A Spoiler- Free Synopsis of Doctor Who, Season 11, Episode 8, “The Witchfinders.”
Team TARDIS (the Doctor is still struggling with what to call her trio of amigos) ends up in a Northern town that history forgot, midway through a witch hunt led by King James himself. The Doctor is a) female, b) not entirely compliant with the traditions of the 17th century, and c) capable of remarkable things. Must be a witch. Burn her! Throw her in the pond! Use the larger scales to see if she weighs the same as a duck!
Back when Jodie Whitaker was announced as the new Doctor, some of the critics said it would be harder for a woman to take charge of a crisis in Earth’s history. Looks like they were right; not even psychic paper or a great speech could convince King James that the Doctor belonged in charge of the witchfinding operation, and even the token human in distress turned on the Doctor under pressure. Of course, that is the point they were making. The Doctor herself recognized she’d have an easier time as a man. But there was nothing to be done about it.
That’s a major thing I noticed: some things are just plain out of the Doctor’s hands. The town where all this was happening didn’t make it into the history books, kind of like how Yaz knew the guy she met in India wasn’t going to be her grandfather. So not even “fixed history” was on their side. On the other hand, King James was protected by history, so whatever he did, no matter how misguided, was pretty much safe. The final moments of this episode were strikingly similar to the ending of Spiders in Sheffield, when Discount Donald Trump killed a defenseless creature with no repercussions as the Doctor looked on.
The result, once again, was a very human-feeling episode. Even the alien monsters didn’t seem terribly alien, which explains why they were so easily mistaken for minions of the Devil.
And thus we come to the Christian theme. Mistress Savage (what a name, huh?) did point out that the Bible declares a godly person must not suffer a witch to live. And the Doctor came back with the New Testament answer, “love your neighbor.” Remember, this is the woman who once threw “the Devil” into a black hole and subscribes to the Big Bang theory of the origin of the universe. But once again, she gets the finer details right.
The witch trials are hard to comment on, because there was so much people didn’t understand, which led to so much fear. And even the strongest faith isn’t enough to make things right unless it’s faith in the right thing. Conviction and courage aren’t what casts out fear; love is.
All in all, though, this was a solid episode, a good old-fashioned history piece. The monsters were fairly original, especially considering we’ve done witches before, with Shakespeare. These were sufficiently different from those.
Verdict: 8 fashionable hats out of 10.
Let’s Connect! Twitter: @noahspud and @CorrelationBlog
Two weekends ago, I got the chance to see Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald. This is one of two reviews on the film that I’m putting up today, simply because my original draft for this review is [as it stands] over a thousand words long.
Needless to say, there’s a lot that I liked about it. But there’s also a lot that I didn’t like.
The way I see it, Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald…is a good movie. I enjoyed watching it. However, it was darker than the first movie, and had some issues with characterization that could have been easily fixed. Yet I’m more than positive the sequel(s) will answer the questions the film raises.
And it’s those issues that get to me. And led to me to writing an essay on the movie.
I’ll try to keep this spoiler-free. I really felt like only a few of the major characters were true to how they have been depicted in the past: those being Newt, Dumbledore, Jacob, Grindelwald, and maybe Tina. All other returning characters took some change or development.
Although, I will say, as a high point, Rowling is using this series to build her Wizarding World, rather than just showing it. I see how that could be annoying for some fans, but it wasn’t really for me because, simply put, I don’t have any nostalgia for Harry Potter. (Though I do appreciate it as a story.)
In the end, I have to ask what the point of this movie is. I keep coming back to one phrase: the sequel. Fantastic Beasts is a series now. And I need to keep in mind that it’s only part two of five. Act I is over. Now for the intermission, where we stretch our legs and get a snack.
7/10 ~ I’m adding the warp-lion and the cats to my list of good bois.
[And, yes. I am keeping this intentionally brief. If you want the full version, click here. If you’re up for reading a lot on a screen.]
Two weekends ago, I got the chance to see Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald. Boy to I have a lot to talk about. Most of it is spoiler-heavy, so I’m going to put a—
SPOILER WARNING RIGHT HERE IN BOLDED CAPITAL LETTERS
—and the image for this post too.
Me: “I think this one likes me.” Ollivander: “Yes…Hazel, dragon heartstring, thirteen inches. Although, I should warn you that the dragon who gave his heartstrings for this one gave another.” Me, nervous: “Who has that one?” Ollivander: “Gilderoy Lockheart.” Me, shrugging “Makes sense.”
There’s a lot about Crimes of Grindelwald that I liked, but there’s also a lot that I disliked.
Story
I have the urge to compare the Fantastic Beasts series with Harry Potter, despite the two not lining up at all. If Where to Find Them is Philosopher’s Stone, then Crimes of Grindelwald feels like Chamber of Secrets, Prisoner of Azkaban, and Goblet of Fire all happening in the same film.
And I mean that in the best way possible. It makes the metanarrative of Fantastic Beasts feel streamlined. This definitely feels like a part two of three—
[Assistant runs up and whispers into my ear.]
What? This is a five part film series? This changes things.
Characters
The movie brings back the main four characters from the previous film: Newt, Jacob, Tina, and Queenie. But with some mild changes. Tina is now an Auror, Newt is under a travel ban from the Ministry of Magic, Jacob remembers everything, and Queenie is suddenly a psycho.
And we come to the first of my problems with the movie: Queenie. In the first movie, she was charming and sweet and innocent. In this one—supposedly set six months after the first—Queenie casually puts Jacob under a love spell and drag him to Europe so they can get married.
You can argue that this is a set-up to her decisions at the end of the movie. But, and this is a rare sentence coming from me, you could have gotten to the same point through dialogue, and her turn to the dark side would have been more effective. Rather than her first action of the film being roofying her boyfriend. In other words: telling would have been more effective than showing.
Migrating from Rowling’s flagship saga, we get a young Dumbledore. I’m…fine with him being there. Even though he doesn’t do anything for the story other than give exposition and tell Newt where to go. I feel like he’ll play a bigger role in the next movie. But, then again, making tea for the rest of the cast and bringing it to them would be a bigger role.
And, since it’s bound to come up in conversation, I approve of how they subtly handled his relationship with Grindelwald. The key word is “subtly.” After all, Dumbledore would have had a lot of trouble being actively and openly gay in the 1920’s. Not that I completely approve of Dumbledore’s sexuality, but they handled it well.
Grindelwald…
This film’s rogues gallery features Grindelwald, played by Johnny Depp. [sighs] Yes, I’m aware of the scandal he’s currently in. And I know that makes him less favorable to audiences. However—and having seen him in multiple roles—I think this is one of his better performances. Say what you will, he nails the “strategic, cutthroat liar” personality.
Speaking of unpopular opinions, I actually thought Grindelwald—as a character—is growing into a better villain than Voldemort. Then again, I am partial to villains that make a point, which seems to be the current trend in the archetype. (Marvel’s Killmonger comes to mind.) While Voldy says, “We should crush the Muggles because they’re weaker,” Grindelwald says, “We should rule over the Muggles because, if we don’t, they’ll nuke each other into the ground.”
One thing I think they could have done, though, is set him up better as a villain for Newt rather than a villain for Dumbledore.
…and Credence Barebone?
A surprising return from the previous movie is Credence Barebone. I say surprising because he died in the last movie! Oh, and not only is he one-hundred percent not dead, he’s now in control of this magic parasite in his body, making him a super-powered biological weapon. And [major spoilers here] he’s a Lestrange! No…wait. Sorry. He’s actually Dumbledore’s long lost brother!
Whom, and I cannot stress this further, the actual—?!
[Assistant runs back up to me and whispers into my ear. “Rowling probably has a plan for him,” they say. “Have a little faith.” Assistant pats me on the back and leaves.]
…I mean…It’s nice to see that Ezra Miller could still find work. Especially after Justice League. So…yeah. Good for him. And I’m sure they’ll do more with his character later, but right now, he feels more like someone out of a Harry Potter fanfiction rather than a member of the Wizarding World canon: absurdly overpowered, a long-lost relative to a character, shipped with another side character.
One more thing on all the characters: this movie has a lot of them. Like, a lot. It really feels like an ensemble film with how many characters the plot ropes in. I counted at least twelve, not counting the poet/prophet that everyone keeps citing. I could spend a lot more time talking about the other characters—namely a few notes on Nagini and a longer section on Leta—but I don’t want to stretch this review any further.
The Beasts
You know, I’m starting to think that this series is Rowling adding to the Wizarding World, rather than exploring what already exists. I should have seen this coming, as she basically did the same thing with the Harry Potter books—giving the audience something new and fantastical with each installment. (And now that I think about it, this explains Credence.)
This is evidenced through the beasts. Half of whom don’t appear in the Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them companion book.
Not that I don’t like the new additions. I have nothing negative to say about them, other than curiosity about all the other beasts they could have shown. Heck, first film had a montage of half a dozen beasts. What about those? What do they do? What makes them fantastic (other than their appearance)?
We don’t know. But, the space-warping lion creature is really cute. It’s not the best trade-off, but I’ll take it.
In Conclusion…
The way I see it, Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald…is a good movie. I enjoyed watching it. However, it was darker than the first movie, and had some issues with characterization that could have been easily fixed. Yet I’m more than positive the sequel(s) will answer the questions the film raises.
In the end, I have to ask what the point of this movie is. I keep coming back to one point: the sequel. Fantastic Beasts is a series. And I need to keep in mind that it’s only part two of five. Act I is over. Now for the intermission, where we stretch our legs and get a snack.
7/10 ~ I’m adding the warp-lion and the cats to my list of good bois.
And, to J. K. Rowling, I salute you. Congratulations on another addition to your canon. May the next find equal or greater success. And I’m sorry, but I won’t be reading the shooting script—I mean screenplay for this one.
A Spoiler-Free Synopsis of Doctor Who, Season 11, Episode 7, “Kerblam!” The Doctor gets a good old-fashioned distress call scribbled on a packing slip in a package from the Amazon of the future. Team TARDIS goes undercover at the company warehouse, trying to avoid the scrutiny of the robots. At long last, Doctor Who is back to normal. Hallelujah. I said the people who weren’t casual/new fans or superfans might get bored of the way this season was going. Even if this episode had sucked, which it didn’t, it would have been a refreshing return to form. Actual alien environment! Alien robots! Standout human characters! Woot woot. What makes it even better is it really is a great plot. It keeps us guessing, and all the moving parts come together in the end. All the acting was great. The dialogue was great. Others have commented how nice it was that this episode went back to “normal Doctor Who.” I kept noticing how it reminded me of The Long Game (people getting excited about promotions and benefits that turn out not-so-cool), the Voyage of the Damned (the robots looked and sounded similar), and The Girl Who Waited (robots who probably think they’re helping but really aren’t). Yet it was all still interesting and new enough to seem original. The moral of the episode revolved around automation and unemployment. There’s probably a political message in there somewhere; those have been coming up a lot this season. It’s a very similar message to Detroit: Become Human. But there’s also a wonderful little message about recognizing and appreciating your own impact on people’s lives. They did end up cheapening that message at the end, though. That character who believed in the impact of her own life? She could have had a very important impact on someone, but it clearly didn’t have the right effect. Hard to explain without spoilers, though. Verdict: 8/10 sheets of bubble wrap. Excellent episode, disappointing ending.
A Spoiler-Free Synopsis of Doctor Who, Season 11, Episode 6, “Demons in Punjab”: Team TARDIS travels back to the day of Yaz’ grandmother’s wedding in India. Except Grandma’s land is technically in Pakistan, because it’s the day of the Partition, when Hindus and Muslims fought over their borders. And Grandma isn’t marrying Yaz’s granddad. She’s marrying a Hindu man. A lot of people are angry about that. Oh yeah, there are also demon-like aliens. This episode had definite Father’s Day vibes. That episode had a companion meeting her dead dad and learning he wasn’t all she thought he was, and it had a wedding, and it had freaky alien monsters. In this week’s episode, though, the aliens were the weak point. So often, Doctor Who sticks a freaky alien monster in an episode that doesn’t need it, mostly to make the trailers look cool and give their Effects and Makeup team something to do. But don’t get me wrong, I love these aliens. They used to be assassins, then their planet was compressed into a swarm of super-particles, and they decided to use it to perform last rites for people who die alone throughout time and space. That’s amazing. But it would have been so much better in another episode, one where we could actually focus on them. This one had quite enough plot. And what a plot. I understand how it could be divisive. To be honest, I don’t have the first clue about the Partition of India/Pakistan. But I feel educated about it now, and I loved every part of the story we got. It was all about love being stronger than division. Most of the people in this story were Hindu, Muslim, or the woman who once threw the Devil in a black hole. And yet the moral is Christian compatible to a T, which just reaffirms that moral. Jesus himself preached (mainly through example) on accepting people despite racial or geopolitical boundaries. The story we got was pretty much perfect for delivering that moral. Team TARDIS knew this marriage wasn’t going to last, so they briefly tried to discourage it from even starting, along with the families who just plain didn’t want it to happen because it crossed so many lines. But the point was, no matter how long-lasting this love would be, it was love, and it was beautiful and so very powerful and absolutely worth it. Verdict: 8.5/10 hand tattoos. The aliens were out of place, but they were awesome, along with the rest of it.
Before I give my review of Teen Titans Go! To the Movies, I would like to first discuss the influence of expectations on the movie-going experience.
[Clears throat.]
Expectations are the worst. The quickest way to rob a movie of any positive journalism is to build hype for it. Sure, it gets people into theaters, which is where the money is to be made, but it can turn people away from future projects.
However, expectations can often work in favor of the filmmakers. As I believe they have with Teen Titans Go!To the Movies.
I refer to one of the “best-case scenarios” of misplaced expectations as “The Planes Effect.” I define it as a situation in which an audience member watches a film with no or low expectations, only to have those expectations exceeded.
The first time when I encountered this is with Disney’s Planes—hence the name. It looked like a bad spin-off of Cars, Pixar’s worst intellectual property (by default). Imagine my surprise when the kids movie featured a war veteran character with PTSD.
Did it make the movie good? Not really, but it made it better than I expected it would be.
Point is: I don’t like “The Planes Effect”. It makes critiquing film subjective and inaccurate. I focused on the one or two (maybe more) good things about it and ignored the bad. Which makes me focus on the bad. Is it a good movie? Is it a bad movie? What is reality? Is it based on our individual memories, or determined by the observations of the greater population?
Back on track—Teen Titans Go! To the Movies. A film that I watched after asking some of my friends for forgiveness in advance and myself if I really wanted to do this. To give some perspective, I didn’t grow up with the original Teen Titans, but I have watched it and prefer it to Cyborg and Beast Boy’s quest for waffles.
But critics of a higher caliber than I were raving about it, so I got a hold of a copy and—
[ten minutes in] we got one fart joke and one cringey rap number. This is exactly what I expected! I should’ve known better then to—wait. They just referenced Guardians of the Galaxy? And nobody in the movie likes this version of the Teen Titans?
Sure enough, the movie is self-aware enough to reward the audience for sitting through the cringe and the desecration of their childhoods (not mine, though) with a parody of the superhero genre as a whole—in a Who Framed Rodger Rabbit or Animaniacs kind of way.
Really, this movie’s strength comes from it being ruthless to cinematic superheroes, but in a jesting way. And in a “take the plank out of your own eye” kind of way, the movie is equally—if not more—ruthless towards Teen Titans Go! Which is something I can agree with.
This post is running too long for my liking (which says something), so I’ll wrap it up. Teen Titans Go! To the Movies is by no means the best superhero movie (to me, Logan), nor does it have the best action (to me, Infinity War) the best humor (to me, Black Panther/Guardians of the Galaxy) or even the best cameo of the late Stan Lee (to me, Age of Ultron, and I will fight for it). But it does a lot of good in its own right, and I have to give it credit for that.
When I talked about the Marvel/Netflix Defenders show, my only complaint was Daredevil and Elektra’s relationship. There was no chemistry there; it only existed because it is very important in the comics, and the show was trying to do it better than the Affleck movie did it. This problem seems to be affecting Daredevil Season 3.
The first time Elektra died, Matt Murdock wanted to give up being Daredevil. When Season 3 begins, Elektra’s dead again, and Matt wants to give up being Matt Murdock. He also wants to give up on God. This time, it doesn’t make sense. I can see how he might blame God for losing his superpowers, temporarily, but he still has friends, a superhero team, a job defending the innocent… Matt Murdock lost nothing at the end of the Defenders. Once his powers return, he has no reason to be mad at God or quit his normal life. I mean, I know the reason. There needed to be some kind of internal conflict to slow Daredevil down so Wilson Fisk’s evil conspiracy could be sufficiently threatening. They had to make it different from Season 1 somehow. Matt’s Catholicism is one of the most important things about Daredevil, and one of my favorite parts about him. I would have been really interested in his crisis of faith if that’s all there was to it, but the general public probably wouldn’t be. If an audience member doesn’t even believe in God, for example, he won’t care if Daredevil likes Him or not. So Matt had to also hide away from his friends, and that was poorly done. So the season’s morals didn’t really work, but the show is still just as awesome-looking as ever. I highly recommend watching the first few episodes with headphones to fully understand what Matt is experiencing. This season also introduced Ben Poindexter, aka Bullseye, a psychopath trying very hard not to be a psychopath. Whenever he was onscreen, the acting, visuals, and music created a fantastic portrayal of his mental state. Unfortunately, the portrayal of Bullseye’s abilities was not as good. I’ve mentioned Alphas once before; that show includes a character named Cameron Hicks who has perfect aim, like Bullseye. Hicks’ powers and how he uses them are some of the coolest things I’ve ever seen. Bullseye is rather disappointing, especially when Daredevil and his abilities are so well-portrayed in the same show. And yet… Vincent D’onofrio as Wilson Fisk is kind of like Jessica Jones. He makes everything better. This season wasn’t quite as good as Defenders, but it was still better than Luke Cage. Fourth best Marvel/Netflix show. I enjoyed it.
As I look forward on the calendar of releases, I see a lot of movies coming out this December, and a few starting next week, with a sprinkling of video games to taste. And, looking back over the past few weeks, the biggest releases are Bohemian Rhapsody, Red Dead Redemption 2, and Nutcracker and the Four Realms. Or, as I like to call them, “Not applicable to the blog,” “A game made by a company with whom I have issues,” and [to the tune of “Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairy”] “Hey guess what, guys / we made Narnia / Narnia / Narnia…”
So, in preparation for a post a few weeks out, I think I’ll look back at Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, because I never really did a formal review on it.
It is a prequel to the Harry Potter series, and is based on one of the in-universe textbooks assigned at Hogwarts. The book itself has no overarching plot, other than being a list of monsters. It’s nice to keep on the shelf next to the other Harry Potter books.
The book gets: 7/10 ~ Acromantula is my boy.
The movie, on the other hand, covers the story of the guy who wrote it [in universe], Newt Scamander, as he runs around New York with a suitcase full of monsters and an unfinished manuscript for a field guide tucked in his jacket pocket.
I mentioned a while back that the movie feels like an episode of Doctor Who, specifically the ones with Matt Smith. An eccentric, yet peaceful man picks up less-eccentric, yet wide-eyed friends and takes them on an adventure. However, while Doctor Who has travels throughout time and space, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them has stronger anti-religion themes and magic.
Yes, I said anti-religion themes. The film has two antagonists. The first being the Magical Congress of the United States of America with their rules and regulations unfamiliar to Newt.
The second antagonist is the New Salem Philanthropic Society, an organization bent on destroying all witches and wizards, based out of a church. From what I recall, there really isn’t much tying the group to Christianity other than their base of operations, so it’s probably me getting worked up over nothing.
All in all, I would say that if you’re a fan of Harry Potter, it might be fun to watch. It’s not the best movie in the franchise, but it’s definitely not the worst.
The movie gets: 6/10~ could’ve used more Acromantula, but the Occamy was a good substitute. And the Niffler. They too are my boys.
One more thing, though, as a screenwriter. I picked up a copy of the screenplay, and…well…
Let me break it down. Most screenplays are written by a writer/writers, and is then passed off to the director. (Which is why book-to-movie adaptations suffer from changes as they do; the story shifts hands three or more times by the time you see it.) Accordingly, most “screenplays” don’t have things like camera angles, close-ups, and (in some cases) transitions. These are reserved for either the “shooting script” or situations where the writer and director are the same person.
What I’m getting at is, if you want to read a screenplay for purposes of learning how to be a screenwriter, I do not recommend the original screenplay for Fantastic Beasts. It’s written like a shooting script.
I mean, props to J. K. Rowling for actually writing and producing a screenplay–I know how hard it is. But I find it hard to believe that a screenwriter can get away with that many camera angles and not get chewed out by the director for it. That’s not the screenwriter’s job. Tell the story; let the director point the camera.
I’m sorry. It just bugs me. It’s a little, itty-bitty-nitpicky thing that drives me up a wall. Rowling is credited as the writer, and David Yates (from the last four Harry Potter movies) is credited as the director. I feel like the crediting may not be the most accurate.
The screenplay gets: 3/10 ~ and the final tally of my boys is: Acromantula, Niffler, Griffin, Occamy, Thunderbird, Bowtruckle, and the giant squid that lives in the Hogwarts lake. They are good boys.
This week, on Doctor Who, Season 11, Episode 4, “Spiders in South Yorkshire” – wait, what’s it called? “Arachnids in the UK”? What kind of title is that? Arachnophobes, you might want to skip this one. And even if you’re not afraid of spiders, this episode’s real monster might be even scarier: Donald Trump!
What’s that? Well no, it’s not actual Trump. And yeah, it’s explicitly stated that this guy opposes Trump. But he’s a rich white businessman who owns a hotel chain and wants to be President, and he’s an absolutely inhuman jerk. Any attempt to separate him from the public’s perception of Trump failed the second he uttered the words “You’re fired.” Which was in the first few minutes of the episode. Discount Donald Trump wouldn’t be quite so terrible if he got killed by spiders at the end of the episode. And there was a time when he could have been. But no. He survived, killed an innocent creature, and then bragged that he was sure to be elected President of the United States. And we all thought, “why would America elect him?” And then we all realized that America already did. And so, having delivered its thinly veiled political message, the plot just stopped there. The plot’s other thinly veiled message was about landfills. Apparently, if a science lab bioengineers spiders to make creepier cobwebs and live longer, and therefore grow bigger, and then doesn’t check to make sure their dead spiders are dead and throws them away, and then those still-living spiders are sent to a landfill that’s been improperly created so all the trash turns toxic, then those spiders could grow to the size of a large van and start wrapping humans in their webs, suffocating them. So landfills must be bad, right? And here’s the really weird part. Some of that trash, which is surely covered in spider pheromones, spills out into the streets, and Yaz’s dad picks some of it up. But apparently that doesn’t attract the giant spiders to Yaz’s house. Instead, one of the scientists also gets some pheromones on her and just so happens to live next door to Yaz. That’s how Team TARDIS gets pulled into the story. But the episode isn’t all bad. We meet Yaz’s family, and once again we reminisce about the days of Russell T. Davies, when companions were delightfully human and had crazy families who the companions would be dying to fly away from. The rest of the episode, too, is refreshingly human, as the whole season has been. And again, the whole thing was beautiful. The spiders look awesome. I watched this episode with a friend of mine who doesn’t like spiders, and he assured me that this episode was terrifying. But none of that makes up for all the trash, including the human trash can that is Discount Donald Trump. Especially on this blog, where I try to pull morals out of everything, I can’t ignore the message the episode was so clearly trying to send. And no matter what your politics are, I hope we can agree that a British science fiction show can leave American politics alone if they’re going to handle it this poorly.
Verdict: Nope/10. Probably could have been so much better.
“…the “tamest” of the gory actions is the sky literally raining blood…”
“…the church is shown as moronic, arrogant, and cruel, blaming everyone else rather than themselves…”
“…I won’t try to argue that this is a Christian show. If anything, it’s pretty anti-Christian—at least, anti-ancient-Christian…”
“…In closing, I can’t decide if I like this show or not …”
“4/10 ~ I can’t wait for Season 2.”
[Music fades]
Now…
And Season 2 is out. Just in time for Halloween. This is it, ladies and gentlemen, the continuation of one of the strongest video-game adaptations to da—
And it opens with the church dragging Dracula’s wife away to be burned for witchcraft. Back to square one. Though, to it’s credit, it doesn’t stay there for long before returning to the end of Season 1.
Last time—well over a year ago—I had stuff to talk about with this show. Most of it in regards to its seemingly anti-Christian themes. So I might as well open with saying that Season 2 does, in fact, dial those themes back from a ten to about a two. One character jokes about, “God being [perpetually] mad at me” (after giving a misinterpretation of the Tower of Babel account). And another character is shown to be beaten by someone who is implied to have ties to the church. Beyond that, and the opening scene I brought up, there is no mention of how evil and sinister and blind the church is.
Which is a step in the right direction, I believe.
Season 2 stands at eight episodes long—contrasting Season 1’s four—still at a half-an-hour long. Not a lengthy show by any stretch. It fills this larger time-block with more focus on the vampires. Because, yes, there are multiple. Dracula is just the leader.
So, if it dials back on the anti-Church junk, does it also dial back on the blood and gore? Hard to tell. I was a tad bit distracted for the duration of the episodes. It feels on par with the first season, maybe a bit worse. But I saw it coming this time, so I don’t think it hit as bad…with a question mark?
So the story mainly revolves around Dracula and his war room making plans to wage their war on the humans. His war room consists of a Viking vampire, Godbrand; a lady vampire and possible Season 3 villain, Carmilla; and two humans necromancers named Hector and…Isaac.
…I’m gonna level with you, reader. Probably the weirdest part of the show for me, is hearing my name every five-to-ten minutes. And even weirder that Dracula regularly confides his secrets and fears with this other Isaac.
Dracula’s motivation is still towards avenging his dead wife, by way of wiping out humanity. On the grounds, of course, that they are evil and beyond forgiveness. A philosophy which I do not entirely agree with, but I guess that’s what happens if you acknowledge humankind’s sinful nature while ignoring the redemption that Christ offers.
Besides that, the writing and acting are both really good. And I do like the art style they chose—one thing I forgot to mention last year. I felt like they did a good enough job ironing out some of the plot holes too, or using them to the advantage of character motivations. For example, a turn in the show happens when Carmilla asks Dracula why he didn’t turn his mortal, human wife into a vampire, to which he gives no answer, and she extrapolates that his wife was a “human pet,” thus kickstarting her…evil-ness.
I should wrap this up. I could talk about this show far longer than either of us would want. So I close with this: it’s not worth watching Season 1 for, but if you’ve already suffered through the first four episodes of the show, you might as well.
5-6/10 ~ It’s also nice to see that Richard Armitage (Trevor Belmont) and Graham McTavish (Dracula) were able to find work after The Hobbit trilogy.
The Correlation 