The Newsroom: “News Night 2.0” Review

Note: Full spoilers for the episode follow.

The plot of tonight's episode, “News Night 2.0,” largely centered on Will McAvoy (Jeff Daniels) and his news team attempting to reboot their show with a stronger emphasis on actual reporting and educated opinion, and less pop culture fluff and human interest stories. Unfortunately, things don't go as planned with the first episode of the rebooted series, and McAvoy ends up with a rather botched, embarrassing episode on his hands. Meanwhile, Mackenzie McHale (Emily Mortimer) accidentally sends an email to her whole staff informing them of her previous relationship with Will.

Good old Aaron Sorkin. You gotta love his lightning-fast dialogue and token wit. It was really on display tonight. “News Night 2.0” had a lot of ground to cover, with numerous subplots, new characters introduced (namely Olivia Munn, who gets some decent screen time), new news stories and new business to attend to. Speed was an absolute necessity here. Quite shockingly, even with the heavy story elements, the episode was really more about establishing character – specifically that of Will McAvoy and Maggie Jordan (Allison Pill).

Despite a liberal tone and general demeanor, it turns out McAvoy is a card-carrying member of the Republican party, with rather strong feelings about the party's many issues, and the misguided direction of politics as a whole. It would seem Sorkin made him a Republican to oppose those who would inevitably argue against the show's politics, and he made the right call.

Making McAvoy some sort of liberal messiah wasn't the right direction for the character, and the subtle insinuation McAvoy's beliefs are actually right-of-center adds a particularly interesting flavor to the overall narrative, not to mention his character. Hopefully it will help shape (and shake up) the show's central thesis as the series continues.

Alas, because of the somewhat contrived email story, we also delve a bit deeper in McAvoy's tainted relationship with Mackenzie – a plot thread that I worry will inevitably dominate the show in episodes to come. With clear shades drawn from the romantic elements of Studio 60, Sorkin is basically borrowing from himself here, recycling a story we've all seen before. It's cute and sometimes really funny, to be sure, but the whole “my boss is my former lover” subplot is a rather dry well, one I hope Sorkin only dips into for the first few episodes before moving on.

The rest of episode focused on Maggie Jordan who, through a mishap with a press liaison she once had a relationship with, is responsible for the botched first episode of News Night 2.0. Unfortunately, the show once again borrows a few cues from Studio 60 to get its point across. Thankfully, unlike Studio 60 – a quick little series that took a sketch comedy show and treated it like it was something of great political importance – The Newsroom actually has a much greater purpose in mind: to realign and refocus TV news journalism for the better.

Like the McAvoy plot, sadly, Maggie's story is also bogged down by relationship turmoil. The seed of a budding love triangle between her, Jim Harper (John Gallagher Jr.) and Don (Thomas Sadoski) is planted, which could prove ugly as the season progresses. However, where the McAvoy/Mackenzie relationship feels a tad stale, the Maggie/Jim/Don story does provide some freshness, mostly thanks to Pill's charmingly high-strung performance and Gallagher's low-key Clark Kent appeal. Only time will tell if this relationship will grow dull and tiresome, impeding on the show's true message, or whether it will somehow tie into the central thesis of the series.

I rather like how this show is shaping up thus far. In a world of corrupted TV news journalism, where news and slanted opinion change between networks (and sponsors), the idea of a news program that only delivers a sense of intelligence, integrity and purified news is downright novel.

On that same level, even shows critical of sensationalized, sanitized journalism like The Daily Show resort to some of the same tactics, wild theories and sensationalism they often heavily mock. Could a show like News Night really exist with TV journalism spiraling in the direction it's been for over a decade now? I hope Sorkin can answer that question throughout the series and – like News Night 2.0 – focus a little less on the fluff and human interest stories along the way.

Source : ign[dot]com

Weeds: "Messy" Review

Note: Full spoilers for the Weeds: Season 8 premiere follow.

I wonder how many mock Tweets we might see tonight saying, "Holy balls! Someone shot my aunt! Seriously!" (A visual joke I thought was pretty awesome)

We’ve reviewed Weeds off and on here at IGN through the years. There wasn't quite enough interest of late to continue weekly reviews, but now that we know Season 8 is indeed the final one for the show, I thought a season premiere review was appropriate – and certainly I’ll be reviewing the finale. And we’ll see if perhaps some reviews might pop up in-between…

I know plenty of people who haven’t really liked this show for several seasons, though personally, I still enjoy it. It’s not as strong as it was in the early years, certainly, but I still find it continually entertaining. The opening credits of the season premiere, bringing back “Little Boxes,” were wonderful, showing us, via animation, the history of the show. If nothing else, I have been impressed at how Weeds has reinvented itself over and over, changing settings and scenarios in a way few other shows have ever dared.

As for the premiere itself, it was a solid one. Nancy being the one to get shot was a good choice – the reveal of her with the blood running down her face was suitably shocking and I kind of love that she has now managed the Beatrix Kiddo-like feat of surviving a bullet in the head (come on – she’s obviously going to survive). I was sure that if someone was shot and killed, it would be Jill (I figured the regulars were safe and one of the kids would be too cruel), but Nancy herself being shot simply makes sense – as Shane and Silas noted later, discussing the semi-inevitability of something like this happening. The one funny thing about Nancy being in a coma though was that Mary-Louise Parker had so little to do after the first few minutes, literally just laying there. I'm guessing that'll change next week though.

Nancy Botwin: Human Target

This being the final season (even if they didn’t know 100% when they began filming), I’m not too surprised to see Andy’s feelings for Nancy rise up again – especially given the circumstances. And his scene with the chaplain/rabbi was a really good one, as he talked about his confusion, especially about what he’d do with his life without Nancy. And in the meantime, he's screwing Jill again, because, well, she'll have sex with him and Nancy's never been willing to go there. Oh, Andy...

The scene with Doug feeling up and peaking down the shirt of a comatose Nancy was pretty freaking gross. Yeah, Doug is Doug, but that was a pretty nasty place to go with a guy painted more as a lovable loser than, you know, a potential rapist – the fact that he was interrupted as he began to undo her clothes made it seem like he might doing more than Jenji Kohan intended… though hell, maybe she did intend it!

Another scene that just fell flat for me were the idiot cops showing up at the Botwins. They simply felt too cartoonish (Shane having to chastise them for standing in Nancy’s blood?!), on the heels of the already-goofy elderly neighbors.

However, the end reveal of just who it was that shot Nancy was a lot of fun. We’d already had Silas and Shane take us down memory lane, naming a ton of characters from the past who would have vendettas against Nancy. But no, I didn’t think of Tim Scottson, the son of the late DEA agent Peter Scottson. Yeah, they kind of had to do those quick flashbacks so we'd know who he was, given Daryl Sabara (Spy Kids) is so much older and bigger now, but the realization of who he was in the show’s history was quite a nice way to bring up events from Weeds’ history as we heard towards the end – in a season I would expect will continue to delve into Nancy’s past.

Oh, and two specific jokes I want to note: I have snarked quite a bit about the overabundance of the word vagina on every other comedy series this past year. Well, call me a hypocrite, because I laughed a lot at the whole “vaginal weight” bit – look, adding the word “weight” makes it a different thing!

Lastly, as a Jew who eats cheeseburgers and has had my share of Christmas trees, I appreciated Andy remarking that perhaps Nancy did finish converting to Judaism if she does those things.

Source : ign[dot]com

Falling Skies: "Young Bloods" Review

Note: Full spoilers for the episode follow.

Matt’s need to get himself in serious trouble is unrivaled. At this point, I’m more worried about Matt’s thirst for danger than Ben’s strange connection with the Skitters. Either way, Tom needs to teach his two younger children some discipline, something that isn’t necessarily the easiest thing to do in a world gone to hell. Matt has proven that he isn’t ready for any sort of mission so I’m hoping Tom keeps him out of harm’s way for now. I’m still not exactly sure why Tom, who has been very protective of Matt thus far, would suddenly let his youngest son go out on a mission without him. I’d rather not see Matt used as a plot device to setup a rescue every week. Maybe next season, kid.

As for Ben, this is the first time they’ve started to get his story right. Letting Hal in on Ben’s continued connection with the Skitters expands the story just enough that we can get some dialogue about what Ben is going through. Not surprisingly, Ben is afraid and it’s completely understandable why he doesn’t want to talk to anyone about his condition. But just like Matt, some bad decision making is undoubtedly going to get the 2nd Mass in trouble at some point down the line. I’d rather Hal make the right call and talk to Tom or Weaver, but I’ll be surprised if either happens, which is a shame because it could save a lot of people a headache, not to mention a few lives, down the line. Needless to say, if Hal wants to look out for his brother, he’d talk to someone.

Maybe the Skitters have put something into the air to make anyone under a certain age do something stupid that will lead to them getting caught? That’s what happens to the entire group that goes on a rescue mission to save a few kids from being harnessed. Weaver’s daughter, Jeanie, calls her father out on being a control freak prior to the mission. Well, stupid is still stupid, even after aliens have invaded the planet, and while Weaver isn’t the best of leaders, his idea of ‘formulating a plan’ before running into the alien facility made a lot of sense. It’s another frustrating situation of people not thinking things through. Weaver may have let his anger get the best of him, but he was absolutely right and I’m not sure why it was such a stretch for his daughter or even Diego to agree with him. Waiting five minutes more could have led to a completely different situation.

This series, and this episode in particular, are trying to stress the struggles of raising a family in the aftermath of an alien invasion. Still, there are logical leaps and some decisions being made that can be infuriating as a viewer. Diego’s decision to go in without a plan, Ben deciding to keep his situation quiet, Tom letting Matt go out on a mission and even Diego’s entire group leaving at the end all seem like the wrong decision in service of the plot. Obviously, this isn’t the last we’ve seen of Diego’s group or Ben’s situation as they are setting something big up down the line, but to get there we’re seeing some infuriatingly poor decision making. Not as infuriating as some of the decisions made in The Walking Dead Season 2, but still frustrating.

Despite my frustrations with some decisions being made, there are a few great moments that salvage this episode. Matt being used as bait did lead to a gruesome scene with two Skitters having their heads blown off. Matt covered in blood was a great visual as well.

The entire scene within the harness facility was creepy. We got to see the harness slugs moving a lot more than we have previously. Seeing one of them actually be applied was handled really well as we got to see the entire thing from Matt’s perspective. It’s an incredibly frightening scenario for a small child to have to go through and I thought the scene did a great job of capturing that. The rest of the rescue was pretty much by the numbers. I’d love to know how they got by the mechs but I’m going to assume that’s a budget saving measure. It will be interesting to see if there is any fallout from Weaver being bitten by a harness slug.

Both Weaver and Tom experience some tough family moments. At the end of the day Tom is at least able to still have his sons while Weaver is left with a note from his daughter who decides to leave with her boyfriend. I tend to give Weaver a hard time but he gets the short end of the stick this week. I get the sense the writers like dragging Weaver through the mud as much as possible. The pain killers last season, the death of Jimmy and now having him reunite with his daughter only to take her away in the span of an episode. His emotional breakdown at the end of the episode was well-earned and I’m starting to like the character a lot more this season.

Source : ign[dot]com

HD Remakes: Blessing or Bore?

One of the biggest trends in games over the last few years has been the HD remake phenomenon. Bringing games from previous generations back with high resolution visuals and other modern bells and whistles sounds like a great way to celebrate gaming past, but not everyone sees it that way. IGN AU’s Cam Shea and Adam Guetti fight it out.

For those that can't be bothered reading the text.

Adam: Nostalgia. As a gamer it’s that incredible feeling that turns our insides fuzzy after booting up an old classic and re-entering a simpler time. Yet, while we love to experience its warm embrace, is nostalgia actually beneficial for the gaming industry’s future? At the moment, I’m simply not convinced. I've tried ignoring it, but I just can’t shake the nagging feeling that, over the last few years, developers and publishers have begun exploiting this powerful emotion as both an easy means to an end as well as a tool for increasing their yearly release number. Where do you stand on the issue Cam?

Cam: Well, there are a few different ways of looking at the idea of nostalgia in games today. Personally I think that evoking nostalgia through a mix of old school game design and aesthetics with modern production values - think Super Meat Boy, Cave Story or New Super Mario Bros. - is a brilliant way to celebrate the heritage of our industry, and can actually lead to really fresh experiences. I've loved the resurgence of 2D gaming over the last few years. 2D games can have a level of precision and simplicity that leads to incredibly refined gameplay, and they're generally more affordable to make, so taking an old school approach can actually be a great way for indie developers to get a start in the industry.

That said, I don't think that's the nostalgia that you're driving at. What you're talking about is that you're sick of HD re-releases of old titles, right? Why so? What's so bad about bringing classic games back and putting them in front of today's gamers?

Adam: Yes, it's true - I’m not the biggest fan of the HD re-release. I’ve recently booted up titles like Halo Anniversary, and you know what the one resonating feeling was? Boredom. Sure I’m not necessarily the target demographic, but if a lover of the original like myself isn’t attracted to it, why would the younger generation bother?

The main issue that gets right under my skin though, is that I don’t think these titles are being released to educate those who might have missed them. I see them as a simple and relatively painless solution for an extra cash flow injection. I don’t need to handle Lara Croft’s aged curves. I want the newer, younger model!

Where do you stand on Halo Anniversary?

Cam: I don't really object to developers making the most of the titles in their portfolios. If you've got a classic franchise with an established fan-based, why not give it a new lease on life? Beyond Good & Evil is a perfect example of the benefits of HD remakes. The game did well critically but underperformed at retail on release. It then steadily garnered a reputation as a game that should have been huge but wasn't. It had a stellar rep but Ubisoft didn't see the returns on its quality. An HD re-release is the perfect way to give it another chance, and see if people who missed it the first time around - but had heard about its inherent quality - would put their money where their mouths were.

Where the argument falls down is games with a terrible HD port. It's not actually that simple to take a standard def game and make it look good in high definition. Publishers still need to allocate the time and resources to do it right, and if they don't, it ceases to be a loving re-release and becomes exactly what you're talking about - a grab for cash and a slap in the face for the legacy of the game or series in question. Spending the time re-working the textures, getting the tech right for consistent (or higher) frame rates and going over every element with a critical eye is key.

These titles should be a way for publishers to offer great value for classic gameplay with some (relatively) modern presentation. The God of War Collection and MGS HD releases are examples of HD remakes done right. The Silent Hill HD Collection, on the other hand, SHOULD offer a wealth of gameplay for a very reasonable price, but falls down technically. Sure, everything's in HD, but it’s been executed without sensitivity to the artistry that gave the original games so much atmosphere.

Adam: The God of War Collection might have been done right, but the rabbit hole inevitably leads to the question of ‘why’ these games are really here to begin with? Maybe I’ve become jaded, but I can't ignore the feeling that the principal reason for all these games is to simply fulfil the bottom line. Beyond Good & Evil wasn't given a HD treatment to share the love, but because somewhere, a sequel is in the works. The Silent Hill Collection wasn't an inspired choice that failed at the finish line; it was picked from the stables because Downpour was steadily waiting in the wings.

Ultimately, I know people are willing to buy into the HD hysteria. The sales and number of titles on the horizons proves that. It’s a reality that I understand and am growing to accept. I just refuse to believe that it's all under the guise of celebrating our past and indulging in classic gaming nostalgia for the future generations of gamers. This isn't nostalgia, nor is it the remixed approach we initially discussed. No, this is by-the-books marketing, pure and simple. Even when that might not be the case though, it remains superfluous. Do we really need Zone of the Enders again, for example?

Frankly, it looks like an HD re-release that wasn't all it should have been.

Cam: I'm sure there are quite a few Zone of the Enders fans out there who are absolutely looking forward to that release. And so what if it's marketing? Gaming is a business and almost every decision that gets made is filtered through a series of checks to ensure it either makes money or serves the publisher's interests. Do you think Microsoft greenlit Halo 4 because the company heads have a burning desire to tell more of Master Chief's story? Of course not. That doesn't mean Halo 4 won't be awesome though. It also doesn't mean that HD remakes are nothing but a cash-in. They can be good business, good marketing and good for gamers all at once. Why not bring the Silent Hill games back to build awareness of the new title waiting in the wings? Makes sense to me. As I said earlier, though, the issue is whether they're done well. If they've just been dashed out with as little effort as possible, then I'm with you - they are a cynical marketing and money-making exercise. If they're done well then I have no problem with HD re-releases whatsoever.

Case in point, I reviewed the Ratchet & Clank Trilogy for IGN recently, and had an absolute blast. The gameplay still absolutely stands up, and even though they looked fantastic first time around - and ran at 60fps - I loved playing through them at 1080p. Certainly preferable to simply playing them on PS2. And you know what? It was a great excuse for me to really immerse myself in a classic PS2 franchise that I hadn't really played that thoroughly first time around. I'd already played the Future titles, so this release couldn't have been any more perfect for me. Plus, PS3 faithful get trophy support and those that like playing in 3D can also do that (not that I'd recommend it - the frame rate drops to 30fps and the resolution to 720p). Point is - what harm does bringing Ratchet & Clank back do? It's not like Insomniac worked on this port at the expense of another project - it was handled by another team entirely (Idol Minds). We don't miss out on other games as a result of HD remakes. Final thoughts dude? Have I won you over with my relentless logic?

A re-release done right.

Adam: You may belittle my points, but you will never take my freedom!

Look, if publishers push out HD remakes like Ratchet & Clank that don’t detract from original projects and are handled delicately, I’ll wave my white flag in the air. But the reality is that so many aren’t given the same level of love and care. The Splinter Cell Classic Trilogy was labelled “A slapdash production,” while Resident Evil 4 HD was marred because “Upscaled graphics actually make the environments look worse than they did before” – both comments from this very site.

The Devil May Cry HD Collection may have been another not-so-great re-release, yet DmC on the other hand remains an approach I’m much more interested in. I’ll probably never play the original trilogy in HD, but Ninja Theory’s reboot I’ll surely give a crack. Why? Because it’s an attempt at simultaneously creating a fresh experience for current gamers as well as fans of the series.

Simply put though, don’t hide under the misguided pretence of gaming nostalgia and I’ll be happy. Besides, let’s face it; there may very well be eager Zone of The Enders fans, but I’m also sure there are those counting down the days for Naughty Bear 2. That doesn’t mean it’s necessary.

But hey, enough from us - what do you all think? Hit us with your thoughts below.

Cam Shea is IGN Australia's Senior Editor. You can follow him on IGN here, and join the IGN AU Facebook community here. Adam Guetti is an Aussie freelance games journalist.

Source : ign[dot]com

Beyond: Two Souls' Emotional Sucker Punch

Of Sony’s shooting stars at this year’s E3, Beyond: Two Souls is soaring towards the most ambitious goal: to deliver an emotionally-gripping interactive drama around death. Sony is clearly listening with great intent when Creative Director David Cage says innovation in video game narrative is something “the industry desperately needs.”

Cage has always been a somewhat peerless believer in the narrative power of the medium, but Beyond marks bold territory, even for a guy whose last game featured self-mutilation via quick-time-event. This is a deeply personal project for Cage, sparked by the death of a close family member and a subsequent lack of solace found in traditional religion. The game – centered around 15 years of the life of 'Jodie’ and her relationship with temperamental spirit companion ‘Aiden’ - is a result of his disillusionment and a creative outlet where he could fashion his own ideas about the afterlife.

As one would expect from a central relationship on which to hang such heavy themes, Jodie and Aiden’s relationship is complex and deliberately ambiguous. While we can make assumptions about Aiden’s identity and how he fits into the broader conversation, Cage is not explicit on his character, confirming only that he’s “the person Jodie loves the most and hates the most in the world.”

“He’s much more like a wild animal, you never know what to expect from him. He doesn’t understand the rules in our world. He doesn’t have the same references; he doesn’t understand morals at all. So he’s very possessive with Jodie and wants to keep her for himself, without understanding that this is not what she wants.”

Ethereal link notwithstanding, the pair share an emotional co-dependency.

“Depending on what happens to her in the story, Jodie will sometimes feel really close to Aiden, because he’s the only one who’s always there for her. But at the same time, he’s the only one preventing her from having a normal life.”

Cage has written the entire script himself, and the process took him a year. Like Heavy Rain, Beyond is a rare example of authorship in the blockbuster video game space with very few ‘auteurs.’ With mind to the enormity of the Quantic team, Cage suggests the production cycle would be thrown jarringly out of sync if he were to approach the narrative with more fluidity. The script is the backbone of Beyond, and that backbone was fashioned by Cage.

As one would hope, his vision is shared by many, including actress Ellen Page, whose performance drives Jodie. The demo presented at Sony’s conference, while subdued, was a very pointed example of the power of Quantic’s tech and the power of Page, who spends most of it emoting only through facial expression. Cage is putting a lot of stock in the subtleties of his cast’s performances, going so far as to capture six actors on a sound-stage at once.

Cage is more than confident that this intense focus on performance will deliver the necessary emotional clout. “(Playing it) will be like a punch to the face.”

Taken out of context, Cage’s words could be interpreted as egotistical, his steadfast grip on the project bull-headed. Yet his enthusiasm is anything but; bordering on childlike, his words tend to pour out of him like a shaken bottle of champagne. His utter faith in the video game medium itself is charming.

“In a movie, you’re just passive; you’re just watching a story that is told to you,” says Cage. “But in games, I saw that you could be the main protagonist, you could be in the shoes of the hero, and make the decisions. 15 years ago I saw it had become a very creative medium where you could create experiences like no other medium before.

So I worked on these (sorts of experiences) for 15 years, and I thought the rest of the industry would follow the same path very quickly. But actually, the industry’s stayed focused on shooters and more physical and violent experiences versus what I’d hope for.”

His cinematic approach is not without its detractors.  Unapologetically scripted, and with that Heavy Rain-esque quick-time-event-driven control scheme, Beyond raises familiar questions around the shaky balance of power between the player and Cage’s sleight of hand choreography. The E3 behind closed doors demo, though impressive overall, has already brought up concerns over the arbitrary implementation of gameplay mechanics.

Undeniably, Cage is still dancing like a gleeful madman along that line between movie and game. While his ability to present us with captivating and unique scenarios knows no bounds, he is still tied to interactivity and our expectations of it. It could be that those Heavy Rain players who found that critical fourth wall was shattered by the insistence on quick-time-controlled menial tasks, or those who lost interest after the branching narrative grew too convoluted, might have similar issues here. Cage’s interactive dramas are still video games, and by his own admission, the biggest challenge is to make people forget this.

“The second you forget you are sitting on a couch with a controller in your hands watching television, the second you forget about that, means we succeeded in creating this experience,” says Cage.  “You just need to forget where you are, and this is a program moving pixels on the screen, you need to see characters and situations on the screen. That’s the biggest challenge.”

But it's difficult to chastise before we're let in on Beyond: Two Souls' grand secrets. It's currently shaping up to be another remarkable experiment in pushing narrative boundaries, and by far one of the most intriguing games to come out of a sequel-studded E3.  Cage’s belief in risk-taking should be enough to pay attention to his projects, because he’s making them – not for the fortune or the glory - but for us.

“The thing is about the industry, there are many games that look the same today, if you go on the show floor at E3, you'll see many games about aliens, about monsters, about shooting. Sometimes you’ll even think they have the same art director because they look the same. And that’s fine, there's a market for that.

But at the same time I wish there were more options for gamers. I think it’s a mistake to limit ourselves to a certain audience, when we could reach everybody. Not everybody’s interested in shooting. I wish more people would be allowed to take risks, and try new things and new ideas, because new ideas are what this industry desperately needs. I mean, how many shooters can you make?"

Lucy O'Brien is Assistant Editor at IGN AU. You should talk to her about games, horror movies and the TV show Freaks & Geeks on IGN here or find her and the rest of the Australian team by joining the IGN Australia Facebook community.

Source : ign[dot]com