Entry #19: I Lied This is Actually #20

                 

Ahoj! (Hello in Slovak)

                  Welp, here we are. My 20^th entry! This might not be the last one I post, but I have officially filled the quota! Hooray, achievement!

                  So, I guess documentaries have never been something I purposefully seek out for fun a lot. I mean, I have, but I don’t all the time. But, that doesn’t mean I find how they’re made any less entertaining. You have to give the filmmakers, cameramen, and producers some credit. They’re filming around someone or something’s life and story. They couldn’t have predicted everything like you can when writing a film. It’s a real risk, documentaries. You can’t go in there with a plan of exactly what you want to film.

                  So, when I heard from Leeper that there are “rules” to filming documentaries, I thought that was silly. You used to not be able to re-create a recount of a story because it was “against the rules”. Who wrote these rules? Yes, documentaries should absolutely be executed with finesse, but what’s with these rules? Are the people who made up these rules the same people who say “get Morgan Freeman to VO your documentary about sea slugs and BAM instant blockbuster”?

                  Now, I understand that when dealing with real people you should be cautious to them and their feelings and that you need SOME semblance of a plan when filming documentaries. That’s not what I’m knocking here. I’m saying that if you come into the documentary scene with a play-by-play outline of exactly what you want to shoot and when to shoot it, you’re gonna have a bad time. And, with that in mind, isn’t it a little silly to throw a set of rules into the mix?

                  From what I’ve seen, the most iconic things in media are things that brought something new to the table. If film as a visual medium is supposed to make us understand something through seeing, why throw a wrench into the works? What if the most effective way to do that involves a little rule breaking?

                  I had never even heard of an animated documentary until Tuesday. At first, I thought that was weird. But, when I understood the reason behind it, I can’t imagine how it could have been executed better. Sometimes, to make your audience understand your point, you have to jar them out of their comfort zone. I would rather be jarred and uncomfortable than feel nothing at all.

Entry #18: Head Chunks

Knock, knock!

Who’s there?

Another sore of tangential entry!

That will probably be the extension of my humor for today. This entry is a bit more serious because it’s something I don’t like to talk about. I don’t like to talk about it because when I do I feel like I’m seeking attention. But, after watching Ryan, I feel that I need to talk about it in order to properly explain how this film resonates with me.

I’ll take documentaries over the evening news any day because I feel like documentaries are more focused. I would rather hear the plights of people from the source than from a couple of well-groomed people sitting in a pristine studio. I want the whole story, not just a snippet. Snippets are easy to forget and brush off.

With that said, the way Ryan is animated and filmed was something I could easily latch onto. Not only could I understand the struggle of Ryan, I could see it in the way he was portrayed. His face was so broken.

He was broken.

And we got to see him slowly piece himself back together by remembering his art only to have it all shattered when questioned about his alcohol dependency. It’s hard to glue yourself back together again and then suddenly have someone tear you apart again. Even when that person means well, the damage is already done.

This is something I understand to my core. If the animators of Ryan were trying to portray mental illness, then I think they nailed it. I deal with dependency on others. It’s part of my anxiety. The problem is I tend to latch onto people who intend to hurt me. It’s like duct taping yourself to a cactus. This isn’t the case at the present. I’m lucky to have better, extremely supportive friends. But, when I was in elementary school through high school, I was in an abusive friendship. They often threatened to kill themself if I ever wasn’t within reach.

There were other things, but the point is I tore myself from them and I wish that was the end of it. I won’t outline exactly what happened between us but it’s very hard for me to talk about without feeling terrible. I have a really hard time dealing with other people’s emotions. I don’t know how to comfort or confront people. I was with that person for so long, it feels like someone took any empathetic abilities and social skills I had and tore them right out of my body.

So, basically when I saw Ryan with all the parts of his head missing, I felt like I could easily see an entire chunk of my head gone. I’ve been trying to get to get it back, but recently it’s been torn from me again. Again, I won’t say why here. I hate bothering people with my negative emotions. Even saying this much is making me feel like a whiny child. But, I need it to properly convey how I feel about Ryan.

Anyhow, let'd end this entry on a lighter note. Whenever I'm stressed, I look at pictures of bunny sea slugs. 

So wee, so presh. 

Entry #17: Being Ambiguous Fills you with DETERMINATION

You know, it seems like people in the gaming community have been getting their knickers in a bunch over the gender of the playable characters lately. I don’t know how many of you are in the Mass Effect circle, but it was revealed that Commander Shepherd, the ambiguously gendered main character, was originally intended to be a woman.

Now, for those who don’t know, Commander Shepherd’s gender is something the player can choose prior to the game. There also an array of male/female character models you can choose from. Not to mention the romance element of the game does not depend on your chosen gender either.

                  For some people, the fact that Shepherd was originally going to be just female is upsetting. Gender has been a big topic in gaming lately, I’ve noticed. My opinion on it is more of an observer than an active arguer. The gender of a character never bothers me, personally. I’d play as Fem!Shep as readily as M!Shep. But, do I like the idea of the main character being a blank slate on which the player can project themself onto. A Game isn’t like a movie, it’s meant to be an experience. Sometimes, an ambiguously gendered character is the way to accomplish that kind of experience.

I love RPGs for this reason. I think people tend to leave RPGs out of the equation when we talk about emersion. Whether you are the character in the game or just an omnipresent observer, the different ways the player is incorporated into RPGs are really inspiring.

                   Take OFF, for example. The main character you are controlling is named The Batter, but you the player are not The Batter. You are regarded as his controller or puppeteer. Batter is aware of this and even introduces you to the other characters in the game, and those characters can speak to you directly as well. While you are along for the ride, you are still an active participant in the game. However, this fact leads you to discover something sinister about Batter that you cannot control. You are a neutral character and the fact that character you are controlling is not you makes your role ambiguous and a blank slate.

                  Another example (and I’m sorry to my friends that I’m bringing this up because they’re sick of hearing about it) is Undertale. In this game, you are the fallen child you’re controlling, but you have an ambiguous identity and gender. You’re supposed to become emotionally invested in the world and care about the characters as they care about you. You also have the option to be as heartless as possible and slaughter absolutely everyone. Several times, you are regarded as the one deciding factor in the fate of everyone in the game. Again, the fallen child is a purposeful blank slate the player takes the role of.

                  Don’t get me wrong, I like games where the character is a defined person, specified gender and all. I love Portal and others like it. But, I find that I get a lot more out of playing the game as myself. When the playable character is completely ambiguous, I find myself caring about the story and characters more.

So, I try to stay out of the polarizing conversation that is genders in gaming. I personally couldn’t care less if the character was intended to be male or female or something else. I just prefer the ability to strike out into a new world and make your own story.

Also, in a few Mass Effect games, you can choose to romance this guy:

 

And I think that’s pretty neat.

Lookit him.

He’s beautiful.