All posts by Kage

https://www.skool.com/bestinyourgirl-2398/about

Kagegiving:The Time Machine by H.G. Wells

INTRODUCTION: H.G. Wells The Time Machine is one of those classic novels that is always on some list as a “Must read”. I read it as a child and really enjoyed it, but I decided to give it a refresh and see if it was really worthwhile in this modern age.

SYNOPSIS:
It’s the 1800’s and a man creates a time machine, so this novel is steampunk and sci-fi.

PROSE:
Prose isn’t as great as I remembered it. It has its moments but it really falls short, especially in comparison to other books of its time frame. I know it was a normal thing back then to not include faces in Gothic horror novels and while this isn’t gothic horror, he doesn’t really give us anything but a description that is barley sufficient for a police sketch artist.

CHARACTERS:
The characters all fall flat. Wells couldn’t be bothered to even give them names, nor really develop them at all. They’re all just kind of there and the one Eloi that is mentioned in detail, also happens to be childlike by Wells’ own description.

DIALOGUE: Fantastic and about all that is really worthwhile about this book.

SUBTEXT: In today’s day and age, it is indubitably about the left (Eloi) vs the Right (Morlock) and is more relevant through a Trump American than it was when it was first published.

CONCLUSION:
I was hoping this book would hold up in my adult years as I fondly remember it, but it just doesn’t hold up to snuff. It is boring, but thankfully it is such a short read that would could let your child enjoy it and they would at least pick up some good vocabulary. Besides not being that good, it boarder lines the pedophiliac in nature, which, given Lewis Carroll among others, wouldn’t of been outside the realm of normal. I mean, an adult man who intended to kidnap a female Eloi and bring her back to his time and has the demeanor of a child? Come the fuck on, it doesn’t get more pedophilic than that! I don’t think I am reading too much into that at all and sadly, it is something that is never discussed about this book. Even worse, she is more developed in terms of looks than anyone, which is ironic, given the near age of the child would make her extremely underdeveloped. Sure, you could be pollyannaish and think he just wanted to be a dad, but why steal the Eloi? Really fucked up shit that I am shocked no one picked up on, until now. I am shocked I missed that as a child, but regardless, the only thing this book really has going for it is the discussion about the two distinct races, which, in today’s day and age, which more relevant than ever, as it seems like Wells was quite prescient about the potential for two diverges on the races and one look at the divide of this country, left and right, it is hard to not see the Left as Eloi and the Right as Morlock. The majority of Trump supporters are classic blue collar labors, whom sole reason for Trump is that he somehow understands them and wants to bring back these shitty industries, like coal. They feel unheard by the Eloi or Elites as they call them and that is a sad thing, because not only do they lack a sense of irony when they toss such piffle out, but they’re mal-adaptable malcontents. Which, while I can sympathize with the malcontent part, the anti-intellectualism aspect is a horrible way to live. So in that regard, this book is fantastic, but the rest of it is just plain lousy that one has to wonder why the fuck it is a classic.

2 ½ out 5.

Fashionably Late Book Reviews: Being Logical by D.Q. McInerny.

INTRODUCTION: I first read Being Logical when I was in my early 20’s. I absolutely loved it then, because it was a short and concise introduction to formal logic, which is sadly, no longer taught at the college level and hadn’t been for years by the time I was old enough to attend. This is the exact book that I thought was going to be a huge game changer if you could get enough people to read it. Sadly, I was unaware back then, that a majority of the United States was highly illiterate. So sadly, upon further inspection recently, I do not think as highly of this book, given this new data, as it would be closer to a collegiate textbook for the average American than I would hope, even though it was hugely inspired by Strunk&White Elements of Style, falls way short of that book and even invokes errors that the book would of warned against. So lets look at this book through a modern lens and see who the audience is and if it is worthwhile.

PROSE: The prose is fine, albeit a tad bit too complex for the average American reader. You can tell it is also heavily influenced by Aristole’s Oragaon, as McInerny’s expression of a quantification of a thing is nearly identical to Aristole’s. In fact, it was nearly verbatim. This is extremely confusing to the most readers who wouldn’t be able to discern such and why would they? If it was an attempt is to be a cheap collegiate text for those of us whom are autodidactic than it would be fantastic, but it was meant for the normal reader as an introductory text to formal logic and it fails miserably in that respect.

FORM: Book form is fantastic! It has a section on the formal fallacies, including their original Latin names and makes for a fantastic glossary. I’ve been using it for years, along with The Philosopher’s Toolkit as glossaries to look things up, should something slip my mind. I think the average reader is going to roll their eyes at the Latin and think of this as boring though and that is a negative for the book. Albeit, I and others of my ilk will find this to be a fantastic aspect, the intended audience would not concur with us.

CONCLUSION:
This book, which should be for everyone, falls short of the mark. I’ve been pitching it for years and well, few seem to care about formal logic and thinking correctly. Typical human hubris that makes them think they’re thinking correctly, because as well all know with stupid people, they’re always correct and perfect. So, even though the audience this was intended for, would have very little use for it, it makes one hell of an introduction to Logic for everyone else. I would highly recommend this book to someone creating a high school or adult ed course on Logic and if Universities ever bring formal logic courses back, this would be a great 101 text. The average American is most likely not going to put much thought into this and probably toss it before they finished chapter one and that is a downright crime. On the textbook merits, I give it 5 out of 5 stars, even if it is a tad bit stuffy for some people. For the average American, though, I have to give it a paltry 3 out of 5. At least he tried to bring logic to Americans, and that would be commended. Thank you for such a fantastic book, even if it isn’t as appreciated as it could be.

Fashionably Late Book Reviews: Look Who’s Back

INTRODUCTION: I have wanted to read this book since 2012 when it came out. It appealed to me due to the fact that I also thought, that if Hitler like thinking was to ever make a true return, it wouldn’t come back under obvious and not so subtle attempts at re-branding the NSDAP as the Alt-Right or Institute for Historical Review have attempted and failed to do. I’ve also stated in the past that nationalism was a byproduct of the welfare state. Nearly all societies that have government run anything is going to become closed off and nationalistic society, given that human beings are primitive and see money as resources and as such, they’re evolutionary prone to “team playing” in these regards. In essence, the left’s screams at the right of “Racist” are not off in the fact that those looking to close the boarders are attempting to keep American resources for Americans. Where the argument 180’s today, is that Alt-right figures also want to reduce such resources, not just for emigrants, but also for Americans of different “races”. It important to keep this in mind, as America isn’t the only ones going through ye olde 1930’s pangs and Germany has been for years and at least extremely violently since 1989. So a book like this is a must in today’s day and age. Satire has always been a foremost way to ridicule bad ideas and Nazism is no exception to the rule. That said, does this book ultimately do that?

PLOT: Hitler awakens in 2011 and finds himself in a fish out of water story as he struggles to make sense of it all.

PROSE: Not bad. It isn’t purple, but it shows more than enough. Everything is through Hitler’s point of view, so I feel like it was a missed opportunity to possibly play with Hitler’s skewed perspective. I’m not saying he had to see the world like Gobles’ propaganda, but if you have ever seen Hitler’s art, you notice something isn’t quite right about his perception of the world and that could have been an interesting aspect to play with, like how Tim Burton has a unique visual voice.

DIALOGUE: Excellent.

CHARACTERS: Timur Vermes Hitler is spot on. The only exceptions are Hitler’s speeches, which seem off in tone and not nearly as exaggerative as they could be, nor do they reflect the content of Hitler’s actual speeches. You do not need to read too many of them to know these are not Hitler’s typical oratory approach. They primarily focus on the Middle East, specifically, Turkey. I keep up on German affairs as I am still working on my German, and Muslim immigrants are a huge talking point for right wingers over there, so this is Timur Vermes having Hitler speak in a modern way, which kind of contradicts his fish out of water story at the beginning. There are quite a few of these, how do I put this, non-Hiterlian idiosyncrasies that elude to him either being a severely delusion human or the best huckster show business has ever seen. One instance has Hitler showing humanity towards someone whom he is working with and finds out she is Jewish. While Hitler did have half-Jews working for him, this still seems out of character for the Jew hating sociopath that everyone has seared into their brains. There could be a multitude of reasons for this; one could argue that this is a typical trope of literature where you give the antagonist a positive trait to offset their negative intentions. Dr.No for instance loves his cat. Hitler was great with Kids and Animals, so if that was his goal, it was a redundancy, given what we actually knew about Hitler and could have used. There is another such scene when the same woman is pregnant and Hitler thinks she and her baby daddy want to name the baby after him. Weird he would be so cool with a Jewish woman naming a child after him or the union between a German with a Germanic Jew.

I don’t suspect that Timur is secretly harboring Nazi feelings or is in anyway trying to aggrandize the Nazi leader, because while Hitler was alleged to have a good sense of humor, he most likely would have called this book, itself, propaganda, since he is portrayed as kind of inept and more of a parody of Archie Bunker than the leader of the Third Reich.

The real reason I think those speeches are not as Hitler like as they could have been is that Timur was afraid this could incidentally act as a Turner diaries and so he didn’t go all in on the speeches, least he be accidentally responsible for making neo-nazis off a satire. While I can understand such a concern, when it comes to satire, my belief, you have to go all in as his Hitler does or not bother at all.

Outside of that gripe, the other characters are not as developed as they could have been, which kind of makes sense for this novel, since he seems to be attempting to put you into the perspective of someone in Hitler’s inner circle at the time or a fan of Hitler and attempt to get you to see why people liked him in the first place, allowing you to feel that stature historians and those who knew him have claimed Hitler exuded in your presence.

SUBTEXT: I do not think it is really subtle, but ultimately Hitler is more of an analogy of Germany in this book than actually there in person. He is a spectre looming over Germany and showcases Germany’s struggle with dealing about the holocaust. This is shown in the movie as well, which is why I said it isn’t really subtle. It is kind of shoved down our throats and literally said pretty much the same way I put it. Timur also wrote the screenplay, so I would presume that is the actual intent. Always appreciated when the “subtext” is shoved in our face so we cannot have our own interpretations. Multiple interpretations, like with Dracula or Frankenstein is normally one of the ways these books have longevity, so I feel that hurts it from potentially becoming a classic, even though it could be. The accidental Rocky Horror Picture show reference as Hitler’s new slogan is pretty epic and rings of an abuse boyfriend, coming back around to the honeymoon phase to repeat the cycle, so there is at least something we could come up with ourselves or discern from the book.

CONCLUSION: While the subtext is thrown in our face and the book has a few flaws, ultimately, the book is excellent. I read it in about 16 hours and I only downloaded it last night. While I wanted to read it in the German, I couldn’t pass up the deal on Amazon, so I Kindle bought it. I am very glad I did as it still have a lot to offer and is very poignant.

To be fair, never mind the criticisms above, I feel like there is a stronger version of this novel that never came to light. Had I been writing it, I would have set it in 1986, when the fall of the Berlin wall was about to happen in 1989 and racial tensions in Germany were probably even higher than they are today, along with the impeding fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. Hess would of even been alive to have given the rouse more of a “is he, isn’t he?” kind of vibe and the idea of potentially driving Germany back into that type of state might of made the book have a bit more gravitas as a social commentary than a kind of buffoonish Conan O’Brian skit. Still, it works and it deserves

4 out of 5 stars.

Kageoween: Found Footage 3D in 2D Review.

INTRODUCTION: These movies, as of late, seem to be making a lier out of me. I know I said I hate these films, but Found Footage 3D is another exception to this rule. I don’t know why it has taken the better part of two decades to produce some quality found footage films, but they’re here now and it might be a good thing. At least this one was pretty epic, besides HellHouse LLC trilogy.

SYNOPSIS: Group of people, go off into the woods, like every damn movie, albeit this one with some meta aspects to it, making it “different”.

CHARACTERS: Well done! Granted, none are overly remarkable, but they draw you in and keep you glued into the edge of you seat. I found myself caring at the end, which is a rarity for me.

ACTING: Very, very good! None are well known that I am aware of and all of them put their best foot forward. That, or my standards are getting lower the older I get.

KILLS: Fuckin’ wicked! Oh good, they’re good stuff. Seriously, the ending is amazing!

DIALOGUE: Fantastic! I love the Evil Dead homage along with a great line, pointing out how these films tend to suck. Brilliant!

PACING: Fantastic! Moves at a great pace and keeps you enthralled until the end.

SUBTEXT: none of note. It’s not really a thinker, but it doesn’t need to be. You really just enjoy it and a popcorn flick is always alright.

CONCLUSION:
This one took a tired old cliché and didn’t turn it on its head, but made it tolerable and enjoyable. Found Footage 3D is how these films should have been produced years ago and it is nice to see that people are taking the genre as more than just a cash grab as it has been for years and they’re making haters of the genre like myself, eat crow for the fact that they can be fun, even with an overblown formula. This one is well worth the check out.

4 out of 5.

Kageoween: Hell House LLC 3, Lake of Fire

INTRODUCTION: I’m on record pointing out that I hate found footage films, but I loved the first one. I’ve seen the second and while a little more flawed, still very good. Now I am onto the third and I have to say, I very much love this whole series. I don’t think it is too early to dub them classics. Sure, much like their older predecessors, they have flaws, but they’re still amazing films in spite of those flaws, so I’m, at least, dubbing them modern classics.

SYNOPSIS: As if two times of going to back to HellHouse LLC wasn’t bad enough, a third group decided to take a chance and build something out of it. Like it ever works out? If it did, they’re be no more cash cows, uh, I mean sequels.

CHARACTERS: I think they’re the best developed of the three movies, sadly, you will remember the movie more than the characters and that is one of the flaws of these flicks. That said, everything else makes up for it.

KILLS: You’re not going to find over the top kills here, you’re going to get amazing old school build and some kills. This one does the same for the most part and when it goes go gory, it is worth it.

ACTING: Best of them all. Not a single bit of weird or awkward. Everyone is on their A-Game and it shows. Fantastic choice!

DIALOGUE: Excellent and well done!

PACING: Fantastic tension building and it works throughout the whole movie. These films really do it for me in a way few modern horror films have been in recently years and I really appreciate that.

CONCLUSION:
While the end is kind of weak and it was once again a pretty predictable ending, not mind blowing, everything else leading up to it was on point, so it was still a very strong sendoff overall. Although, as with all Horror franchises, if this does well, you can expect a fourth one or even more. Give it a year and I can pretty much guarantee that Shudder will come back with HellHouse LLC 4. Stephen Cognetti is a director and writer to keep an eye on as I see big things in his future and personally I would love to see him get a theatrical run. Not that being a Shudder Exclusive is bad, but he could be becoming a bigger name. Regardless, you need to spend Halloween watching all three of these movies back to back. You’ll thank me for it, because they’re really well done, albeit slightly flawed, horror flicks.


4 out of 5

Kageoween: I Chuckie, a review of the 2019 remake.

INTRODUCTION: I was excited to see that Child’s Play was getting the reboot treatment. I was never the biggest fan of the series, but up to three was good. There is an argument to be made for Bride of Chucky but I was pretty much out at that. The concept was kind of hoakie, but it worked in its time frame, remember, it came out in 1988 and every movie had characters with weird backstories. This one removes the weird voodoo in exchange for a more realistic take. Was it better off?

SYNOPSIS: A company like Apple produces an Amazon like Alexa, but in the form of a doll. The doll goes rouge due to a disgruntled employee having shut off the safety precautions. All hell breaks loose.

CHARACTERS: Pretty shallow to say the least. They could have developed them more, or at least the main characters. Overall, very weak, but so wasn’t the original Child’s Play.

ACTING: Fantastic! Not a weak actor among them all. They all did superb.

DIALOGUE: Not a single bit of cringe! It was excellent and at times very comical.

KILLS: Weak and not very inventive. We have seen most of these things before and it was tame.

PACING:It tried to be an old school story driven movie, but the pacing wasn’t right for it. It didn’t build tension correctly and that is a shame, because I would have loved more build and tension.

SUBTEXT: If we ignore the overt text that is the dangers of AI, Child’s Play at its core is really about being involved in your child’s life more and not allowing negative things to influence them, as Chuckie was. Everything he learns, he picks up from others and I think that is a worthwhile takeaway.

CONCLUSION:
The story could have been better and Andy’s hearing aid could have been a much bigger plot point. It was a missed opportunity to make him seem crazy, so by the end, he would have been redeemed in a most stellar fashion. The modernization was much needed and a fantastic break away from the old. While not an amazing film, a sequel could be beneficial and wouldn’t be minded. I loved the Isaac Asimov homage of the three rules that cannot be broken and there are a few other reference, like RoboCop that are within. Even with the comedy, this movie just could not get me to like it. Objectively speaking, not bad, just slightly flawed. Subjectively speaking, I really hope if they do make another they expound on this one with more developed characters, better kills, a better story and more tension.

Overall
3/5