become deadlier and far more
frightening. For me, this short was the highlight of the collection. The next
one, The Wurdalak, is a conventional vampire story. The last one, The Drop of
Water, is a short film about a nurse who steals a ring and a ghost haunts her. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Now, the lessons from the better shorts, the first and the second, are
lying in the posts about other movies in this project. But there is a lesson
that is unique to this collection- the lesson of names and their power. You
see, The Wurdalak is conventional. Way too conventional, if you ask me. We have
a vampire, he kills those close to him, much blood. It even takes place in Eastern
Europe, if it wasn't conventional enough.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
But he is not called a vampire. He is given a different name. And this
gives the movie some sense of originality. Because to a certain extent, it is
like discovering and learning about a different, a new, monster. And this can
be done in our games too. Give a familiar monster a different name and a
description that is only a little different, and you can cut yourself a lot of
time creating monsters on the one hand, and on the other the players will feel
a certain feel of knowledge and similarity combined with a feeling of
freshness. This is good.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
As an added bonus, you can go the Troll 2 Way and have a connection
between the names (yeah, it is probably the first and the last time that I'll
mention something positive about Troll 2, as even this name change is executed
terribly). You don’t have to go for the Nilbog kind of name, but you can go the
anagram way. When the players will figure it out, they will feel like geniuses,
like true investigators. This is even better.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Anyway, that's it for this movie. How about you? Have you watched this
movie? What have you thought about it? And what did it teach you?<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
<br /></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-88490945960325102722014-10-31T10:20:00.000+02:002014-10-31T10:20:00.091+02:00Dracula (1958)- Adjusting as Needed<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
It took me quite a while to finally see this version of Dracula. The
vampire buff in me stands now in the corner, ashamed of himself. I hope that
you'll forgive him… Anyway, this version doesn't disappoints, which is quite
amazing to say when considering the bad aging of most of Hammer's Films.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
I guess that most of you do know the plot of Dracula, but this version
changes the plot of the book on the one hand and of earlier adaptations on the
other hand, quite enormously. For once, Van Helsing is young, and for the other
Harker is there to kill Dracula and not to sell him anything.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that's quite interesting. Instead of sticking with the original
book, like the opening scene might suggest, the movie quite clearly makes the
story its own, changing what it sees as needing a change, a breather, some
fresh air.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that's something that isn't utilized enough. Many of us GMs try to
do everything by the book, whether we're talking about the stats of monsters or
of the plots of published adventures. We so try to go by the book that we
sometimes forget that these things were written as guidance, so we will be able
to adjust them according to our needs.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
A great GM once said that nobody knows one's group better than this
particular one that comes from the group. I know my group better than any other
GM in the world, because I GM for them regularly. So do the players in my
group. And that's an important truth, because when it comes to this, to GMing
for them, or to figuring out what adventure to buy for the next session, or
even which parts of the adventure I should stress and which I should eradicate,
nobody knows it better than me. And it is true for you and your groups. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
So please, when GMing published adventures, or when playing some fight scenes,
or whatever else, don't try to play by the book. Instead, adjust it as much as
you need to make it fitting with your own group, your real group, and not some theoretical
one.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
How about you? Have you watched this movie? What have you thought about
it? And what have you learned from it?<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-58354151812773550602014-10-30T22:20:00.000+02:002014-10-30T22:20:00.211+02:00Phantasm- Meeting the NPCs in Normal Situations<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Some movies leave you with a lasting impression, others just don't.
Phantasm belongs to the second group. It's not that it is a bad movie, or that I
didn't enjoy it, but it just wasn't that good either. For me, it didn't have
anything memorable within its 90 minutes, and even The Tall Man himself wasn't
anything inspiring. I mean- after knowing The Slender Man, all I can say in benefit
of this movie is that it was a nice inspiration for some great artistry. Too
bad it's all I can say for this film.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Anyway, this movie's plot is pretty complicated, and not because of its
presentation. You see, the movie twists itself quite a lot, combining gypsies
with ice-cream men with heroic sensibilities, aliens and dwarfs, brotherly love
and much-much grief over death in the family. Anything beyond that might be a
spoiler, and I don't want that to happen.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Our protagonist, Mike, begins as a certain kind of stalker- he follows
his brother anywhere, because his afraid of his brother leaving him behind, to
leave his life alone. In a scene near the beginning, Mike follows his brother
and witnesses his brother doing it, or at least beginning to do it.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that's a great idea to use in our games. No, not this particular
idea, but… one of the greatest GMing tips that can be given about portraying
NPCs is that they should be given a sense of life. They should feel alive
beyond the scope of their encounters with the PCs. A great way to do that is to
have the PCs meet them in normal situations.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Imagine this scene- the PCs are doing their businesses in the city as
usual, when suddenly they see the villain in a flower shop. "A-ah, this
time we'll get ya!" they'll say to him, for which he'll respond
"Can't I just but some flowers for milady?" or something along those
lines. Or maybe he collects flowers because this is one of his hobbies? Or maybe
because he is lonely and this is his way of escapism?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
As an added bonus, try to think about ways to utilize these instances to
make the players feel bad. "Look, if I'll try to kill this woman you'll be
the first to know about it, and then you'll come and take revenge on me, and
then you'll destroy my base (again) and then I'll have to start all over again
(again)." Two benefits for the price of one, I'm taking it…<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that's it for today. How about you? Have you watched this movie? What
have you thought about it? And what have you learned from it?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Tomorrow I'll cover the last five movies of this project, so I hope
you'll enjoy it too.<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-30912882359484318162014-10-29T22:20:00.000+02:002014-10-29T22:20:00.224+02:00The Orphanage- Use Sceptics to your Advantage<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And here comes the big fix. A film that is so emotional, so intense, and
so true to its roots. And it is far more than just a horror film- it is a film
about motherhood, a film about childhood, about innocence, about the powers of
our imaginations. This film is a masterpiece without a doubt. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
It is the story of a mother, called Laura, who returns with her husband
and son to her childhood home- an orphanage. As time goes by, her son starts to
talk about some imagined friends, friends that Laura and her husband ignore as nonsense.
But after her son, Simon, disappears, the real horror begins. Or is it just her
imagination?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Short summaries like this one don't do the movie any justice. It is one
of those movies that one just has to see for himself/herself. But I wanna talk
about one of the things that make this movie so powerful, so full of horror and
terror and suspense and dread. The movie has the sceptic character(s).<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
In this movie, we begin with all of the characters except for Simon as
sceptics, but as the movie advances Laura also starts to believe. Yet, the
others are sceptics. And those sceptics are important, as they give this movie
to edges on movies without sceptics.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Firstly, sceptics leave our protagonist with no choice but to try and
figure the truth by herself. She has no one else to ask for help, as after all
nobody really believes her. The cops say that it is bullshit; her husband says
that she starts to get mad, and the only ones who believe her are the paranormal
experts, which doesn't make the situation any better.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
But secondly, and far more importantly, is that this sceptic helps us to
keep our suspension of disbelief. And why is that? Because through the
sceptic(s) the director tells us that "yeah, it is quite strange, it does
seem really farfetched". And when the director acknowledges that, it is
far easier for us to believe in what we see, or at the very least to stop
saying to ourselves- "Oh, this is just too strange to be real". <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And when we're dealing with the supernatural, the combination of these
two things is a huge edge that we can give to our games. Have in your Cthulhu
game a cop who thinks that what the PCs are saying is crap. Have a friend of
the PCs, in your World of Darkness games, dispute their theories. And suddenly,
they will be inclined to work harder, because there's no one else to do the
job, because if it is strange to the world inhabitants it is really strange and
thus easier to believe, because of the disputer is close to the PCs the players
will want to prove it to say to this friend of them: "A-ah, see? That is
real!"<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that's it for today. How about you? What have you thought about this
movie? And what did you learn from it?<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-30670676872301729452014-10-28T22:20:00.000+02:002014-10-28T22:20:00.462+02:00Salò- Horror through Beautiful Scenery<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
I want my time back. Like seriously I want my time back. This film is
supposed to be a controversial art film, but I don't know. Maybe I'm just not
ready for films like this, or maybe it is just a matter of me being close to
this subject matter. OK, not this exact subject matter, but I think that you
know what I mean.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Anyway, it is a movie about 4 sick fascist libertines, in the North
Italian region, and the ways they torture 18 teenagers, 9 boys and 9 girls. It
is suffice to say that it is not a movie for those with a light stomach. For
120 days, the fascists torture them in about every dreadful way imaginable and
finished with a Waltz and no punishment. Pasolini wanted it to be a social
commentary. For me it is a sick flick that shouldn't have been made.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
But, being made, and held to such a high regard by some directors and film
critics, and being a part of my October Horror Movie Challenge (number 24), I
have to pick a lesson from it. And what can I say, it is quite hard to pick one
because there aren't many things to pick from this movie. But I picked one
anyway.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
When the film opens, we quite early get some glimpses of Northern Italy.
We see some beautiful houses, some nice skyline and rivers, and we even see
some nice small and big trees. The scenery is just beautiful. Way too
beautiful. Even the house where the teens will spend their next 120 suffering
for no reason whatsoever, even this house is beautiful from the outside, and
has some merits in the inside.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
This is made by purpose, because through this beauty of the outside
world, and its contrast to what lies and happens within, we get a feeling of an
evil world that doesn't care for those teens at all. Even the huge amount of
statues, all of them religious statues, is there to advance this world. "The
world is sick", Pasolini tells us, "and even though such horrible
things are happening in this house, no one in the world cares, the world just
continues with its usual affairs". <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
When we GM horror games, especially cosmic and other fifth level horror games,
this contrast can add so much to our games. Because the power of this level
comes from the realization that the world is an evil, uncaring and cold place,
using this contrast can help us so much. The beauty is just a façade, terrible
things lie beneath, and the world doesn't care, it continues to be beautiful,
it continues to do nothing to prevent it.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Have you watched this move? What have you thought about it? And what
lessons did you take from it?<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-8562696652939684482014-10-27T22:20:00.000+02:002014-10-27T22:20:00.527+02:00Society- Please don't Break the Contract between us<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
There are two types of bad movies- those that are bad from the beginning,
and thus you can laugh at them, and those that start good and then turn really
crappy. This movie belongs to the second, much disappointing group.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
In short, this is the story of a young man who thinks that he doesn't
belong to his family. Slowly but surely he starts to find the truth, while it
seems that the whole world is against him. At the end, when the truth is
finally revealed, Yuzna tries to pass some social commentary. While the message
gets to us, the execution is a bit… way too much over-the-top, and that's
without mentioning the "fart-jokes" of the end. Too bad, it opened
way too good to be campy, it is just a disappointment.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
But, like always, there's something to learn from this movie. There's
something that the movie does right, or otherwise I wouldn't have been this
disappointed. And what the movie did right was to question my understanding of
the situation- am I really seeing that something isn't right, or is it just the
protagonist's imagination.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Throughout most of the film, Billy visits a psychiatrist. This gives us
the possibility to ask ourselves: who really is the madman in this movie? Is
Billy the madman, or is he the only sane person in the world. He himself
questions what he sees, and time after time Yuzna disputes his protagonist's
theories.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And it is so powerful. Because not only are we afraid for Billy, who
might be sane and thus in real danger, we also fear that he really is mad and
thus he might hurt all the other people in his disturbed world, people who only
tried to help him. What Yuzna does at the end, though, is to throw all of these
possibilities and fears out of the window, picking a lazy (even though much
more social-stingy) solution. For an example made right, I'll have to point you
to the great Buffy episode Normal Again (season 6 episode 17). But yeah,
Society…<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
What can we learn from this failure? First of all, that sometimes we
can't give both social commentary and a satisfying ending. And as we first of
all game and only later try to say something, the game is more important
(unless stated so from the beginning).<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Bu secondly and far more importantly, if we have built something good,
please don't let it fall. Because disappointment is a breaching of the contract
between us people, players and GM(s). And this contract is far more important
than shoving a message into our ears and brains.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
With that out of the way, I wanna hear you. What have you thought about
this movie? And what have you learned from it?<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-51850388758249939392014-10-26T22:20:00.000+02:002014-10-26T22:20:00.647+02:00Dead Ringers- The Importance of Identification<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And here comes Cronenberg to the rescue. Dead Ringers is one of those
movies that I waited to see for some years, now. And it did not disappoint. I
left it amazed and emotionally disturbed, which means that he succeeded with
achieving his goal. Unsurprisingly, it is considered to be one of his greatest
masterpieces, ranking among the greatest Canadian films ever made.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
It is, to say the least, the story of two twin gynecologists, who are
far closer than they look (and it's quite hard, being played by the same actor)
yet so different from each other. T is the story of their collapse, of them
losing all that they've worked for. It is a story about brotherly love. And it
is one of those films that one has just to see for himself/herself.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And because of being such a great cinematic masterpiece, it was
extremely hard for me to pick a lesson from this movie. Not because there
weren't many (or even any), but because there are way too many things one can
learn from this movie. But hopefully I picked the right one*.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
In the last couple of scenes in the movie, we see Beverly kills his
brother Elliot. A few seconds later, we cut to Beverly waking up and he calls
and cries. He doesn't look on his brother, he doesn't really see him in this
stage. He is vulnerable, he is crying and sobbing, he is human. And even though
we remember what he did, that he killed his brother with gynecological tools
for mutant women, we can't not feel for him in this scene, we cannot not like
him. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that's a great lesson for the Personal horror GM- always ensure that
the players will be able to feel for, to like, to identify the characters, the
PCs. As long as they feel for their characters, they will be able to feel the
personal horror, because they'll feel that they do it, or at the very least
that they can do it given the same circumstances. But without this ability to
identify with the characters? They'll just be in shock, they won't feel the
true personal horror.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that's the whole truth, actually. The feeling for and the
identification with the characters is the thing that enables the personal
horror genre, and if one needs to spend more time before going all horror, or
to show vulnerability after a terrible murder, so be it. The identification
will give you the reward; the identification will give you the horror.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
How 'bout you? Have you watched this movie? What have you learned from
it? And what have you thought about it afterwards?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
* I did want to talk about how to treat your subject matter, but <a href="http://buriedwithoutceremony.com/">AveryMcdaldno</a> did it so <a href="http://buriedwithoutceremony.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Safe-Hearts.pdf">much better</a>.<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-3942940602215378012014-10-25T22:20:00.000+03:002014-10-25T22:20:00.256+03:00Hellraiser- How Not to Use Gore<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Ok… yeah… emm… I'm trying to think but words fail me. So I'll just say
it plainly: "Hellraiser was shit." How shiity was it? Well, Ebert
said it best, when paraphrasing King's remark about Clive Barker: "<span style="background: white; color: #4c4c4c; font-family: "Georgia","serif";">…but I
have seen the future of implausible plotting, and his name is Clive Barker</span>."
True, Ebert did make a few mistakes recounting the plot, but it doesn't really
matter, it doesn't make the plot any better, and the pace is bad no matter how
you look at it.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
<span style="background: white; color: #4c4c4c; font-family: "Georgia","serif";">It is a movie about a man who made a deal with a Rubik cube or
something, and due to this pact he dies. Then his ex-lover kills people so
he'll get his flesh back. Also- some ugly demons who were supposed to look interesting
or something, especially the something part. One of them looks campy, with his
sunglasses, but that's as close as it gets there.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
<span style="background: white; color: #4c4c4c; font-family: "Georgia","serif";">Truth is, most of the lessons to learn from this movie have already been
covered, only here we learn them as things not to do, as common pitfalls or
whatever. But there is something that we can learn from this movie that I haven't
covered: Appealing to the disgust factor.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
<span style="background: white; color: #4c4c4c; font-family: "Georgia","serif";"> </span>You see, this movie is
just disgusting. There's no better way to phrase that, or even to describe it. It
ain't scary, ain't anything else. It was a disgusting movie, plain and simple.
And one couldn't even say that it was being disgusting with a purpose. It was
disgusting for the sake of being disgusting. It had a man that eats insects. Why?
God knows. We later see him return and we learn that it was supposed to be some
kind of foreshadowing or something, but it was a lazy kind of foreshadowing. It
was the kind of foreshadowing that leaves you with a sour taste. And this one
was the one with a "purpose".<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Stephen King once wrote that if he can't terrify he horrifies, and that
if he can't horrify he goes to the revulsion side of the spectrum*. I say
something else: If you can't terrify and you can't horrify, please don't do
horror, it might be better to all of us.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And I think that I'll leave this movie here, alone and (hopefully)
forgotten. Maybe one day I'll find the way to get my time back, or just thee opportunity
to ask Barker (or King) what crossed his mind when making this movie (or complimenting
Barker).<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
How about you? Have you watched this movie? What have you taken from it?
And what have you learned? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; unicode-bidi: embed;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
* I can't say that I like King's terminology, but it is a topic for
another post, for another day.<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-14079794633373193032014-10-24T22:20:00.000+03:002014-10-24T22:20:00.378+03:00Day of the Dead- Have Yourself a Little Bub<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
I don't think that it will come with any surprise, that I found Day of
the Dead amazing. <span dir="RTL"></span><span dir="RTL"></span><span dir="RTL" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span dir="RTL"></span><span dir="RTL"></span> </span>Truth
be told, it is not on the same level of his earlier two zombie flicks, but it
is not surprising. The first two films were (and still are) groundbreaking,
satirical, amazing, among the best the horror genre ever came to be. Those
films weren't just great in their own genre, but among the entire world of
cinema. Day of the Dead doesn't have a chance against this, but truth is- it
doesn't make it any less good. It is still a treasure trove of the genre, and
it still has a lot to teach us.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
In short, in this iteration of the series, we follow a group of humans,
some of them civilians and some of them soldiers, and we see how humanity
collapses due to a lack of real communication. Like with most of Romero's
films, though, the zombies are there in the background and not much more, and
this sets them apart, shows why they received such high remarks, why they are
still being imitated throughout the entire world.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
But we're not here for a lesson about the movie industry, and as such is
the case I wanna move towards the GMing side of the things. Because, like I said
a few days ago, most older horror movies which still hold their charm have
something to teach us, positively, or otherwise they wouldn't be as scary as
they are. And with this film, we have a great lesson to take.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Somewhat towards the middle of the film, we are first presented with
Bub. Those who have watched the film know by now to where I'm going with this,
but still… Bub is a thinking zombie. It has a brain, some feelings, a sense of
an earlier life; it even enjoys listening to music. And Bub raises the level of
the film by so many ranks.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And Bub is an amazing takeaway, because we don't expect to see, to meet,
to encounter a thinking zombie. We don't expect to feel something for one of
the monsters. And yet, we do. So many blogs and GMing books will talk about
giving the goons and mooks a face, maybe even many faces. Most of them don't
ask you to give the mindless monsters a face. They're just cannon fodder. But when
you will give those mindless monsters a face, and a brain, you get so much
more. Because when Bub salutes the "evil" soldier, after shooting him
to death, one can't stay calm, uncaring, unfeeling. One only has the ability to
look in amazement, to feel. And that's the power of Bub. So have yourself a Bub
also.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
How about you? Have you watched this movie? What did you take from it? And
what have you thought about it?<span dir="RTL" lang="HE" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-54074353929311287712014-10-23T22:20:00.000+03:002014-10-23T22:20:00.037+03:00Re-Animator - Adding Just a Tiny Bit of Humor<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
I don't like Stuart Gordon's adaptations of Lovecraft. Here, I said it. They
are just so bad, so… they're just bad. This time, he does his best, giving us a
trashy film done professionally. But that's about all I can say for this bizarre
movie, too much for most of us' appetites.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
In the movie, Herbert West is transformed into the early eighties, with
that time's weird sense of fashion and strange ideals. I might have exaggerated
a bit there, but the movie doesn't take itself too seriously either. Herbert
messes with the dead, granting them "life" with a strange serum. Then
we got much nudity, gore and something that is supposed to be some characters
to identify with.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
But I guess that I have to say something in its favor, or at least I need
to find something to learn from it. After all, if I found something to learn
from the terrible Braindead, I must find something to learn from this
re-animated dead flick. And what can I say? It got a weird sense of humor.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Humor, from quite an early stage, was associated with the horror genre. When
the movie is built around tension-and-release moments, doing the "release"
part right is mandatory. And one of the greatest release-mechanisms ever? Why of
course, it is the infamous humor. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that's the lesson to learn from this movie- use humor, but use it
well. The reason that the head-on-a-stick is so funny is that it comes just
after so much seriousness and villainy, and suspense and so much more. After being
serious for far too long for this movie's level, it just comes with a childish
joke, breaking the ice, the statues, and our ability to take this movie seriously.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
So, I don't know if I succeeded with explaining what I meant. Truth is,
this movie's sense of humor is so hard to explain also. But yeah, use humor, it
might be what you're looking for your "tension-and-release" cycle.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
How about you? Have you found this movie any good? And what have you
learned from it?<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-69886091616825447382014-10-22T22:20:00.000+03:002014-10-22T22:20:00.086+03:00The Abominable Dr. Phibes- How Not to Use a Pattern<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Another campy movie. Sometimes one has to ask himself (or herself) why
camp goes so well with the horror genre. But this is a topic for another day
(and maybe even for another blog). The Abominable Dr. Phibes is campy enough
for its characters to remark about the stupidity of the characters' names. But,
unlike with other works of film and television, here it doesn't help the movie
to look any better, too bad for this movie…<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
To put it shortly, the movie chronicles the revenge that a famous and
now supposed to be dead organist on a series of surgeons and others of the
medical profession for letting his wife die. For some reason he chooses to take
his revenge according to the plagues that hit Egypt in the famous chapters from
the book of Exodus.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Now, up until now it is a very descent premise, and the list of actors
is quite remarkable and promising. The musical score is wonderful and… you get
the idea. So why does this movie fail? Mainly because it chooses such a
wonderful premise, such a promising pattern, and destroys what it has to offer.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
You see, the actions, the killing ways, they're not in the same order as
shown in the bible. The film tries so much to be scientifically accurate that
it changes the order of the plagues to something else. More logically correct,
far easier to believe in terms of causality, but it has a devastating effect in
terms of our building dread.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Most of us remember the order of the plagues, at least in broad strokes,
enough to understand when the pattern is changed. And when they change the
pattern, we don't know what death scene is gonna come now. So instead of
looking forward for the death scene, we're busy trying to remember what the
Rabi said will be the next one, and we can't because what comes to mind are the
original order and the knowledge that it was changed. So we don't look forward
to the next death scene, we don't have the anticipation building the right way,
and as such it's far harder to dread the upcoming death.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
So please, when creating a villain, or a monster, and trying to think
about a pattern for the killing, if you'll ever think about using a common
knowledge pattern, don't change it. You'll just make it worse.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
How about you? What did you learn from this movie? And have you enjoyed
it?<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-47004370494208733622014-10-21T22:20:00.000+03:002014-10-21T22:20:00.158+03:00Black Sunday- Use the Scenery to Your Advantage <div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
1960 was an interesting year. It was the dawn of one of the lousiest
decades in the history of the American cinema (ok, most of a decade, the
salvation came in 1967), but it also had the amazing film Psycho to give us
some hope and grandeur for this decade. As it turned out, in Italy things were
a little better, as can be shown by the rise of the Giallo movies. One of them,
one of the earlier ones, is "Black Sunday", also known as The Mask of
Satan. And it is still a very nice movie.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
It is a story, a movie, about the consequences of the witch hunting of
the 17<sup>th</sup> century. It is a film about the way Satan worshipers
torment the pure of hearts, and how they fight back. It is a story about love. It
is also a movie that stands to its title, to its rank, that time only
benefitted it.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And like with all early masterpieces that still hold their charm, this
movie has a lot to teach us. I, for once, wanna concentrate on the scenery. Especially
the castle, the old dark castle. This castle is based around the gothic
tradition- it is old, it is gloomy, it is filled with paintings of important
figures from older times. It is also a castle made of narrow corridors and full
of rooms and doors, not to mention some secret passages.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And this gives the director a lot to work with. The paintings can be
used for foreshadowing; the gloomy and dark looks of the castle for the mod
setting. But especially important are the narrow corridors filled with doors
and the secret passages. The first one is important mainly because it gives the
monsters the ability to attack from wherever they want. Through this we get a
larger sense of paranoia and a greater fear of the unknown- after all, we know
the monster will attack, but we don't know from where.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
The secret passage is important from this reason, but also from a far
more important one- it helps the director to control the pace- when the
corridor will be revealed, we will enter the last phase. This is an important
tool to have in the arsenal, as it helps to move past scenes of dwindling
importance, action or dread-building.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And we, as GMs, don't have to limit ourselves to just old castles, we
can use asylums, or hunted houses, or so much more. The important lesson from
this movie, though, is to think about the scenery, to try to think and understand
why do we want such a scenery and how can we utilize it. Hopefully, we'll get
far greater benefits from our sceneries if we'll think about those questions.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
How about you? What did you think about this movie? And what have you
taken from it?<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-25175478124473976182014-10-20T22:20:00.000+03:002014-10-20T22:20:00.632+03:00Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer- Give Principles for your Killers<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Emm… No, I just don't know what to say. I'm just speechless, wordless,
amazed, shocked, and horrified, perhaps not in this order. Henry is a strange
film, a little gem and at the same time a little piece of trash. I think that
in the end, it is only a matter of how one looks at the film. For me, it's
mainly in the gem section, but it doesn't mean that I'll watch it again, or
that I'm happy for this film to ever been made.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
To put it shortly, Henry is a film that tells the story of a serial killer,
portraying him in a documentary-style fashion, showing his brutality without
flinching, protecting us, glorifying it or anything of this fashion. It is a
Slasher, but not the typical teenagers-on-the-run kind of Slasher; it is a
psychological horror film but not that close to the exemplary ones like The
Shining or The Silence of the Lambs. It is a movie that one has to see in order
to understand. Telling about it is not enough.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Now, this movie puts a serial killer on the center. True, we have Otis
and Becky, but it is Henry who we are after. And Henry is an interesting
character. We know that he is bad, and one can't listen to him teaches his
modus operandi without suffering from so many chills that it hurts. Yet, we
hate Otis more. We hate the drug dealer, we hate the amateur serial killer, we
hate all of Otis's character far more than we hate Henry. And that's
interesting, and that enables us to survive this movie. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
So one has to wonder- how could they achieve that? How could they make
us hate Otis far more than we hate Henry? The reason that I've found is located
in a very simple scene near the beginning- Otis tries to grab his sister and
kiss her, Henry says "no!" and stops him. That's the scene, that's
the reason. And why is this so powerful, so important? Because it helps us to
identify with this Henry-monster, because it shows that even Henry has
principles, or at the very least some feelings regarding other human beings. Things
that Otis has far less of, if he has anything of this type at all.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And when we come to present our monsters and villains in our games, it
might be better to use something like this. Why? Because it will make the
players question the definitions of good and bad, the definitions of what moral
and what isn't, it will make them be far more afraid, because a killer that is
prone to feelings can be understood, and this means that one can become such a
killer. But it has an almost as dark in addition for the earlier one stated- if
the killer has feelings, and the killer is prone to those feelings, he can do
things that will be totally unexpected, because it will attack the
understanding of the killer's psyche and not just the normal expectations. And that's
far scarier than anything one could achieve on its own.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
How 'bout you? What did you think about this movie? And have you taken
something interesting from it?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
16 movies up until now, all of them new.</div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-74378345147146648042014-10-19T22:20:00.000+03:002014-10-19T22:20:00.494+03:00Let's Scare Jessica to Death- The Powers of Clothing<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Some movies hold to their title, others do not. Too bad that this movie
belongs to the latter group. Let's Scare Jessica to Death is an interesting
movie, its soundtrack is creepy like hell, and it knows how to play on the
audiences fears. Each and every element works perfectly when looked at separately.
But when combined? They overshadow each other. And that's the main problem in
this movie for me.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
In a nutshell, it is the story of a woman who just got released from a
mental asylum and who now tries to readjust to her new life, in a house far
from town, nice and cozy and quite morbid. She hears things in her head,
many-many things, and she tries to deal with it.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
What struck me the most about this movie is its use of clothing to tell
us about the characters. Especially when looking at our two leading ladies in
this film. Emily is dressed in red, which puts her in the sensual realm, as an
adult woman. She knows what powers her sexuality possesses. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Jessica, on the other hand, starts the film dressed in violet, and her
clothing grows darker in tone with each passing day. I mean, she
"chooses" darker clothes with each passing day. And that's
interesting, because we can see through her clothing the naivety being broken,
we can see how what she hears makes her older, forces her to grow.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And this can be used in our games too. Clothing is such a powerful tool
to convey feelings, to convey characteristics, to shed a light on the inner
feelings and workings of the characters, it is useful to show social
differences. In other words, we can say that "show me what you wear, and
I'll know who you are".<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
All I can say is that maybe, just maybe, one should try to use it. I know
that I do, and it works magic for me, why shouldn't it be the same for you?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; unicode-bidi: embed;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
How about you? Have you watched this movie? What did you think about it?
And what have you taken from it?<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-29001313005541047952014-10-18T22:20:00.000+03:002014-10-18T22:20:00.270+03:00Martin- When One Shouldn't Invent the Wheel<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
I owe you an apology, dear readers. I was to the IICON convention, the Israeli
convention for geek culture, kinda like the Israeli Comicon. Unsurprisingly, it
took me some days to recuperate, to return to normal. Truth is, I was quite
sure that you won't even feel it, having prepared posts for the first two
convention days, but personal matters made me unable to cover the following
days (the last day of the convention and those days for breath-catching). So I'm
in a bit of a delay. For that, I apologize. I do hope that the posts from now
on will justify the wait.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And without much farther ado, let's move to the 14<sup>th</sup> movie in
the project, to the movie Martin. Martin
is an interesting case. It is not a bad movie per se, and even Romero called it
"my favorite movie", but for me, it just didn't work.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
It is a movie about a person who is sure that he's a vampire, and who
challenges through his twisted take on vampirism the myth of the vampire. Parts
of these he does through the phone, talking with a radio DJ who understands
what great hit he has in his hands.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
The movie is very art-housey in its feel, and that's where the problems
start to arise. You see, George Romero is a very talented director, and one
feels it, and he knows what he's doing. But it just doesn't work. I didn't feel
a thing for the character of Martin. I knew that I should have, but I just
couldn't. The movie is so filled with art-house tricks that it just loses
something in its way to glory.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Romero, and it might be strange to say, is just not Ingmar Bergman or
Pedro Almodovar who can make a very art-housey movie and it will still be communicative
enough for us to feel something for the characters, for the story. Romero isn't
talented enough for the task, although he sometimes can come close to that.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And most of us are Romero-level GMs and not Almodovar- or Bergman-level
GMs. It is not bad to be Romeros, but it does mean that we should know our
places. We don't have to try and challenge the usual narrative or the basic and
universal roles and tropes that make our RPGs. We don't have to conjure a
meeting between the PCs and the players every other game, or to go to the
meta-level game every time that we can. Truth is, most GMs can make wonders of
just the usual party going to the usual dungeon to kill the usual dragon. Hell,
I who finished a campaign with a meeting between PCs and players don't consider
myself able to conjure a meeting like that again. Sometimes, or maybe even all
the times, we just have to know our places, to know what we can achieve and
what we can't, what we can challenge and what we shouldn't.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
We don't have to invent the wheel from scratch every time, or even every
other or third time. Usually, striving for a great experience, for a nice
evening of dragon-slaying, sometimes it is just enough.<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864154071068165379.post-26247124604943255632014-10-13T22:20:00.000+03:002014-10-13T22:20:00.048+03:00The Mist- Learning When to Stop<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
13 years after directing The Shawshank Redemption, Darabont directs
another King's adaptation. And I can’t say that I was impressed. It is
considered to be one of the greatest and most frightening horror movies of the century
so far, but I couldn't agree less. It was one of the most disappointing films
that I've ever seen.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
On the surface, it has all the elements of being a good horror movie,
and also a good movie outside of the genre, the same line that for me holds
movies like Casablanca (my all-time favorite), Psycho, The Silence of the Lambs,
The 400 Blows and so many more. It has some very nice acting, and it has a
political sting, and it has some interesting and surprisingly deep characters
(well, most of them, if you look hard enough). It has a really nice conspiracy,
and it tackles religious fanatics and hubris filled scientists. It has
everything that a movie could ask for.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that's the problem, it has way too much. The mist isn't scary,
because there are creatures in there. They aren't scary, because we've got big
ol fucking Cthulhu in there. Cthulhu isn't scary, because we got a conspiracy,
and this conspiracy isn't scary because we also got some religious fanatics,
and we're also told about the scientists, and we see the people going mad,
becoming beasts like in Night of the Living Dead, and… I think that you've got
the idea. We've got way too much.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that's even before we look at the movie on the genre level. We've
got horror, and then we got a love story (only for the woman to get killed 2
seconds or so later). Then we get into a Christian movie, later turned into a post-apocalyptic
film, before finally ending on the melodramatic Hamlet side of the spectrum.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
Maybe it's just me, I don't know. But for me it was hell too much to
really care for what's going on. I watched the movie trying to understand
what's going on at the beginning, and then started to guess what strange twist
they'll bring this time.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
And that's a lesson to keep in mind when designing and writing your
stories, your adventures. Think not only about what to put in, but also about
what to put out. Remind yourself that too much of a good thing turns everything
into something bad, or at the very least tasteless. When every few minutes the
story changes completely, and you throw something too different and too big to
handle, you'll just end with people who don't care.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
They don't care not because they don't want to, but because they can't,
because you put too much for their minds to handle. Because, and that' a thing
that one should keep in mind, you as GM's know everything and you had much time
to absorb it, to analyze it, to understand what goes where and when. But
players? They only have a few minutes. So have mercy on them, or don't be
surprised when they can't get what you're doing next or don't care for your
uber-impressive plot twist.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" dir="LTR" style="direction: ltr; text-align: justify; unicode-bidi: embed;">
How about you? What did you think about this movie? And have you learned
from it something else, something positive?<o:p></o:p></div>
yosimoshehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16821676725650974647noreply@blogger.com0