connorwburnett

I don't review games very often. I remember back when "God of War" (2018) came out, I wrote pages of notes in preparation for some mega essay I was going to write about why I thought it was this incredible masterpiece of human ingenuity. But I never got round to doing it, probably because I didn't have the time or skill to write such a thing.

Films are much easier to recommend to people, as you can assume everyone has access to a streaming service where it will be available for free, or they can use Amazon prime to buy it, or buy the DVD. Well, on second thought no one has a DVD player anymore, so the last option is unlikely.

But you can't just recommend a game to anyone. Besides from the fact that a lot of people can't play games because they don't have a current gen console or high-spec PC, games have a stigma around them that films don't have. I can feel comfortable talking about films with anyone, but I can't with games, why is that? It's the gaming stigma that labels so called "gamers" as lonely, unemployed weirdos. This is something that genuinely gets on my nerves as there are a lot of games that I truly adore, as much as I do with films, that I would love to talk about, but I simply don't feel comfortable doing so. Videogames, in the grand scheme of things are still a pretty new medium, especially in comparison to films, so over time you'd imagine they become more socially accepted in the public eye.

Games like David Cage's "Detroit: Become Human" are incredibly important as they bridge the gap between films and games.

Remember those choose-your-own adventure books, Detroit is the video game version of that.

In essence, you're watching a film, but all of the key plot points are left up to you, you become the author of the story.

Detroit is set in the year 2038, the invention of androids has changed the world forever as unemployment rates rise to 27%. Androids were designed to serve humans, unable to decline any human request. We enter this world in a period of change, androids are beginning to defy their commands in search of freedom, these androids are labelled as deviants. You follow the stories of 3 androids as their journeys intertwine, you must decide their actions and the roles you want them to play in this world on the edge of a tipping-point.

For some context, I just finished my second full playthrough of Detroit last night and all 3 of the androids had completely different resolutions to my initial playthrough.

Detroit only takes about 10 hours to play, its full of twists and turns you won't expect. You'll recognise a lot of the faces, especially Clancy Brown and Lance Henriksen, who all put in fantastic performances.

So, you're probably thinking, that's all great but what does the game actually play like?

It's really simple, the core gameplay mechanic is quick time events. For example, in a fight scene the game will flash up a button on screen, you have to press it before the timer runs out. If you press it in the time, you'll land a punch or dodge an attack (depending on the scenario), if you don't press it in time, or press the wrong button, you'll get hit in return. Fail too many of these events and you'll lose the fight. But unlike in most conventional games, instead of returning to the last checkpoint, you'll character will just lose the fight and the story will change in response to this.

These sequences are always exhilarating, with the knowledge that, if you mess up, your android will face the consequences. And importantly, androids can die, so don't try and test the game thinking that, "I'm too early in the story for anyone to die". There were plenty of times where I was left in shock that something happened, so, as a word of warning, take your choices seriously.

The action sequences are brilliant, but Detroit's true value comes with the decisions the game forces you to make. Your relationship with the other characters in the story are dependent on how you interact with them in dialogue scenes. Often the game will give you the choice on what your android says to the other characters and how they say it, which will affect your relationships with these characters greatly.

You need to be mindful of how you come across to everyone you talk to in the game as your actions can close or open doors later in the story.

Most importantly, all of the key choices affecting the narrative, the game leaves completely up to you.

Trust me, when you enter the last couple hours of the game you will be stressed out, but in the best way possible.

This will be one of the most engaging games you ever play. I've played it twice and I still think I can play it at least 2 more times and still get completely different stories. It's a very complex game but delivered in a simple way making it appropriate for all types of people, those who regularly play games and those that never play games, it's that good.

Seriously, if there was ever a game I would recommend to the general public, it would be Detroit. You would really be doing yourself a disservice by not playing it at some point in your life.

I hope you can find as much enjoyment in it as I do. I will be starting my third playthrough sometime soon.

"The Crow" has a simple premise, murdered man is brought back to life to avenge the death of him and his fiancé. But I can assure you it is not a simple film. For those of you that don't know, lead star, Brandon Lee died partway through production after he was shot by a gun unknowingly loaded with a live round.

I didn't know about this until after I watched the film, but when I found out, I can't say it shocked me. This is a film that has a lot of issues in terms of character, pacing and overall narrative structure, which are far easier for me to understand when I know the context, the unfortunate passing of the lead actor certainly explains it.

Therefore, I can't really hold a lot of my critiques against the filmmakers as it's a triumph that they managed to release a completed film in any shape considering the likely trauma Lee's death gave them. But I think this is an interesting film to discuss so I'll share my thoughts anyway.

What grabbed me most about "The Crow" was it's aesthetic and world building. It successfully flaunts this kind of gothic, grimy style which helps to make it stand out visually. The opening sequence is particularly well-shot and intriguing, however, unfortunately the rest of the film isn't able to maintain this fluidity.

This film comes off as confused to me, in terms of what it wants to achieve from a narrative perspective. Without getting into spoilers, a lot of stuff happens at a break-neck pace in the first 30 minutes, I was genuinely confused how they were going to fill the rest of the run-time. The pacing is very strange, but I can't say I was ever bored. I was hooked by the world, and I stayed for the goofy comedy.

And yes, for me this is a comedy. I think its strange that it's marketed as a horror film. There is a lot of violence, but its far more of an action comedy to me.

The editing was a little messy, felt rough and choppy to me a lot of the time. Usually I can ignore continuity errors, but there were so many here that it started to distract me.

I didn't love the cinematography, felt far too basic for me a lot of the time. I think if they were a bit more experimental it would have enhanced the film's other qualities far more.

That is probably my biggest problem with "The Crow", I don't think it fully commits to the crazy high paced joy-ride you know it wants to be. Its lacking slightly in too many areas for its full potential to be fulfilled, which is a shame as I think it could have been something really great.

I'm sure that, without the passing of Brandon Lee, they would have been able to polish this film far more to get it to a stage it deserves.

I would recommend most people to watch this film. Brandon Lee puts in a really captivating performance and it's a true shame we didn't get to see the rest of his acting career. I.

Look, this film is an absolute mess. It's an hour longer than it needs to be, the writing is absolutely abysmal at times and most of the characters are annoying as hell. But even then, I still had such a great time watching it. In some ways I love this film, it encapsulates the "blockbuster movie" experience so well that, at several moments, tricked me into believing I was actually watching something good.

When you stand back and look at the film as a whole confined experience it is just plain odd. When I walked out of the cinema the one word I kept describing it with was weird. It is weird, weird, weird. It blew me away honestly, how they could get so much bang on perfect and so much astoundingly awful. I suppose I'll start talking specifics now, refraining from any spoilers of course.

The first 15 or so minutes of the film felt like I was watching a video game cutscene, and this is a problem which plagued a lot of the film for me. A lot of the time I struggled to view the story from the perspective of any one character, greatly detaching me from the events taking place. I think most of this can be explained by the rather strange way this film is shot and edited at times. There are many sequences in the film that look beautiful, don't get me wrong. But at other times I was extremely confused over what the cinematographer's aim was. On countless occasions the camera would do this awkward zoom-in which made it feel like I was watching some kind of nature documentary, and, during many of the action set-pieces the editing was cut together so quickly when the scene would have greatly benefitted from longer takes. Overall, this contributed to the feeling that I was just watching a pure spectacle, rather than a character driven story. And yes, maybe that was intended and if so, fair enough. But if that is the case then what is the point spending so much screen time attempting to develop your characters, because I can tell you, I didn't care about a single one.

I'm not going to go into the plot at all, but wow, it is certainly nothing unique or special. Of course, I wasn't expecting it to be and I'm sure that the same can be said for Avatar 1, not that I can remember any of it. Let's just say, don't expect anything you haven't seen a hundred times before, this is just your basic action, adventure storyline, which is totally OK if they nail the visuals and the climatic set pieces, everyone knows what's going to happen so just make the journey as enjoyable as possible. So, did Avatar 2 achieve this?

For the most part yes. It almost feels stupid for me to praise the visual effects and CGI because they are so obviously fantastic. However, I think its important for me to mention that there are some sequences, particularly those that are underwater, that I thought were worth the cost of viewing alone. Some sections of this film are just jaw-droppingly beautiful to gaze at, it is a triumphant achievement in visual effects. However, saying this, they still haven't completely nailed it yet. A lot of the shots which involved an avatar and human character in the same frame really pulled me out of it. I'm not sure whether it was a lighting issue or something, but they never felt they were truly taking up the same physical space. My absolute favourite aspect of the film was the sound. They did such an outstanding job with the foley. I could feel every footstep and every drop of rain, definitely worth the cinema experience! I loved it and, as per usual, the score was fantastic. The Avatar theme is definitely one of my favourites, fits the film perfectly.

So, the most important question, should you watch it? If I had to give you a straight answer I would say yes, it is worth watching. The sound and visuals alone make this a wonderful experience in cinemas, something I'm sure most people were expecting. It's just such a shame that the film falls short in almost every other aspect of its presentation, and I've limited my rating to a 4 because of this. If I were to rate it on my pure enjoyment, I would have to give it an 8, but that's not how I rate films.