Flames of the Witcher

 

Like many out there, I have a very insular view of the Witcher as a franchise. I know the thing from it's games and only that. Just as book fans typically stick only to the games, and show fans are ostracized by all the other sectors of the franchise. It's a particularly strange and somewhat ineffective way to run a multimedia franchise, but when literally no facet of the franchise is willing to shake hands with the other what are you going to do? The Witcher games at least try to take the books that had released at the time into account to as full of a degree as they feasibly can, being an RPG video game. The show... wasn't so much interested in even doing that and really... well, the Netflix series kind of looked at the profitable franchise and figured they could puppeteer that corpse into their own thing with a bit of work. Several years later, some odd casting choices and one horrendous PR disaster later- and the series is being cut short.

It is very necessary to remind everyone that no matter how they like to frame it, The Witcher is absolutely not living up to the vision that the showrunners had for it. They like to pretend that they are ending the show and it isn't being cancelled, despite the drop-off of ratings and reviews they got throughout their previous season, alongside the nightmare storm PR they have drummed up consistently. And they also want everyone to forget the 7 season plan the team initially had in place. And those seven seasons were the actual working plan- it's not like the Resident Evil series where the showrunner casually threw up the idea of 20 seasons before farting out a disaster piece of the ages- The Witcher had ambition. For all that ambition ended up amount to...

It seems almost callous to chalk all this fallen potential up to the casting, and subsequent firing, of one man- but if the shoe fits- then it must be said that axing Henry Cavill was probably the death knell for this already struggling brand. After seasons of muddled themes, distorted plot points and straight butchered character arcs- through it all people who actually liked the series could enjoy a solid performance from the one man who perfectly encapsulated his character and seemed more invested in getting the story right than anyone in the writers room. As one of the only Witcher fans in the world who both liked the games and read the books: (Shock of shocks!) the man should have probably been brought on as an executive producer. Instead he was driven from the show and with him went any hope the show would eventually become something worthy of the source material.

Source Material is such a strangely feared concept in the modern scene of adaptations whereupon every adaptor seems so eager to veer off and do their own thing atop the bare bones of the original plan that often times I'm left wondering why it is these creators were 'drawn' to the property to being with! Surely a 'fan' would respect and want to preserve what was so special about the thing they are adapting, rather than just roll over it with their own twisted facsimile of the original. Oftentimes it feels as though perhaps what had drawn them was the 'fandom' rather than the product itself. That 'love', so to speak, which could be opportunistically siphoned off their direction with enough surreptitious reconstructions. That is the only explanation I can fathom for some of the disasters that paint the modern world of TV and film.

So The Witcher is burning down at Netflix, and through the flames we are going to be fed two more series as the franchise chokes on itself and goes out with a whimper. In that time I'll be honest- the idea of recasting your core lead character does intrigue me for how seamlessly they will attempt to pull it off. I mean sure, thanks to the rank incompetence of the writing staff, Geralt's key position as an moral observer judging the worst of the world with an objective eye is practically eliminated in favour of him being dumb strong man with sword- but the white haired badass was still the most recognisable character on the show. Straight up sticking a new handsome actor in his britches is sure to cause some undeniable friction I can't help but be curious at.

Compare this to the world of Fallout for a second. There is an adaptation that didn't just get the look and feel of the original property nearly down pat- (I think there are some tonal issues personally, but if Josh Sawyer himself doesn't see them I'll confess to perhaps being my own kind of misguided in that regard.) but built upon the foundations of the games in order to tell it's own story. It's own, largely derivative, story. Fans love it, critics seem enamoured, and now everyone is scrambling to claim credit for making the show what it is and the franchise too. Witcher, on the otherhand, feels like it's been discarded by the video game community, despite the fact that the brand's international success can be placed pretty much solely on the shoulders of that game series, whether the creator wants to admit it or not!

I do feel bad for the Witcher, because it was actually on of the better properties to suffer this disgrace. Resident Evil was never going to be a strand-out TV show even if it were placed in the hands of competent creatives, but The Witcher actually had that potential. I'm not sure if I'd go so far as to give it the cliche title of 'The next Game of Thrones', given that the scale of The Witcher is inherently personal whereas GOT was telling the story of an era; but it could have been it's own special little gift to fantasy TV storytelling instead of what it ended up being- an increasingly low-effort exercise in pointless excess living up to neither the games nor the books.  

Rebellious Moon

 There are no do-good evil-fighters, only celestial bodies.

Hark, doth mine mortal ears deceive? Else be it true that dear Snyder, of the Zachary house, hath conjured with his labours his ownst copiee of the Star Wars? Ist true, one should be beholden to insist, how 'Rebel Moon' carries vast shades reminiscent of many a lament property within her make. Star Wars for one, Warhammer 40k for another, onest might even detect some rogue splash of Battlestar Galactica shouldst they delve some layer deeper. Truly thou hast brought the very culmination of their influence, mild and wild, unto a most potent broth. Whomst could forsee how such a concoction wouldst last in a world of forever sequels and forever franchises? What new nugget of brilliance hast the house of Zachary to offer the belated and beleaguered realm of action fiction, which ist had not before? Well hark well, friends, I hast the answer!

Boredom. That is what Zach thought our worlds of Sci-Fi were so desperately missing in his grand journey to ruin quite literally every last piece of goodwill he had amongst that ever shrinking portion of the world with their frontal cortex's mostly intact. Zach sat down and though- "Yeah, all these high flying sci-fi movies with their incredibly evocative and tangible worlds, strong and pervasive narrative themes that reflect deeply in the personalities and actions of the core cast? What a waste of effort! Effort- that could be going into exposition!" I truly believe that Snyder genuinely does not understand the point of storytelling from a basic level, and yet fell into the position of 'writer director' by basic merit of the 'fail upwards' society that the already successful enjoy over in the states.

I say this because that is the only real explanation I can stomach to explain how one takes the story of The Seven Samurai, a story told countless times in every medium, from movie to comics to books, (I'll bet there's a game or two that mimics it too) and utterly screws it up. It ain't that hard to do! We're talking a story about gathering a group of colourful characters with unique talents that come together to save a small community struggling under the boot of oppression. That's as basic as basic gets. Yet not only does the Zack manage to make this last 4 hours, but he fundamentally misses the mark on every single marker of this story that he possibly could. It is as though he set out to make a movie that purposefully mocked the very idea of a Seven Samurai setup, only he forgot the sarcasm to make it all stick.

Zack is enamoured by the spectacle of 'style'. He wants to be behind the scenes crafting this expansive and visually arresting world, whilst being in front of the charge setting up the piece for iconic scenes fuelled on the richness of that built world. It's a very specific art to master which he absolutely cannot get to grips with. All of the first movie is wasted telling us about how great and cool the various stragglers are who lump themselves with Cora (The only person who's name I remember) in her quest to find some rebels that might help them fight off 'The Imperium'. These stragglers seem to exist only as words of exposition, because in person they are drab, personality drained, occasionally barking, background clutter. No one interacts with anyone else in a way that highlights their traits or desires, it's all as sterile as a doctors ward.

Bring us in to the substance of narrative, birthing and growing characters, and you'll stump Zach blind. All he can do is write backstories that are spoken with perfect bluntness, as though reading the bio-section of your own top trump card, as within those overbloated narratives we're supposed to independently derive passions, goals, relationships, struggles and ultimately their lessons too. When the sword woman reveals that her family was killed, we see that as a perfect excuse to set up her coming to grow close with the people of the village as a surrogate. Instead, one of the kids tries to bug her with a bit of wheat once. They're best friends now, she thinks of this kid as her new son. Would you believe me if I told you that was the single most developed relationship these two movies present? Cora and her brainless boytoy are so pathetically underexplored I cannot even tell you a single character trait about either one that these characters could have been attracted to in theory, let alone what actually makes them a decent couple!

Action, Zack's one forte, is smothered under his ridiculous obsession with getting the 'trailer shot', which feels like his intention behind every scene. He's so desperate to get that one crazy moment where the hero is writhing in the midst of battle, slaying their foes whilst chaos reins around them in a highlight of their whirlwind frenzy, that this becomes every shot. Every character is launching themselves out of cover in every scene, standing right in the middle of a hail of laser fire that doesn't even land close to them, as they charge the ranks like children on a playground. You'd think our heroes were actually invisible for the way they never seem to be in actual, or even potential, danger of being shot at any time ever. They lay under the tanks, begging to be shot, and all the carnage would sail above them hitting... well... nothing actually. It's amazing how few good guys we see in any actual danger ever. I can remember maybe two or three villager deaths. We don't even see that many background extras being blasted. So what are the Imperium dunces aiming at, if not the heroes? Are they trying to off Zack in order to escape this movie? That might be it...

And can you believe I've touched on all that without even bringing up slow-mo yet? I never really thought something so trivial could be used as such a crutch for dynamic pacing- but here we are. Zack actually thinks the way you slow down a scene is by literally slowing down the footage. I know it's been memed to death but that mockery comes from a point of reason! He throws slow-mo on footage of grain being chucked around, on water being drawn out of faucets, of a man throwing a handful of dirt as he trips over, of a man jogging in the moments before a climatic jump. It seems almost insane to have to point out that such a technique is designed to highlight moments of excitement, drawing out moments and stretching that tension ever more thin before the bow snap of the payoff. He simply doesn't understand what tension is and how Slow-mo effects it. At all. And that is his one trick. He's not a one-trick pony. He is a no trick pony. Zack Snyder is an actual class clown who accidentally fell into a position of tortured regard! He is a hack.

But I will say this for the man- he is entertainingly awful. There are so many directors out there who put out movies that are frankly unwatchable, but the bare basics of movie making are not lost on the man. He can frame a great shot, construct a visually arresting scene and direct a fine looking sequence or two. The man is a cinematographer and very much should have stayed as such, but some moron told him he would make a half decent director and here we are! If only he could write just a little bit better, his movies could be a bit more memorable too. Still, Rebel Moon did manage to score the Netflix top box office awards so who knows- maybe we'll get our 'trilogy of six movies' following the world's most boringly cool-looking sci-fi series. I actually morbidly hope we do. 

Avatar has lost it's damn mind

 Not the blue one

So of all the children's cartoons that we have grown up with, most get put to bed upon reaching maturity for whatever reason- typically because that level of show, writing, production just doesn't appeal to older ages. Which is fine, they're not meant to. They are designed to keep younger minds entertained and therefore it is totally fine for a show as formulaic and uninspired as Miraculous Ladybug to persist for as long as it did. (They recycled at least a minute of animation for every episode!) But what about the shows that do stick with us? The shows that appeal to younger and older generations? That seem to grow as we do, and hit sometimes even stronger upon hindsight? Well, then we have the rare gems like the brilliant 'Avatar' franchise- and the wierdoes trying to capitalise off it with strange and twisted ideas about what best makes that original tick.

'Avatar: The Legend of Aang' was an anime-styled Nickelodeon cartoon following the journey of a fated Bender of all elements trying to restore balance to a world turned on it's head ever since the tyrannical Fire Nation took over. He is joined on his quest by Sokka, wise cracking warrior-to-be from the Water Tribe, and Katara, a Water tribe bender with staunch moral compunctions. This trio are not the most complicated and twisting characters ever put to screen, but considering how nobody seems capable of adapting them faithfully to any medium- they might as well be! Flawed kids thrust into a world they're not ready for who end up rising to the occasion- what does that sound like to you? Does that sound like a Game of Thrones successor? No? Well that can't be right- because the showrunner for the new live action adaptation seems to think that a perfect comparison!

In a recent interview the showrunner claimed that this show needs to cater to fans of Game of Thrones in it's grounded grittiness, and walking the tightrope of nailing that feeling is their job... Which is... horrendously off base on both what Avatar is and what Game of Thrones was! Avatar is a children's show first and foremost- it's world is rich but not complex or shackled by grounded and realistic political stakes. In many ways, the very premise of the show breaks down its world to the most basic identifiers. You have the tyrannical fire nation who represent evil and everyone else who represent good. Game of Thrones, on the otherhand, was all about telling the story of what happens after the great big obvious evil is slain and the shades of human who inhabit that space between the 'ages of heroes'. Martin focused exclusively on the philosophies of power and what it means in various angles of life, and how it chips away at humanity and basic morality. There's much to it than just that- but even in that most surface level observation- Avatar could not be further away as a franchise.

But hey, let's 'benefit of the doubt' this. Let's assume what he meant to say is he simply wants this show to become so popular that it rivals the viewing numbers of one of the biggest shows of all time. Maybe he's a dreamer and I'm choosing to interpret this in the worst way possible. Sure. But then how do you explain the comments made about Sokka? You know- the comments wherein cast members think the new show has toned down elements that could be considered 'iffy' such as Sokka's sexism. Which on the surface sounds rather affronting. Sokka's Sexism? Wasn't this a children's show? What they mean is, the conceited way in which Sokka saw his role of physical superiority in the early series, which is beaten out of him throughout the first series as every woman he meets humbles him. Because you see- that is what is called 'character development'. But it seems this series... just doesn't have characters? Is that what I'm supposed to take from these comments?

But hey- I'm sure the show will have plenty of time to conjure whole new character arcs for it's cast to go on now that- oh wait- no they've stripped the heart of main character too... The Showrunner has gone on record with IGN to brag about how they made it's narrative "A little clearer". (Right, because the animated show for children was so complex!) Now instead of Aang going on adventures and side-activities fleshing out the world and his own childish-nature, the very impetus for him running away from his duties as an Air Temple Monk and getting trapped under water for 100 years in the first place, he is instead fed a "vision" of what is happening at the Water tribe and B-lines there to stop it. He's more serious and less human this time around. That's what we all wanted right? Right?

Now of course I know that a live action show is going to have to cut some corners for the mere fact that it's super expensive to make these episodes, so they can't have side-activities drawing attention away from the core narrative. No 'Tales from Ba Sing Se', no cabbage guy I guess- what about Jin, the girl who Zuko gets close with in Book 2? She probably doesn't factor in enough to the core plot to get a scene, despite how well remembered she is as a representation of the path Zuko could have gone if he dedicated himself to running away completely. Is there space for nuance anymore in a story where we wring out the characters to all but their core most ideals? Aang is the hero, therefore that is all his character is. He's no longer also a child who wants to experience the freedom of not having the weight of the world on his shoulders- he's just a block of wood.

I'm making assumptions, sure- but you have to understand that there's a beating heart to the way that characters are supposed to be written which sounds all but absent in the direction that these show runners are taking it. And never are these choices being made with the right intentions- to make a better story. You might conflate 'clearer' with 'better', but when I read that what I interpret is 'simpler for consumption by the growing caste of media illiterate viewers'. This doesn't even sound like a show interested in capturing the spirit of the beloved original, but rather in making a fantasy drama to compete with other similar fantasy dramas. And when your goals are as vapid as that- well then, comparing yourself to Game of Thrones suddenly makes some sense, doesn't it?

Remember that the show runners of the original Avatar series were actually attached to this project at one point and they choose to drop out over 'creative differences'. Who's willing to bet that we're seeing the face of these differences laid out before us with these comments that deftly miss the point of this franchise that so many of us love? The more I hear about it, the less I'm getting the sense that this is going to be the next One Piece- when everything is sounding more like Season 1 of Halo. A show so painfully off it's course that the showrunner was replaced and they're having to spend all their marketing practically begging people to give them another chance because this time they've got it for sure! Avatar doesn't have enough season-worthy material to waste it's first making fundamental tonal mistakes... Oh god, just imagine what they've done to tone down Azula! One of the only character's on TV to threaten to outright kill someone in her first dedicated scene! Man... I'm not looking forward to the next few weeks...

Avatar... huh?

Everything changes...

Oh right... the Blood Dragon Show

 Urg...

One piece is good?

 I'm a different kind of Netflix adaptation

The Witcher series is... going a bit awry

Between the lesser of two evils; I'd rather not choose at all.

Adaptations have been on their evil dark path of ignominy of late. To the tune of, every single adaptation has let people down in some regard except for... I dunno... Sandman? I've heard good things about Sandman. (Still yet to watch it myself.) But aside from that? The Halo show, Resident Evil show, Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power, Wheel of Time; it's as though people who either don't love, or in some cases actively despise, the source material are intentionally doing their best to set these fictional worlds on fire. Like that WB executive who hated Zack Synder so much he tried his utmost to kill his movie franchise off, only to give Zack the victimhood complex which his fanbase weaponised into kicking off a light-cult fandom movement that, in turn, managed to bully WB into rereleasing a movie that, ultimately, didn't even earn them much in the way of prestige or viewership when it finally dropped. Where was I? Oh that's right; adaptions are a mistake, stop them.

One adaptation that had a lot of buzz around it, both positive and negative, was that of The Witcher starring Henry Cavill. Based on the novels of the Witcher more than the games who popularized those models to the wider world, The Witcher was set to adapt the various stories about the titular monster hunter, Geralt of Rivia, as he tries to stick by his moralist philosophy in a corrupt and sodden world that seems to slowly ruin all those who survive in it. And beside the fact that The Witcher was popularised to a global audience by the video games, conventional wisdom would lead outsiders of the franchise to the books for their material because for one; there's more of them, and for two; the general public still aren't ready to accept video games as a legitimate form of intelligent art. Which, incidentally, is my explanation for why every adaptation turns out to be a dog's dinner.

Still, regardless of some unfavourable comparisons to the visual designs of the games, (physical prop armour is tougher to build and make look cool than digital game assets.) the show turned out to be quite enjoyable to watch throughout it's first season, due in large part to the starring role of Henry Cavill, a man known both for being a gamer and a lover of 'The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt'. His passion seemed to mirror the excitement of a fan wanting to see their favourite game franchise spread to a wider audience of viewers, and that positivity made it possible to look past the perhaps average costume design... and general graphical design. (I hate this show's version of the Wolf School pendant. It looks like a minimalist redesign gone horribly wrong.) I can even forgive the show for having it's single best fight scene in the first episode. 

Season two was a bit more divisive I hear, with actual changes made to the source material causing head scratches for fans who were left, once again, wondering what the point is of adapting something and then veering off on your own path. (I don't know if the team have gone quite as off-the-rails as 'Rings of Power' has, but the threat is there.) Still we hold on for Henry, because Henry seems to believe in the property and thus became something of the fan's beacon to support this show even through it's potential woes. Like holding one of our own on our shoulders, hoping he'll succeed for the good of all our fandom. He's always been good at getting fans to like him, that Henry. Superman fans were begging for him to come back for so long that Dwyane Johnson slapped together a clunker of an outdated superhero movie just to bring him back into the DC movie franchise! Whatever would we do without Henry?

A pertinent rhetorical, given the times. For Henry Cavill, the lightning rod of a series that otherwise been called "Decent to mediocre" has hung up his swords and quit in favour of... one of the Hemsworths? (Which one? Urgh, not Liam!) It's a shocking and bizarre situation considering just how central to the marketing of this franchise Henry was, with his love of the game and respect for the books impassioning him to try and flesh out his character as much as humanely possible. Every time stories came out about how Henry was taking his role, we'd hear about his dedication to the source material and understanding of it. He wanted to try and bring out Geralt's inner voice into the breadth of the show, allow the philosophical aspects of Geralt to nestle into the audience's head so when he turns around and comes out with a speech about the line of good and evil, it comes out of the mouth of a man who you believe ponders these sorts of queries between his bouts of brutality. That's just an actor who cares.

Which if report are true, put him at odds with many of the writers and showrunners behind The Witcher. Henry had to fight to make the show how he wanted to make it and apparently didn't possess the power to make the necessary changes despite his star power and fan adoration. He made the very important choice to put his foot down over only continuing series 3 if the team agreed to stay more to the script of the novels, and now we find out he's leaving for 4. And I am pretty much on Henry's side here, not just because of how likable he appear to be. Rings of Power has shown us just how 'spectacle oriented' show writers become when untethered from the tight confines of their source material; disregarding the 'bigger picture' and 'important themes' in favour of empty flashes of dull excitement and 'member berries. (Remember the Balrog tease? What was the point of that?) When I hear reports of one former Witcher writer disparaging their former colleagues for laughing at the source material, I can't help but not only believe it, but assume that's how it is across the board with all of these adaptations. I'm not adverse to change in adaptation; I just think it needs to be respectable and worthy change. 

Henry, for his part, is at least making sure he's hitting his dreams. The man has finally been welcomed back into the DC superhero franchise he helped kick off all those years ago, and if we're really being blissfully unawares; we could accredit this shift in leadership to Henry merely wanting to dedicate his full attention back to the Supes movies. (Of which he can't be doing for than a handful of months of work towards a year. Yeah... he could have fit in a TV show at the same... if he wanted to.) Liam has been respectful, and sensible, enough not to say anything here, but I think the consensus is the same; the man has the looks but lacks that level of performance required to take over a pivotal role which was the spine of a close-to-flagging TV series. Will he just try and copy Henry's voice, which itself was a working evolution upon Doug Cockle's Geralt voice; highlighting different aspects of the stunted emotions of a Witcher? Does Liam even recognise the significance of the work? I don't know... which leaves this show's fate in limbo.

Adaptations... shouldn't be this minefield that they appear to be. I hear time and time again that it's ego which sinks these projects, from people who want to make their mucky mark on established work and can't get the go ahead to make official additions onto the work. (Just look at Rings of Power; they lied about sticking to the confines of canon so they could tell their bad fan fiction.) And dropping Henry from the role, whether he chose to leave or was ousted, was a terrible move for a project riding his passion. Any competent showrunner would have run to Henry with compromises or stern words the second this possibility passed their periphery, and if that encounter did occur and still resulted in a walk away; then they've failed in this basic duty of keeping production together. Liam needs to be nothing short of a miracle worker to pull this switch-up off; and I'm not the optimistic 'route for the underdog' sort of guy myself...

 

Resident Evil is dead (The Netflix show)

 I'm crying and shaking right now

Wow is me, how could this possibly happen? How could the fates be so utterly cruel as to land upon my head with their violent rage? How could the thread of promise that was a Resident Evil series wherein Albert Wesker's daughter sarcastically wills 'Zootopia porn' into the canon of the franchise come undone in some executives chamber? And why is this the first time I've ever been given hope by the machinations of corporate America? Resident Evil, the Netflix show, has been killed off. Finito. Done. It's been shot directly in the brain box; this corpse ain't reanimating, and we've set the damn thing on fire so it doesn't pop up as a bloody crimson head either. It turns out in the spate of troubling business decisions by the Internet's latest raging dumpster fire, Netflix, they were going to get something right, even despite of themselves.

Resident Evil is the latest in the recent revolving door of video game adaptations that slammed right into the ground in front of everybody, but unlike it's cousin over at Paramount, Resident Evil had the good graces to bow itself out of the running. Yes, if you lack any sort of taste whatsoever you might have gone through Halo and then Resident Evil and asked "What's the big deal?" And 'the big deal' is that these properties are repeatedly being 'treated' to low effort, low ambition TV detritus that tries it's utmost to leverage the name of the brand it is associated with to try and secure fans without the hard work of making something worthwhile to begin with. Effort is hard, just take my word for it. Why not profit from someone else's effort? (That's literally what I do everyday. Without the profiting part. Damn, I really need to learn how to start making money off of the stuff I do.)

Halo series 2 is a go already, which I guess means we'll at least get to see a Halo before that raging cinematic bonfire eats itself out, but Resident Evil didn't even really have a game plan at all. They didn't try to play all that much to the locations from the game, they intentionally set themselves in a separate continuity to those games and threw off any and all attempts to establish anything interesting expanding the world of Resident Evil, which is really what step 1 of an adaptation should be about doing, no? Instead we got a lukewarm zombie show, not even worthy of sharing the same air space as The Walking Dead, even in that show's current state, that tries to provide little name drops here and there but ultimately gives up in favour of teen angst intercut with post-apocalyptic survival scenes, with each setting given just enough screen time that you are left invested in neither. Truly the talents of experts.

And the thing is, I had hope for this show. I had hope because there is a legitimate ground for a Resident Evil style TV experience to be good; if only anyone with passion were willing to attack it. Hiring Lance Henrikson in literally any role ever is a great idea. Hiring him as an Albert Wesker with practically no similarities to the overly campy leather-donning super villain from the games beyond one eye-poppingly lame dress-up scene is less so. Getting creative with the designs of the zombies is where this franchise makes its bread and butter; but setting most of the narrative away from those zombies is deeply questionable at best. Hiring CW grade writers for the show really just underlines the sort of audience you expect to be drawn to this; and I'm not sure if it's the same audience that are into a franchise as old as 'Resident Evil'.

I get it, I really do; there's that expectation among these TV producers that the fans of video games are others from the regular TV watching society. They're social awkward shut-ins who haven't seen the light of day for years and, as I sit here looking at my own drawn curtains, there is some truth to that; but there's also truth to the fact that quality tends to transcend audience barriers. You make a product that is good, and it will spread to people who aren't typically interested in that type of content. You make something that's bad, and it might just repel the people who typically are. Netflix has been immune to good or bad show production over the years, pumping out so much content that they honestly needed to bring the axe to some of their great ongoing shows for fear of running out of advertising space on their budget sheets. But now, with tighter belts, reputation is going to have more of a sting for the Netflix boys, and a pig's sty of a show like RE ain't going to be long for the world as it might once have been.

The problem with game adaptations are two fold; the money men don't want to put in the money and effort to make it work; and the ideas they choose to adapt don't make sense in the first place. They want to do a Metal Gear Solid movie? Why, so that we get an action-packed romp full of moments where Snake fails at being sneaky? A Last of Us show? So that the game which was designed to feel like a movie can be reverted into being a long form movie? Progressing us... backwards, then? And don't get me started on the Uncharted movie; I've done a whole bloody thesis on how fundamentally hairbrained that concept even was. Every step of the way we have projects destined for a nose dive, such that the community loses their mind when a video game movie manages to be not terrible. Congratulations Sonic the movie, for that most basic of accolades.

The Resident Evil movie franchise may have also been responsible for bastardising the licence so that the director could provide an action vehicle for his wife to star in; but somehow those movies ended up feeling closer the source material than this show ever did. Maybe that's a consequence of those movies actually taking us to areas suffering from a zombie apocalypse, rather than a high school where the characters get bullied. God; there was so much potential for a show like this... Imagine if they had just jumped in at a period right adjacent to the games? We could have done vampires and werewolves and mold monsters and all that cool stuff! Instead we got mediocrity. And cancellation. Well deserved, I might add.

The producer of the show, who also worked on Supernatural, almost seemed eager to egg on this projects demise. Before the first series was even out he was doing interviews talking about how he wanted this show to go on longer than Supernatural, "Resident Evil 10 seasons, Resident Evil a Hundred seasons." He was talking doing Lady D and Las Plagas; but only as a reward for enduring ten or so seasons of tepid crap, and I'm sorry but that's not how it works. If you can't deliver something palatable for the first dish, why the hell would I stick around for the thirtieth course? The man was begging to have the show cancelled. And now it is. Another death knell in the Netflix catalogue proving that the 'quantity over quality' model really is a losers game. But hey, maybe they'll be hope for the Fallout series? >Groan<.

Is Sonic Prime going to be everything that it could be?

 Prime-time worthy?

It's funny considering that I have such a truncated history with the Sonic franchise as a whole, that the majority of my familiarity of the Sonic character was formed through my attachment to ancillary media, à la the Sonic TV shows. Sure, I mean I played Sonic Adventure 1 back in the day, but the 2D games were ancient history by the time I was picking up the controller, and the Sonic community always seemed so cannibalistic, always fighting itself, that it never really appealed to me to become part of all that noise. And yet with that otherwise passing interest, some shade of child me was ecstatic when he heard about the 4kids version of Sonic X that would be coming to my TV screen. It wasn't because I was a fan of the Sonic games in particular, but because I was fans of games in general, and this was the first time I saw the medium I loved coming to the rest of the world in a serious manner. (Of course it was far from the first time this had ever happened, but I'm equating my own perspective for measurement's sake.)

I was there the night Sonic X first launched for us over in England, and I refused to miss a single episode; I loved that show far more than it deserves to be loved for what it was. (Not that it was bad; but it wasn't 'Avatar: The Legend of Aang' or anything.) So inexplicably, for means I don't quite understand myself, Sonic on TV has been important to my entertainment enjoying life. Since then I've looked back and experienced some of his previous outings from the distant hill of retrospect. The original 'Sonic the Hedgehog' from 93 which was... one of the shows ever made. Sonic SatAM (As it's dubbed by the community to differentiate it from the 93 show) which holds easily the best worldbuilding the franchise has had outside the comics. (Haven't read the comics, can't compare them.) 'Sonic Underground', where they turned it into a musical with instruments and Sonic's two surprise siblings and a royal mother who never features and- look it was bad, okay. And then 'Sonic Boom', the show to coincide with the series reboot which was easily the best thing to come out of the whole affair (before both it and the reboot were scrapped) but it was still... very safe, you know?

After all this time and all these reiterations of the Sonic brand, I guess I'm past the point where the novelty of seeing the blue blur on screen is going to excite me. And so I should be, a lot of these shows have been aimed at younger generations than I, who demand less from their entertainment, I know this. But I'm not asking for 'Teen Titans' quality kids showmaking either, (Although I wouldn't begrudge such a high standard being routinely matched) all I want is the potential we all see in the Sonic brand being met- or at least scratched! We talking about a world full with anthropomorphic animals with crazy colours, personalities and powers; there have been dozens of great fictional worlds built from less than that, from Zootopia to Adventure Time to even 'MLP:FIM', according to that show's fanbase. Sonic can facilitate more than the bottom of the barrel, problem-of-the-week style world and storytelling which has become so lame in the modern TV world.

And my intentions are selfish, I admit. I want a Sonic series to create a world for the timeless Sonic characters to inhabit because I want that world to rub off onto the games that are in constant need of it. The Sonic universe, as it exists currently in the games, is contradictory and paperthin at the best of times, flaccid and utterly uninteresting at the worst. Heck, the series can't even decide on what the population of the world makeup is! 'Sonic Forces' makes direct reference to the fact that it's within the same canon as 'Sonic Adventure' with the appearance and affirmative acknowledgement of Chaos. ("Mom says it's my turn to kill chaos") But then if that's true, why the heck are the streets of Sonic Forces' City lined with only animal people when in 'Sonic Adventure' Station Square had primarily human occupants aside from the main cast? Is there some sort of definitive global segregation between the species of humans and humanoid animals? A apartheid analogy so blown up that the disparate races are forbidden to their own separate cities on other continents? And if so, then what of the human cities? We only see Mobians being saved from destruction in Forces, so did the resistance just sit back and watch the Human population of their world be enslaved and/or exterminated by Infinite's armies? Am I thinking about this way too much and the answer is merely that no person on Sonic Team has spent more than 30 minutes on a script? Yes.

I want a better world for Sonic. I want the bones for a great 3D Sonic game somewhere down the line with stakes and consequence and maybe some level design. (Lord knows after 'Forces' the series could do with some level design!) And is Sonic Prime going to help provide those bones in order to grow a working franchise body from? Probably not, but we can lie to ourselves if it makes us feel better. One of the few original shows that Netflix hasn't abruptly cancelled once it realised that it's trajectory of eternal growth seems to be trailing off several years before they expected, Sonic Prime has kept much of the details surrounding it's content infuriatingly secret in the months we've been waiting for the thing. Even as we sit now, with an officially released preview, it's hard to scourge the slightest morsel of substantive knowledge from this crow's feast of a carcass, but if we're to go cadaver diving in order to pre-empt this show than just let me grab my gloves!

Off the bat I'm not hopeful I'll exactly get the dream I was searching for, but the show does look like the game, which is certainly fulfilling someone's fantasy. The checkerboard texture for the dirt of the hills, the floating rings scattered across the land, and a generally one-to-one depiction of 3D era Sonic. (No inexplicable scarf redesign here.) But they've also taken certain liberties here and there which are no doubt going to be hit or miss for certain sectors of the audience. Namely, Sonic's run cycle which turns his legs into a infinity symbol but leaves the top half his body just hanging limply on top, kind of like Big Wheel from 'Robots'. (Never thought I'd unironically be making a 'Robots' reference literally ever, but there we are.) I think it looks kind of stupid.

Sonic is also undergoing a change of the guard in the voicing department, with this new guy, Deven Mack, being another in a long line of voice actors all attempting to perform the same cocksure, attitudinal-but-still-approachable voice. He sounds fine. Right now the only question I have is what is going to be done with this series in order to make it watchable, because honestly it can go any which way. I've stated my presence for at least semi-serialised stories that build a stable world, but I'm not getting that vibe from the little we've seen. (It is a little, I hasten to add. So I could be wrong.) Heck, I don't even know what genre of fan they're appealing to, what with the background and running sprite being indicative of the 2D era and the bigger spikes and green eyes of the Hedgehog from the 3D era. (Generations and Forces taught us well that the two sides of the fandom can never and should never crossover.)

As such I'm left with a prevailing aura of trepidation, but a general idea of 'who knows'. Sega have demonstrated time and time again that they don't know how to reach the Sonic fanbase, and are maybe even a little scared to try, which could be great or terrible for this show. Either Sega are so scared that they've got their reigns all over this show and won't allow it to do anything not in line with the handful of Sonic games that fans haven't decided that they hate yet, or they're too scared to touch the show and we might get someone with a vision guiding the ship. I'm amenable to being treated with a show I don't expect, and as long as it's good, I'll watch. So please be good, Sonic Prime; the Sonic franchise needs a win right now. 

Cowboy Bebop

 I'm not normal

Blah blah, gaming blog whilst this has absolute no ties to gaming, blah blah, influenced certain genres of game, blah blah. Now that's out of the way, who watched the classic jazzy noir sci-fi anime Cowboy Bebop? Even if you haven't I betting that you've heard of it. It's like Akira or Fist of the North Star, just another classic Anime that world needs you to know about in order for you to exist on it for anytime whatsoever. I say this when, if I'm being honest, most of today's kid's first introduction to this world would have been through this simply stellar video by famed meme-poster voice actor 'Gianni Matragrano'. (To be clear, none of those lines are from the actual show. Spike is- he's not like that. I swear.) I've touched on the show a bit, even watched an episode or two, so imagine my surprise when I woke up one day to find a trailer for this show in the live action which both looked good but still confused me. I was conflicted.

Which isn't to say that I didn't know that this Netflix show was coming, it's just one of those things that you hear about but don't think anything substantial will come of it. Like the Dune movie which took thirty years but is now finally out, or that Uncharted movie which feels like is took just as long but is on it's way, or how about that Lord of Rings Reboot which is just around the corner. (Wow, a lot of these projects are finally get off the ground this year, this must be the promised time) Not even when I read the several reports I heard about the casting of Faye Valentine driving up some controversy for some reason or other, did I stop to actually acknowledge "Okay, this thing is definitely happening." Afterall, we saw leaked cast photos, read a terrible script, and got everything short of a release schedule for the CW Powerpuff Girls show, but now one of the main cast has dropped out so that's in the air. I thought, heck that could happen to Cowboy Bebop, no need to acknowledge this. But here we are.

So in typical Netflix fashion we've been treated to a trailer that will follow a speedy release window and alls left to ask from here is "Is the thing going to be any good"? 5 years ago that would have been a pretty definitive 'no', as a Sci-fi show is just too high budget to be anything less than a sweeping opera and trying to put a Noir world in that space would never secure enough studio budget to do the idea justice. But this is Netflix we're dealing with and they have a brand defined by putting down their money where others would just walk by for the sheer purpose of securing those rare break away success stories. You can always count on something cool coming out of the Netflix lineup, but then they'll throw something like 'Another Life' at you so that you get thrown off guard as it becomes clear that not everything they do is destined to be a knockout. And then there's inbetween shows like The Witcher. Where does Cowboy fall?

At a glance I have to say I'm feeling a show that seems closer to the Witcher in terms of quality for the moment, which makes sense given that the source material is littered with cool concepts and visuals that would either be too expensive or just straight confusing to translate 1-to-1. As a compromise we have a fairly decent looking Sci-Fi world when it comes to the Space ships and the overtly advanced tech, but anything on the ground feels almost oppressively ordinary and tied to this world. There's none of the vast space wild west vibe from the show maintained here, which I suppose keeps the vibe of the show open to new comers but it feels like a missed opportunity to make this show really stand out. Maybe they just needed a more ambitious cinematography team working on the project over here, who can really say for sure?

Speaking of jarring elements, I really wasn't expecting this show to be in English. I know that seems absolutely hair-brained when you consider that this is Netflix's latest big push project, and not just a show that they happen to host which accidentally became bigger than any expected. (Like Squid Game) Alongside the fact that the Dub of Cowboy Bebop is actually very widely known and loved, and Spike's English voice is iconic. Even with all that I just wasn't expecting an English show, which shows how out-of-touch I am with reality, I suppose. Going past that I can say that I think the cast seem to fit the show very well for the most part, Spike's hair isn't quite as glorious as I would have shot for, but that sort of physics denial isn't really possible in the real world so apart from that he seems fine. Jet Black seems perfect, the second I saw him I felt that character shining through. Only Faye Valentine confused me until I literally saw her in the outfit and put 2-and-2 together. (At least it's better sight-cast than Uncharted is.)

For me my hope with this series is that they both realise and play towards the strengths they have on deck, namely that they should play to style and character over action and, unfortunately, visuals. I don't think the visuals are going to stun for this show, they'll make decent backgrounds but they should keep there with any luck. And the action, although remember I'm judging this purely from the trailer, looks a tiny bit sluggish and disingenuously coordinated. Fight choreography probably isn't going to be going up for any rewards if this footage is indicative of the rest of the show. But that's just fine, because a Cowboy Bebop show doesn't need to hit perfection on either of those to capture the spirit of the original, style is it's most important commodity and the Netflix show at least hints towards that so far. What would help a lot more would be if they actually managed to snag some of the original soundtrack, but I guess that's an ask too far.

When looking at a show like this I can't help but shake the lingering questions of what this would all look like had they gone all in on a Jojo's Bizarre Adventure live action show, although in all honestly that'd probably never get a go-ahead at an English production studio for the simple translation problems. (What producer is going to read the word 'muda' several hundred times in a script without then setting it on fire?) And I think that if I were to be looking at a trailer for JoJo and it was of this comparative quality, I'd be very on the fence about it. Everything seems to teeter on the edge of effortless cool and hackneyed trite, which I suppose is the gamble you take whenever a Noir story is on the docket. I feel a little like Mister Blonde in declaring that this is either going to be a total disaster or a masterpiece, but the slightest bit of nuance comes for the assertion that I think this show is going to hit one extreme or the other. Right now I'm not expecting great things, but Netflix has surprised me before. (And disappointed me. You never know with these guys.)

At the very least if the Netflix guys stick to working with what they have in front of them and don't start trailing off on their own 'new adventures' or anything like that, I think they have a fighting chance of pulling all of this together into something watchable. If the team start getting it in their heads that they can write better than the source material, then we should probably start the exercises for completely forgetting the existence of this show as expediently as possible. As for whether I actually want this to succeed, as a piece of media I want to watch it so I hope that it's good, but then I know that success invites so many more imitators who will invariably screw up the franchises they try to adapt, so maybe it would be better for everyone if this does suck. (There, then this whole situation is a win-win in my head. I did it.)

 

Erica and the rise of the interactive story

Working through the night to the rising sun.

Not too long ago there were the whispers of a trend on the horizon for modern day storytelling, and though it's difficult to predict, I feel it may be starting to come true. As you can likely presume given this title, I am referring to the rise of interactive story telling across the media world. By this I specifically mean the type of stories where the audience are able to make key decisions which influence the direction of the narrative or the decisions that people within that narrative make. When done poorly this can come off as a gimmicky affair, with little substance being added to the story, but done right and it can make for a deeply engrossing and involving experience wherein the audience feel deeply connected to the story that they helped to tell. It goes without saying that crafting such a network of narrative tangents is never easy but it has been interesting to see more and more folk give it a swing in nowadays and I'm starting to wonder if taking on this challenging endeavour has the potential to become a bit of a trend.

 Now of course, Interactive storytelling is not in itself a new concept, even outside of the world of gaming. Taking the concept to it's most basic, one could claim the the original 'Interactive Stories' were actually those 'Choose your own adventure' books from back in the day. From the late seventies to the late nineties there were oodles of these storybooks in which the direction of the title character was at the total discretion of the reader. (and the scenarios that the author could envision.) Since then the concept went beyond that series of books and has been used on a number of properties throughout the years for no reason more than it is a concept which people enjoy and resonate with. (In fact, I used to own a Doctor Who themed CYOA book when I was a child.) Of course, there is only so far that such a concept can travel on print, so once people realised that the same idea could be bought to life with computer programs it only made since to give it a go.

These sorts of 'games' are most commonly labelled as 'text based adventures' and easily the most famous of them would be the Zork series. These programs were revolutionary for their time as they painted a world for the player all through purely text descriptors and allowed them to navigate through that word with typed prompts. Others had tried some similar programs before, but Zork was the first to really test the limits of what a text parser was capable of with complex algorithms able to recognise a decent number of permutations. (making the process of play less frustrating.) Zork would take players through a fantasy adventure experience and in recent years there have been countless odes to this genre of game design (Both 'Call of Duty: Black Ops' and 'Saints Row 4' had direct references to it.) as well as new genres broached using it. (I find that the horror genre tends to get the most mileage out of it)

All this takes us to the modern day, wherein 'interactive stories' is a term no longer used to refer to literature or text based adventures, but for high quality snippets of visual entertainment. For me the best example of this evolution would be a little title from last year called 'Erica'. Now, usually I use the term 'little' ironically for a game that you've obviously heard of, (Yep, my obsessive compulsive sarcasm is so bad that I don't ever deploy it cleverly anymore.) but for Erica I'll say there's a least a good chance that you haven't seen it. That's a shame too, because Erica is clearly quite the passion project with a lot of heart behind it and I think there's something quite special there. That isn't to say the 'game' isn't without its problems, just that it is something that should have been explored by more people. (Especially since the developers, Flavourworks, seem to have labelled themselves "World leaders in live action video games." With such high self-attributed praise like that, you know they're worth paying attention to!)

Erica is a live action interactive story that follows the tale of a young, perpetually confused, girl played by Holly Earl who appears to be suffering even now from the murder of her father several years prior. The mysterious details around the tragedy and the weird cult-ish vibe that her Father gave off still resonates with her up until her young adulthood. Only then do the consequences start to catch up to her in a very real way as Erica finds herself being threatened by an unknown assailant and ends up under incredibly flimsy police protection. The rest of the story revolves around Erica trying her damnedest to piece together exactly what's going on and, more importantly, what her role to play in all this is. So there it is; vague but a concept that could hold some promise as an investigative thriller. The problems come a little bit from the execution which takes the player a bit too close to the main protagonist so that the audience becomes disorientated every time there is a sudden time jump or scene transition, which can make it hard to focus on the narrative; but apart from that the whole thing is rather fun to play through.

From the surface, Erica looks to have enough quality of technology and equipment to stand toe-to-toe with decent budget TV shows and that makes one wonder if this is the trajectory that such interactive ventures are destined to head in. Heck, if one of these projects receives funding and support from a major publisher could we one day be looking at a multi-path Hollywood-level interactive story with the budget to match the latest summer blockbuster? Maybe, provided that Hollywood even survives this lost summer. (Just kidding. Maybe.) In fact, we've already seen this sort of project poked at by the mainstream through an interactive project that received considerably more press; 2018's 'Black Mirror: Bandersnatch'.

Now Bandersnatch is no masterpiece, (as I don't think any of these projects are, it's just the baby steps of a genre finding it's footing) but it certainly cannot be overlooked how much of a pop culture event this little interactive story was; especially in comparison to it's video game contemporaries. When Netflix first dropped Bandersnatch it became the talk of the video streaming world, which made it the cool thing to get behind. The main stream media would even mention Bandersnatch and TV show sites would cover it's success, completely oblivious to how close this piece of media was to the dreaded video game world. (Didn't they know that video games turn people into serial killers?) Off the back of Bandersnatch, Netflix went so far as to launch an entire Interactive section to their streaming service which... two years later still barely has anything on it, but the infrastructure is there for anyone to step into and make something special out of.

And I think that's what will eventually start happening given the popularity that such stories have exuded even outside of the mainstream cadre of content developers. Take YouTube for example, who just last year decided to advertise and recommend an independent CYOA-style series of YouTube video's made my YouTuber: Markiplier. That series, 'A Heist with Markiplier', makes use of YouTube annotations to simulate the ability to make decisions in the story and veer off the beaten path, with the added bonus that, due to the nature of this story, all of these permutations are wild, funny and unexpected. The series itself proved to be quite popular as well, with the introductory video boasting 16 million views as of the writing of this blog, so it seems there's something of an audience for Heist/Adventure/Horror/Post-Apocalyptic/Musical/Choose-Your-Own-Adventure extravaganzas!

With the surprise resurrection of 'The Wolf Among Us', the inexplicable popularity of 'Life is Strange Series 2', and the building anticipation for this year's 'Dark Picture Anthology: Little Hope', it's clear that the interactive story genre has a place amidst all the high-octane demon decapitating action and the... whatever it is you people do in 'Animal Crossing: New Horizons'. Erica's relative unseen splash into the market may seem like a bit of a failure, but I feel there's too much promise in such an idea for things to be left there and I expect to see interactive stories take on a whole new life of their own in the coming generation. (That generation is still coming right? I feel like nothing is certain anymore...)

Resident Evil + Netflix? Yes Please!

I'll show you Tyrant!

Welcome back to the Resident Evil blog wherein I talk exclusively about Resident Evil and nothing else. I swear that I'm not going out of my way to look for these stories, they are literally just falling into my lap. That was very much the case with today's blog for which I've managed to get myself all hot and bothered over something that never usually grabs my fancy; a prospective Netflix series. The Witcher show tickled my a bit last year and the Tom Holland led Uncharted movie has me worried, (Uncharted is literally a video game version of Indiana Jones, what's the point of turning it back into a movie?) but a Resident Evil series is so far up my alley that it ain't even funny. I'm down for that prospect so badly that I'm about to start my withdrawal sweats soon if I don't get any information on this series.

As far as I can tell, this announcement was originally made by way of 'leak' on one of Netflix's sites. This was soon followed by an official announcement which was resplendent in vague-ries and now people are going back to that original leak in order to get some vague details to shift through. (People are still throwing the term 'Leak' to describe this entire show, but I believe that the show itself is confirmed.) The real thing which makes me giggle is the apparent fact that an establishing synopsis was published, taken down, and then recovered by the audience using the Wayback Machine. (I knew that domain would come in handy one day!) From all of this subterfuge around the title, I think it's fair to say that the project is likely still in early stages, maybe without a cast and full crew, but I hope the bevy of excitement this announcement has sparked has encouraged Netflix not to let this potential series pass them by. (Don't let this project enter the same development hell vortex that Uncharted is stuck in!)

The Metro covered the pertinent information succinctly, whilst simultaneously alerting me to the existence of a reboot for the Resident Evil movies coming down the line. (I am loving this revival of all things Resident Evil.) Most interesting off-the-bat is the news that this series will not be remaking any of the game's plots but will instead be taking a brand new story with, presumably, brand new characters. (Which is good because as far as I'm concerned Jordan Mcewen is Claire to me now, I will except no substitutes.) This series will take the form of a 8-episode limited series that will 'expand the Resident Evil Universe'. (I cannot adequately express how much warmth that statement fills me with.)

As for the specifics we learnt from the leaks, we actually have a full synopsis to chew over until things get serious for the production. Apparently this series will take place in a town called Clearfield, Maryland, which is a location that has never been explored before in Resident Evil. The synopsis also name-drops three notable landmarks around this town from Washington, D.C., the decommissioned Greenwood Asylum and, of course, the Umbrella Corporation. (I hear they're the area's biggest taxpayers.) Greenwood Asylum is similarly somewhere new for the franchise, but an abandoned insane asylum always makes great fodder for horror stories so I'm happy to sit and watch this play-out.

The next part of the synopsis is where I have to disagree with Metro, as the details read, "Today, twenty-six years after the discovery of the T-Virus, secrets held by the three will start to be revealed at the first signs of an outbreak." Now Micheal, the architect of this article, took this to mean that series would take place in the early 90's, and I can see why he would assume that. A quick google search will tell anyone that the T-Virus was technically developed in the late 1960's and the mention of 'first signs of the outbreak' would imply that this story takes place early on in the series. This would put this series at the earliest point of any game in the franchise as even Resident Evil 0 took place in 1996 less than one week before the first game.

Now I hate to be the nerdy one, but if we're being 'technical' then it would behove us to acknowledge two things; firstly that the T virus wasn't 'discovered' as much as it was created, and secondly how it wasn't known as the T virus until the events of Resident Evil 1. Fans of the franchise will definitely know how the Resident Evil franchise boasts a whole alphabet's worth of virus strains (Most of which don't even really turn folk into zombies) but the T-virus was not the original strain from which they all spread. (Actually, if we're being obnoxiously specific than we'd have to point out that the future variants actually spread from the G-Virus after it was stolen by, series asshole, Ada Wong. But that's neither here nor there.) The thing that we should remember is what we learnt about in Resident Evil 0, namely the existence of 'The Progenitor Virus.' (Which, from it's name alone, implies that it predated the T-virus.)

Bearing that in mind would mean that this series would actually take place 26 years from the creation of the first T-virus, (in the seventies) or perhaps the discovery of the T-virus to the general public, in 1996. Assuming it's the latter (because I think that would be more interesting) would place this new series 2 years into the future in 2022. Now, I understand why people would assume this series would take place in the 90's, afterall the last two games came out there; but they need to remember that those two titles are remakes and Capcom is hard at work trying to start a whole new narrative in the modern day. Simultaneously to working on the 'Resident Evil 3: Remake', Capcom is working on 'Resident Evil 8', and I personally feel like there's a lot more gaps for telling a story around the later games than there is for telling a story around the earlier ones. However, one would have to bear in mind that the Umbrella corporation doesn't quite exist in the modern day, so we'd have to interpret the synopsis as referring to the abandoned facilities of a former Umbrella laboratories. (There's mental gymnastics to be made either way.)

As you can probably tell by now, I love Resident Evil and will take any opportunity to ramble on about it, even if that's just to split hairs about a potential leak for a Netflix series. Given the ending of The Walking Dead, I'm all on-board for something new that'll hopefully avoid the long stretches of boring that the TWD series fell for. (Being an 8 part limited series will certainly help for that.) This is the thing I've been waiting for ever since I first heard about 'The Umbrella Chronicles' and learnt how that series wasn't connected to Resident Evil. (Yes, I know it's supposed to be a good show. I'm just still disappointed that it wasn't what I expected.) I'm positive that this franchise can make it on the silver screen (Without Milla Jovovich) and I can't wait for this show to prove that to the rest of the world. This is the sort of gaming-TV crossover that I want more of, not those redundant regresses like the impending 'Metal Gear Solid movie' and the aforementioned 'Uncharted project'. Here's to RE and the prospect of moving forward with storytelling, not backwards.