H+ Review . . . Style Without Substance

 

New Digital Series Released by Warner Bros.

Bryan Singer, the guy responsible for "Superman Returns," "X-Men," "X2" and "The Usual Suspects," has recently unleashed his new digital series "H+."  The plot is simple.  Sometime in the near future a nanotech corporation invents a way to port the internet directly into people's brains.  No more iPhones, no more tabets, because you're always on-line.  Predictably, things go wrong, someone hacks the servers and, yep, people start dying.

Warner Bros. distributed the first two episodes beginning August 8, but if you subscribe to the channel you can view an additional four episodes.  

The first episode gives us a rough background on the story, with nice visuals and fine production value.  At just over seven minutes, the first episode is slightly longer than the (thus far) usual five minute running time the episodes average.  It begins in an underground parking structure in San Fransisco with a fight between husband and wife--the stereotypical argument about a guy failing to turn off the game once he's been told.

Driving deep into the bowels of the structure, they soon lose service, cutting them off from the internet.  After nearly hitting a man seemingly fleeing for his life, they suddenly realize that people are dropping dead just a few hundred feet in front of them.  Then a plane crashes on them.  It's all too quickly revealed that someone hacked the net and planted a software virus to kill people.  The few survivors are only safe as long as they remain out of service range.

The remainder of the episodes are very quick vignettes, neither full stories nor seemingly connected to one another except for the time stamp at the beginning which references where the action takes place, and the temporal reference post- and ante- "Event."  

Despite the stellar performances thus far, the beautiful CG, and a dystopian story of seemingly apocalyptic scope, I have a hard time believing this is going to go anywhere.

As I've mentioned before, the average episode is about five minutes long.  Hardly enough time to even establish location, it's woefully inadequate for expressing story or delivering characterization.  In the six episodes that have been released, only two follow the same characters.  The inherent shallowness of the storytelling strikes me as inimical to the success of the show as a whole.  Released once a week, I have a hard time believing that anyone will stick around long enough to see where its going.

And really, we've already heard this story.  It's a science-fiction trope that new technology will go bad in the worst possible way.  Maybe Singer hasn't done his homework, or maybe he thinks he has something new and important to say.  But so far, I'm not convinced.

The Doctor's Got a New Lady

http://i2.cdnds.net/12/23/618x339/tv_doctor_who_matt_smith_jenna_louise_coleman_on_location.jpg

Doctor Who's Got a New Lady

If she looks familiar to you, that's because she was also in Captain America: The First Avenger.  Announced today, twenty-five year old Jenna-Louise Coleman will star beside Matt Smith as the Doctor's new companion.  You can read all the juicy details here, but suffice to say she's got to be amazing to replace Karen Gillan.  Great companions come around rarely, and David Tennant had his fair share of really abominable companions.  So hopefully the writers and producers will be able to craft a really stunning character for her.

Hugo Update . . . And What's In An Award?

Right now, I'm about halfway through this year's Hugo nominees.  Among Others, and Leviathan Wakes are pretty good.  Since I still have yet to read more than the first hundred pages of Games of Thrones, I'm not really qualified to comment on A Dance with Dragons.  That really just leaves Embassytown with the third installment of Mira Grant's Deadline series.

First of all, the Hugos are not like a Pulitzer or Nobel Prize.  The first recognizes great American works of literature, and the second rewards an author's life work--the Noble Prize, in other words, rewards the entire oeuvre.  

When I was a kid, and played little league, we'd end the season with a pizza party and golden trophies.  Everybody got one and it symbolized your participation much more than your particular contribution.  Now, I'm not saying that the legitimate efforts of highly talents people shouldn't be rewarded

The Hugo Award was set up to reflect popular trends in genre fiction.  As such, it reflects what people like, as opposed to what is good.  Now, don't get me wrong, many of the Hugo awards have been granted to exceptional works of fantasy or science-fiction.  But what makes good genre fiction is not necessarily what makes good literature.  At the heart of it, good literature challenges both the reader and the author.  First the author must transcend the limitations of the medium to explore the bounds of human nature.  The reader, on the other hand, must equally endure.

Michael Cunningham, one of the triad of jury members picking this year's Pulitzer Prize in fiction, explains at the New Yorker some of what went into choosing three titles from more than 300.  What was so remarkable about his article, however, was not the behind-the-scenes work of jury members, but really he philosophy of what a particular award signifies.

He says that "[fiction] involves trace elements of magic; it works for reasons we can explain and also for reasons we can’t. If novels or short-story collections could be weighed strictly in terms of their components (fully developed characters, check; original voice, check; solidly crafted structure, check; serious theme, check) they might satisfy, but they would fail to enchant. A great work of fiction involves a certain frisson that occurs when its various components cohere and then ignite. The cause of the fire should, to some extent, elude the experts sent to investigate."

What this tells me, however, is that the utterly ineffable parts that Cunningham and his co-jurors suspected of greatness did not ignite a fire in the souls of the board members.  So I'm curious how other awards will fare.

Will, for instance, A Dance With Dragons beat out China Mieville and Jo Walton?  Each of these books has brilliance lurking between their lines, but G.R.R. Martin is the old favorite, and his series has recently received a boost in popularity with the made-for-premium-cable television series based on his books.  Certainly, a spike like this can't be bad for Martin, but is it necessarily good for the Hugos?

Extending this line of thinking a little, Leviathan Wakes is the first book in an expected trilogy.  Should we even consider something admittedly unfinished?

Perhaps it doesn't matter, though.  Maybe this is an opportunity for the community to express its collective happiness with a particular author or work.  Maybe its a moment for sci-fi and fantasy geeks to acknowledge their favorites and just celebrate with one another their own, personal pleasure at being part of the process.  Because ultimately, awards are as much for the audience as they are for the recipient.  That little trophy (be it a golden man, a rocket, or a golden bucket of popcorn) symbolizes that we enjoyed something.  And we want you to know it.

So maybe the Pulitzer board already has life figured out and they don't need the challenge a good work of fiction symbolizes.  Or maybe they're so far removed from the American experience that they no longer recognize it when it's staring up at them from the pages of very fine works.  Either way, we'll still smile, and clap and cheer ourselves on and reward the fiction that we love.