The Last of Us

The following review was written by Dominic Burns.

The Last of Us has been getting some high praise since its debut on the PS3 this month and it’s easy to see why. As a self confessed post apocalyptic geek and a big fan of the Uncharted series from the same developers Naughty Dog , I knew from the second I saw the announcement of this game that I was going to like it, what I underestimated was just how much.

I will try my very best to keep this spoiler free.

The story of The Last of Us revolves around two characters. Joel, a weary survivor turned smuggler who witnessed the world fall apart during the first days of an infection that destroyed civilisation by infecting people with a fungus that turned them into crazy and violent zombie like creatures and, Ellie, a 14 year old girl born into the world, post infection who, he is charged with protecting as they journey across the wasteland that the United States has become. 

The introduction to the game very quickly sets the tone, and it’s bleak... so very bleak, but this is The Last of Us’ strongest point in my opinion. The first ten minutes of the game are set before the infection, before the world falls apart. But this changes rapidly. The post apocalyptic geek in me was grinning with delight once the action started but this was soon replaced with a sense of terror and an empty feeling once the title sequence begins to play and as I watched the titles rolling in a style that draws comparison to Zack Snyders 2004 Dawn of the Dead remake I found myself wondering what this game was going to throw at me... and needless to say, it impresses.

The game isn’t just about action, about killing the zombie like creatures that plague the world. It’s very story driven and focuses on survival and what it takes to survive and also about what has been lost.  It draws parallels with The Walking Dead game, TV series and comic books, in that these too are more focused on the characters development as survivors and less on the zombies, and it makes for a much more interesting game.

The two central characters to the story, Joel and Ellie, are two of my favourite characters in gaming and it’s a joy (tinged with sadness from the situation) to watch them develop as the game progresses.  Joel is a man who has lost everything, like most people in this game world. He watched his world fall apart and lost anything and most anyone he loved. And it shows. From his weary attitude to the world around him, to his aging in the 20 years that pass since the introduction, he is a man who is broken, but surviving day to day.

Ellie is the mysterious girl he’s escorting across the States, a 14 year old girl who knows nothing of the world outside the quarantined zone (QZ) she was born into. I felt a great attachment to the two of them and cared for their wellbeing on their journey, especially when in rooms full of multiple enemies.

The development through the game is an interesting one and as mentioned leaves you as a player becoming more involved in their lives and their stories; however it is this attachment that can leave a bitter taste in the mouth with morals being called into question on more than one occasion. What’s different from most games is that you have no choice in the matter, you cannot choose the right or wrong path, you are made to watch no matter how you may feel about the matter. (Apart from one scene early on where you can choose whether or not to euthanize an injured, recently infected man.) 

It is again an interesting choice, where most games would have you press a button to determine the actions, but not in The Last of Us you’re made to watch during cutscenes, (which are crafted with cinematic quality that’s almost eerie in their ability to capture the emotion and acting talents of those involved. ) and this lends itself well to the progression (or deterioration depending on how you view their actions) of the characters when you see how far Joel, a once loving father, is willing to go to survive and ultimately for what reasons...

Watching the development of Ellie comes from her interaction with Joel and the world outside the QZ she was born in. Hearing her make passing comments at forgotten relics as you explore is common and fully believable of a person who knows nothing of record shops or houses in neighbourhoods where barbecues and other such family occasions took place, but perhaps most interesting is her turning from the 14 year old girl who throws bricks at her enemies, asking a myriad of questions at Joel, rather than to him, to the character we see in the later game.

It can be quite uncomfortable to see her developing into the killer that she needs to be to survive in the world she lives in and when Joel eventually hands her a rifle you can see the internal dilemma he has in entrusting a weapon to a 14 year old and shattering any form of innocence she may have clung on to by making her a killer.

I found myself fascinated by the world that Naughty Dog have created, the crumbled buildings, the abandoned cars littering highways and suburban streets,  all reclaimed by nature are crafted in such a way that again they are fully believable locales. From the QZ inhabited by lost souls and over watched by an overzealous military, to the abandoned cities, quarantine zones that have been lost to the infected, to small town America surrounded by foliage. They are all realised beautifully.

These locations are of course inhabited by the infected, who roam them either with the vile movements inflicted by the parasitic fungus Ophiocordyceps unilateralis (a real, disturbing, fungus that infects insects) that’s taken control, who will spot you and run at you without a single regard for their safety, known as runners, to the more heavily infected known as clickers. These are a form of human that are so far infected the fungus has sprouted from the skulls and distorted them to the point that they are now blind and rely on echo locating clicks to listen out for and hunt their prey. The latter, truly are a terrifying enemy and ramp up the tension during the stealth sections, which is a necessity when faced with a building full of them.

Ammunition in this game is scarce at best and tends to make an awful lot of noise if used too, and one misjudged use of weaponry, be it firearms or melee will result in a quick death from these creatures. (complete with a graphic depiction of a characters death.)

Throughout the world in typical post apocalyptic gaming fashion, you will find notes from other survivors, diary entries, notes to family or friends, suicide notes and goodbyes, but unlike any other game, I found myself becoming invested in these two, spending good portions of my time playing, scouting out abandoned houses, hoping to find some clues as to what happened to their former residents, as well as finding essential supplies.

One in particular still plays on my mind, you follow one mans journey from abandoning his small boat, to setting up a refuge for fellow survivors in a sewer complex. You find notes from him and other survivors scattered around this area and I found that I cared deeply for this character through what he’d achieved and his thoughts scribbled on paper. I cared for a character in a game that I never got to meet or even see, and that to me was something special that Naughty Dog achieved.

The stealth required doesn’t feel as forced as it can do in other games, holding down R2 will focus Joels hearing, so you can pinpoint enemy locations so long as they’re moving, and will make him move more cautiously in a crouched position. It lends itself well to the style of game play. Ammunition is hard to come by and you find yourself reluctant to use your firearms. Every shot counts, a point that is hammered home when each missed shot could choose your fate.

Joel is a far cry from the one man army of Nathan Drake found in the Uncharted games. He doesn’t take 50 bullets only to return them all to sender, he doesn’t leap great distances and scale ancient ruins, he’s a Texan everyman, he’s a father and so combat in this game is far more realistic. Melee weapons come in the form of bats, pipes, machetes, but are limited in their use. They can be upgraded with nails and the like but are still limited. So every swing of your weapon, every pull of the trigger is a measured one.  

Supplies, like health kits and Molotov cocktails and even weapon upgrades are crafted by Joel using items found in the game world, and, whilst creating these vital items the game does not pause, leaving you vulnerable for precious seconds, so that health kit you’re making, could cost Joel his life. This really adds to the atmosphere of the game when you have to run from a gunfight, or dispatch a clicker silently, then craft a med kit hoping you don’t get discovered.

My one criticism is of the often illusion shattering ineptitude of the none playable characters AI in stealth. You’ll often see them running around like headless chickens in front of enemies you’re hiding from trying to find cover, thankfully they won’t be noticed, only you can alert enemies to your presence, but it still ruins the moment to see them crouched down at an enemies foot, or to have Joel say “keep quiet” only for you to hear every footstep and movement they are making.

But back to the positive.

The graphics in this game are second to none and the detail with which they have captured the faces of the actors playing their roles during cut scenes is quite eerie. During the introduction you see a range of emotions playing across their faces, from laughter to tears, they are all recreated brilliantly. It is quite an odd sensation being able to look into game characters eyes and see tears forming, from the drops welling up, to them falling down the face.

The conveyance of emotion this carries with it is stunning when you consider this is a game and shows just how much they are evolving. Combine this with the compelling story of The Last of Us, the relationship between the characters and the world in which this all resides and you have a serious art form that deserves all the praise it is receiving.  Even the soundtrack is brilliant, and sets the mood perfectly with oft single instruments wistfully playing a sorrowful melody as you scavenge long abandoned homes, that complements the setting perfectly.

The Last of Us truly is a brilliant game, and if you are a Playstation owner, you will do yourself a disservice if you do not buy this game.

Go out, pick up, and bring it home. Take care of Joel and Ellie.

Make every shot count...

The Lex Factor: Three possible bald men

The following article was written by Kate Knight.

Man of Steel spoilers below. Be warned.

So, the new Superman film is out.  I’ve seen it.  I loved it.  It had some flaws, but they’re forgivable.   It’s a film that I’d be happy to pay to see again and you’d better believe I’ll be getting it when it comes out on DVD.  

To me, it’s a given that we’ll get another slice of the Man of Steel pie in two or three years time.  My question is, who’ll be the baddy? 

General Zod was an excellent introductory villain, but he ain’t coming back is he?  To coin a phrase from Blackadder which I think appropriately sums up his situation, ‘if not very nearly dead, then very actually dead’.   And whilst there is certainly some ambiguity as to the fate of the minions of Zod at the end of MoS, to bring them back for the next film risks turning a sequel into a remake of the first. 

No, to my mind, the next film needs a new baddy.  A big, bald, baddy.  The next film needs Lex Luther.

Luther is a great Superhero villain that everyone knows.   He’s the manipulative, intelligent, psychopathic thorn in Superman’s side.   He’d be perfect for the next MoS film.  The great thing about Luther is that there is a depth of character there, which would allow any actor who played him to explore different facets of his personality and also gives room for several interpretations.  

I want to see Luther in the next film, but who will play him?  Who will join greats such as Gene Hackman and Kevin Spacey who’ve brought this villain to life? I even quite liked Michael Rosenbaum in Smallville, but we won’t go into that here)

Here are my top 3 picks for Luther:  

Matt Damon

Oscar winning actor, Matt Damon.   Team America may have rendered me unable to say his name without sounding slightly simple, but a bad actor he is not. 

I think Damon would be an excellent Luther.  Firstly, he’s about the right age for the role.  Luther is often portrayed as a peer of Superman in the comics and graphic novels (usually around 4-5 years older, but certainly a contemporary) so if we’re keeping Cavill we don’t want someone of Hackman or Spacey’s generation.  

I think back to Damon’s chilling performance in The Talented Mr Ripley and wonder, could he bring this to the Luther role too?  It’s cold and calculating.  Never quite what he seems.   I want a Luther, which explores different facets of his personality and is not one-dimensional.   We know that Damon brings a credibility and professionalism to the role.  I wonder though, would his performance be just a little sterile? 

If it’s going to be Damon, I want The Talented Mr Ripley Damon and not We Just Bought a Zoo Damon. 

Leonardo Di Caprio

He was my schoolgirl crush from when I was about 11 to 14.  When I hit 14 and he started to look like one of my uncles, the crush subsided, but my admiration for his acting ability continued. 

Di Caprio is one of those actors who has undertaken a breadth of work that is sometimes overlooked.  I mean, Man in the Iron Mask and Titanic aren’t great examples of his acting ability but certainly when you look at his performances in Blood Diamond and Django Unchained you see his ability to really bring a character to life. 

We’ve seen him do large scale, action films such as Titanic and Inception so we know he can take the pace and hold his own in those types of films.  We’ve also seen him take on mental illness and obsession in The Aviator and Shutter Island.   Luther is a sociopath and that needs to come across on screen too.

He’s my favourite American to play Luther.  I’d like to see him have a go at this one.  Question is, would he shave off that pretty head of hair?  Because if you want to be Luther the mantra is - it’s go bald or go home.

Benedict Cumberbatch  

This chap has got the potential to be one of greatest British Actors of our time.  That’s not overstating the case either.  I mean, seriously, did you see him in Into Darkness?  He acted the rest of the cast out of the room, and it wasn’t even a bad cast!

He’s relatively up and coming in the film world, having done quite a bit of television and mostly stage acting previously.  I haven’t yet been lucky enough to see him on stage, but I’m reliably informed that his performance as Frankenstein’s monster some years ago was incredible.   The first thing I ever saw him in was a one off TV programme called Hawking where he played Stephen Hawking back in 2004, and I remember thinking even then that he would be one to watch. 

The reason I like Cumberbatch for this role is that we know he is versatile and has the ability to pull out elements of a character’s personality that perhaps another actor may not have considered.  He makes the role his own and he is more than capable of holding his own against actors who are household names.   Just look at Tinker Tailor.  

Whilst Into Darkness is arguably his first mainstream film breakthrough, it won’t be his last.  I think he’s the type of actor that will seek out roles that challenge him physically and mentally – Luther would do that.  He’s not one-dimensional and there’s a history there that an actor of quality could sink their teeth into. 

Plus, I reckon he’d shave his head.

So those are my picks.  Hollywood very rarely listens to me when it comes to making films but who knows!   I’d say it was a fair bet we’ll see Luther in the next MoS film, but will see Damon, Di Caprio or Cumberbatch? – we shall have to wait and see! 

Man of Steel

Superman has always been my number two comic book hero, and in all honesty will probably always occupy that spot behind Batman. In terms of films, Superman has largely lagged behind Batman, only really offering two great additions to the genre (Superman The Movie and Superman 2), but with Man of Steel, the creative team behind The Dark Knight trilogy and Zack Snyder aim to help the first ever superhero to close that gap and take his place at the top table.

In Man of Steel, we follow Clark Kent from his birth on Krypton amidst a military coup, his journey through space, his formative years in Smallville and his search across the globe to find out who his biological parents and he was sent to Earth. Meanwhile, the events of Krypton, which I won’t spoil, ultimately leads General Zod to Earth in search of Kal El.

It’s a big role to fill in the eyes of both the general public and the more hardcore fan, but Henry Cavill has taken on the role of Superman (although he is only referred to as this once in the whole film, and apologetically at that) and truly making it his own, by taking the core elements of the character and updating it for the current time. One of the most original aspects of the portrayal, as well as the way the character is written, is his loneliness and growing isolation with the people of earth. This is something that wasn’t touched upon by any of the previous films, but is a key part the of best Superman stories (Kingdom Come by Mark Waid is a key text for the subject). But the journey through the film that Clark/Kal takes is the one of the most enjoyable and rich origin stories ever put to film.

Although, not all of Clarks character arc falls on the very strong shoulders of Cavill. Cooper Timberline and Dylan Sprayberry are the two young actors (who play a 9 and 13 year old Kal El) who have some major scenes that really shape the viewers opinions on Clark and are instrumental in gaining their sympathies and support.

Both have a key scene with one of the Kent’s, Timberline has a scene with Diane Lane, some of which was seen in the trailers, where she has to talk him down after some of his powers suddenly manifest themselves and he begins hearing everyone’s voices. Sprayberry spends more time with Costner’s Jonathan Kent, including a scene that features the infamous “maybe” line. It’s in these scenes that we see the difficult upbringing and childhood that Clark had, as he fought against his powers and his parents tried to keep them a secret to keep him safe.

The structure Man of Steel follows a similar structure to Batman Begins, with the first half cutting back and forth between three of four timelines, introducing a number of plot threads, which then breaks into the single driving events of the second half. This last half and everything that is at stake all comes as a result of the various triumphs and tragedies that have led Clark Kent to this point.

With all comic book films, a lot of responsibility lies on the shoulders of the villain. No matter how good your hero is, if he has no one struggle with or test him, then there is no tension or true stakes. Luckily for Man of Steel, Michael Shannon is on his best form, not only is he threatening and dangerous, but in a warped way his reasoning is completely understandable. He is the hero of his own story. His sole purpose is to protect Krypton and he is willing and capable of doing anything to make that happen. Shannon goes from calm and methodical, to crazed and emotional effortlessly, more remarkably, none of these transitions feel forced, but give us a fully rounded, almost sympathetic villain.

It’s no surprise that the story starts on Krypton, the original Superman did and so it feels only natural that the next version of his origin should once again begin there. That, apart from the destruction and Kal El being sent into space, is where the similarities end.

This sequence is amazing; it condenses so much history and social structure into ten or fifteen minutes, along with several action sequences that will leave you wanting more. This is down to the interplay between Crowe and Shannon, as well as Ayelet Zurer (Lara Lor Van, Kal El’s mother), which hints at a long and interesting relationship, twisted by differing ethics and morals, but united by a common understanding of Krypton’s fate.

Lois Lane can draw a similar response as Catwoman from some viewers, you either get the character and her interpretation, or you actively rebel against it, finding them clichéd as they try to force a strong woman into a male dominated narrative. With Amy Adams performance, we don’t get any of the irritating or helpless heroine that at times has plagued the character.

But instead we get a strong, independent journalist who you could see travelling the globe, searching out stories and chasing down this one of a guardian angel. In future films, this role and relationship with Clark is going to grow and could easily become one of the strengths of the series.

Man of Steel is huge, in fact that is a bit of an understatement, it’s an epic that spans not only our planet, but also other planets and another dimension. One of the criticisms of Superman Returns was that there wasn’t enough action, which is a fair criticism of that film, Man of Steel doesn’t make that mistake, it goes big, real big. The battle of Smallville is probably the highlight as we finally get to see Kal El’s powers in full force on screen. Buildings are torn apart, trains thrown through the air and fighter jets brought down left and right. Although, this seems to be a bit much for some people, who have found the level of action and violence in points to be too much, skewing the other way in terms of action content. It seems that some people can’t be satisfied.

This film is as much about Clark and his life going forward, as it is the story of his parents, all four of them. Of the three that Clark meets and talks to, they all pull him in different directions, offering their guidance and viewpoints, but never telling Clark what to do. They let him decide what he wants to, to aspire to be whatever he wants to.

Russell Crowes Jor El is so different from Marlon Brando’s that they almost feel like different characters; the only thing they share is their love for their son and the willingness to do anything to keep him safe. This Jor El is as physically capable as he is mentally, equally adept at arguing his case with Zod and the Kryptonian council, as he is fighting off anyone who stands between him and his sons safety. Another great part of this version is that we get to spend a lot of time with him, I won’t say how, but it’s in a similar way to the crystals from the previous films. It would be fair to say that Crowe almost steals the show.

Kevin Costner as Jonathan Kent may seem like one of those obvious bits of casting, and maybe it was, but it pays off for Snyder, as Jonathan becomes the voice of reason as well as the heart of film, who above all wants Clark to be safe. I could go on about this performance, but watch the ‘Tornado’ sequence, a largely dialogue free scene, that shows Jonathan Kent at his most important and Costner at his best.

The easiest way I can sum up this film is in two quick comments, firstly I am going to go and see this film again as soon as I can and secondly, GO AND SEE THIS FILM NOW. This film will sit along side The Dark Knight Trilogy, and hopefully spawn sequels of a similar quality, in spite of an apparent craving for a Justice League film.

Believe in Superman, he is definitely back to his best.

Star Trek Into Darkness

This review is a little late, but I’ve been a little busy in the last two weeks. I’ll keep this one brief, as Into Darkness has been out for over three weeks now, and its theatrical run will be coming to an end soon.

The first in JJ Abrams rebooted Star Trek  series did what not a lot of people thought you could do. Make a Trek film for this generation, but that also honoured the original series and its ideas, and breathed life into a franchise that had grown stale in the previous decade. The challenge with Into Darkness was to carry on this idea, but to go bigger (as all sequels tend to demand), with more spectacle and to continue to bring us more of the crew that was the undoubted strongest part of the first film.

The plot of Into Darkness, is a relatively straight forward one, as this review will be spoiler free I will keep it brief, a former Star Fleet officer John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch) shows up and blows up a building, and generally causes a bit of havoc, which prompts Kirk (Chris Pine) to request to go after him, even though where he has fled to, is a planet they can’t go. See no spoilers.

There are a few twists and turns along way, probably less than in the first film, but this certainly helps the film as it allows us more time with our two leads, Kirk and Spock (Zachary Quinto) as well as giving Harrison a good amount of time to become a very credible threat.

The most interesting part of the film is the Kirk and Spock relationship, which manages to juggle brotherly aspects first, mixed with ethical and moral ideals unique to each character, all done with quick and snappy dialogue that doesn’t bog down or hold the pace of the film back.

The first act and last act are where this relationship is probably seen and emphasised the boast, as its where there individual morals and outlooks on life and their profession are in the spotlight the most, and offers up a few interesting questions about the way they act, and what the other one would have done in a similar situation. The opening rescue mission of the film offers the purest look at the characters views and behaviour patterns, that will go on to be so crucial in the finale.

The only section of the film that could have used some streamlining, was the early Star Fleet section, as regards to the captaincy of the Enterprise. It is convoluted and could have easily been simplified to instead focus on Kirk and his relationships with both Spock and Pike, who is somewhat of father figure to him.

One of the biggest mysteries of the film, prior to release, was who Benedict Cumberbatch would be playing, and I won’t give away anything other than what I already have. What wasn’t going to be a mystery was just how awesome he was going to be, he steals or owns, depending on how you look at it, each scene he is in. Worse than that, he makes it look effortless, knowing exactly when to go big and when to dial it down to a terrifying, single softly spoken word. Specifically referring to his first line to Kirk of “Captain?”. Into Darkness is worth the price of admission for Cumberbatch alone.

It’s a sad day when you realise that the dull and clunky Iron Man 3, has made much more than Into Darkness, and this is coming from someone who isn’t loyal to the Star Trek franchise. So I urge you all to go and change that.

Boldy go where you haven’t been before, basically the cinema to see Star Trek Into Darkness.