Star Wars: Revenge of the Nerds.

 It's Friday, September 11th, and as such it's a good time to reflect on the worst atrocity in living memory.

 That's right - it's been exactly one week since some nerds couldn't get the toys they wanted.

 Like most people who aren't lugging their virginity around like an over-filled steamer trunk, I was unaware of "Force Friday" - the day that the toys for the new Star Wars movies were released. All that changed when some stunningly petulant material started showing up online, written by grown men who had waited up until midnight only to find that their local Toys R Us had run out of action figures.

 It was an awkward mix of embarrassing and hilarious, and an example can be found here if you want to subject yourself to it. As the Islamic State bulldozes real-life sacred temples, and the people fleeing that destruction are so desperate that they drown in their hundreds, people were throwing their toys out of the pram about Lego. Or would have been, if they'd got there early enough to buy any toys in the first place.*

 Whilst it should be pretty clear that I don't care about Star Wars toys, I was nonetheless struck by the language people were using. Or, more accurately, the names. From the butthurt author's admission that he got a "cool Kylo Ren poster" to the wailing lament that the Funko Pops had been "decimated", I dont have the first idea what this person is talking about.

 On the one hand, sure, I'm getting older and as such can't be expected to know everything about pop culture aimed at children.* On the other hand, I try not to become completely ignorant of my surroundings. Why don't I know what a Funko Pop is?!

 The answer is that it's ridiculous to expect me to know the names of characters in a film that hasn't been released yet. Somehow, however, movie marketing juggernauts have managed to create a status quo in which I feel slightly left behind for not knowing what's going on in a film that doesn't exist yet. Effectively, I feel dumb for not being a time traveller.

 Aside from this being a depressing comment on consumerism and the movie industry, it also leaves the door wide open for shoddy writing. Think about "Raiders of the Lost Ark." The sequels all had titles involving "Indiana Jones and the...", but the first film in that series didn't because nobody knew what an Indiana Jones was. That movie had to create Indy from the ground up.

 Now, through the internet, tie-in comics and early toy releases, a lot of people apparently already know what I've had to infer from context - that the guy in the trailer with the cross-shaped lightsabre is called Kylo Ren and, judging by the poster given to nerds, he's a bad guy.

 This is a real time saver for script writers - instead of establishing a character as being the bad guy through words or actions, just release a small plastic facsimilie of him three months in advance with a little tag attached saying "antagonist."

 The same could be done with the heroes, except it already has. By bringing back the characters from the original trilogy, we don't need to worry about backstory or motivation on their side of the fence, either.

 Go far enough down this road, and we won't even need the film - just an extended toy commercial to set things up and then a general release of Lego sets so people can make up a plot themselves based on the information they've already been spoon-fed. At which point films shouldn't be released in cinemas or even Toys R Us. They'll just be flat packed in IKEA.

 I hope I'm wrong about this, and that the new Star Wars films are creatively interesting as well as financially successful, but those of us who are long in the tooth and memory can recall how promising "Episode I: The Phantom Menace" looked.

 The new films are bringing in fresh creative talent and new characters, and this is encouraging. But let's hope that the story of these new characters isn't being told on the back of figurine packaging, instead of on screen where it belongs. After all, a complete mythology can be created in the space of one movie.

 It happened a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away...






*Yeah. I went there. Come at me, Star Wars geeks.

Wetherspoons Boss Hates All His Staff.

 There can’t be many people out there who would question the testicular fortitude of Tim Martin.

 Arguably the most successful publican in history, the man named his chain of watering holes “J.D. Wetherspoon” after a teacher who told him he would never amount to anything.

 It’s an impressively cheeky move, but nowhere near as ballsy as Mr. Martin’s statements last week, in which he bemoaned the government plans to introduce a “living wage” by 2020, in the process effectively saying that a Tory government was being too soft on the poor.

 In an Imbibe piece entitled “Wetherspoons Boss Slams Government’s Living Wage” - which could just as honestly have been titled “Millionaire Objects To Paying Waiters Enough To Survive” - Mr. Martin complains that the proposed living wage would make the job of already-squeezed pubs more difficult.

 Mr. Martin’s argument is that supermarkets, which often sell alcohol at a loss in order to entice customers before making up their profits in other areas, are making more money than licensed premises already, and can therefore afford to take the financial hit of raising staff wages. The pubs, meanwhile, would have to raise the price of drinks to cover increased staff costs and cede more ground to supermarkets, effectively pricing themselves out of the drinks market.

 At the risk of sounding like Malcolm X, this is a fantastic example of chickens coming home to roost. 

                                            Beer pump, seen here going back and to the left…


 Wetherspoons has, since its corporate inception, operated on ruthless, shark-like business practices designed to squeeze out any and all competition from local, independent businesses. It’s well known within the industry that Wetherspoons will buy beer that’s near the end of its sell-by-date at a knock-down price, for example, because they are confident that their high-volume sales will mean it doesn’t actually cross the threshold of drinkability. This means that they pay less for beer than smaller pubs, charge less as a consequence, and use their low-price/high-volume business model to crush the competition.

 It’s not just beer, either. Wetherspoons is a methodical, profit-driven engine of efficiency. Ever noticed that there’s no music playing in a ‘Spoons? Of course there isn’t. Music costs money. Why did Wetherspoons champion cask ale at a time when nobody was drinking it? Out of a deep and abiding love for the lost art of craft beer? Of course not. It was cheap to buy in, plain and simple.

 Martin defends underpaying the staff in his budget boozers by saying that a third of profits go to staff in the form of bonuses and company shares. Ignoring for a moment that two thirds of profits (about £25 million for last year) are by definition going elsewhere, the idea of “shares” is a typical corporate get-out clause that is used in place of actual money.

 How many young kids in their first bar job would have the first clue what to do with shares in a company? How many would actually know how to cash in their shares, let alone actually go through with it? These are eighteen or nineteen year old kids, many of them already struggling under the weight of tuition fees and the aforementioned tyranny of a Conservative government, who would be much happier with actual cash money in their pockets that they can spend on groceries and bills.

 For Martin to complain that supermarket practices in the sales of alcohol are unfair to the competition is an act of hypocrisy so monumental it could probably be seen from a galaxy far, far away - fitting, given than Martin seems to be modelling himself and his office décor on the Emperor from Star Wars.

                                                                  This CAN’T be a coincidence…


 In the broader spectrum, any “debate” about a living wage is an insult to millions of people. There should be no debate about whether or not companies should pay their staff enough to survive. Ever. We might as well spend out time debating oxygen allowances or whether the working classes strictly need more than 1500 calories a day.

 The proposed “living wage” has already been exposed as largely mendacitous, but to not even pay lip service to it is beyond any concept of fairness. Luckily, other recent government plans will probably sweeten the bitter aftertaste of having to pay a barmaid enough money to feed herself. Tax loopholes for large companies, which are being implemented as we speak, will see national chains like Wetherspoons receive sums of money that should be described not so much as a windfall but as more of a hurricane plummet.

 Don’t be surprised if this time next year, Wetherspoons head office is located somewhere in the Swiss Alps for tax reasons.

 And definitely don’t be surprised if the staff at your local ‘Spoons are still on the breadline.

Movie Reviews: Avengers: Age of Ultron.

 How many superheroes does it take to change a light bulb?

 Whilst I’m sure there’s an answer to that somewhere out there, Avengers: Age of Ultron does at least answer the related question, how many superheroes does it take to crash a movie?

 When Marvel announced the first “Avengers” movie, everyone was sceptical about cramming so many disparate characters into the one film. We were, of course, spectacularly wrong. Writer/Director Joss Whedon has a talent for ensemble pieces, and he managed to make a film that gave everyone room to breathe and still provided outstanding entertainment.

 Perhaps buoyed by this success – or the fact that the first film made a profit comparable to the national debt of a small African nation – Marvel has decided to add more characters for the sequel and, in the process, come something of a cropper.

 It’s not that “Age of Ultron” isn’t fun – it is. It’s not even that it’s not a good film – it’s far from a bad one. But in trying to introduce three new Avengers and a major bad guy, as well as setting up two sequels and a spin-off, and tying up the events of two separate previous movies, whilst all the while trying to add depth to existing characters, the franchise is beginning to groan under its own weight in a worrying manner.

 Who’s to blame? It’s tempting to think that Whedon’s ego is on a Hulk-like rampage – with the biggest superhero movie in history under his belt, he could have insisted on a scene where he personally urinates on a crowd of studio executives’ mothers and probably got it – but in truth, a lot of the problems stem from the complicated storylines that have begun to tie up the Marvel universe.

 First and foremost is the fact that every Marvel film of the last few years has been hinting at the “Infinity War” storyline, in which Thanos, the Mad Titan (introduced in the first Avengers flick and seen more prominently in “Guardians of the Galaxy”) attempts to acquire the six Inifinity Gems and thus rule the universe. In practical terms, this means that almost every Marvel film now has to pull increasingly hard in the direction of this grand finale. As a result, “Age of Ultron” sees the Avengers searching for Loki’s sceptre from the previous film which – no real surprise – contains one of said gem stones.

 This means that new bad guy Ultron is forced to share his screen time with the ghost of movies both past and yet-to-come, and as such comes off as under-written. This isn’t helped by James Spader’s performance as the titular robot overlord. Whedon’s knack for finding humour in unlikely places fails him here, as Ultron is often too wilfully quirky to come off as a genuine threat.

 Introduced properly for the first time (ignoring a brief post-credits scene in “Captain America: The Winter Soldier”) are the Scarlett Witch and Quicksilver, both of whom also suffer truncated character development. They’re superpowered twins who have an axe to grind with America after their home nation was bombed using artillery produced by Tony Stark/Iron Man, but once they realise that their employer, Ultron, is in fact a crazed murder-bot, they switch sides almost without mention, and don’t even bother to bring up the Stark Industries bomb that killed their parents when they’re in the same room as the man who manufactured it.

 In short, every new character feels under-done. There’s probably a joke to be made about the superhumanly fast Quicksilver feeling rushed, but I can’t be bothered to make it.

 What, then, of the more familiar faces?

 The classic line-up are all present and correct, and given ample time to show off their skills. Chris Evans’ Captain America, in particular, is given more to do after fan bitching about his underwhelming set-pieces in the first “Avengers”, or possibly after the stellar performance of “The Winter Soldier” at the box office. Mark Ruffalo is still tortured as Bruce Banner, a man whose transformation into the Hulk is as useful as it is dangerous, and Scarlett Johansson is given more room to play with the back-story of the Black Widow, delving deeper into the guilt and regret that have always been hinted at in the former child assassin.

 Chris Hemsworth, whose triceps could probably get their own spin-off film, is given little to do as Thor. He spends a good portion of the film having wandered off on a spirit quest involving a magic lake that doesn’t even come close to being explained by any part of the script.

 Most interesting (and possibly ill advised) as a story choice is Jeremy Renner’s Hawkeye, who is explored in some depth as an ordinary man struggling to hold his own on a team of superhumans and demi-gods. Renner is a fine actor, and his scenes do have resonance, but they ignore the fundamental appeal of Marvel heroes – that even the gods themselves are flawed. Having Renner fret about his issues ignores the basic point that every one of the Avengers has relatable insecurities, from Cap’s time-lost, baffled loneliness to Banner’s mortal fear of his own emotions. Giving the human member of the team the most obviously human neuroses is a major mis-step.

 The mainstay Avengers are not the only familiar faces. Sidekicks from basically every previous movie turn up left and right, with Don Cheadle’s War Machine given something to do for the first time in what feels like forever, and the Falcon turning up briefly to have a beer with Captain America and remind us all that he exists.

 Stellan Skarsgard, who presumably has a bad home life, makes the effort to turn up in yet another Marvel film for the sole reason of… Well, it’s not exactly clear. Something to do with Thor’s magic lake.

 If the complexities of handling so many characters and storylines at once weren’t enough, there is also a distinct sense that the biggest threat to the Marvel universe at this point comes from lawyers and accountants.

 Robert Downey Jr., who kicked the whole Marvel bandwagon off as Iron Man, has been hinting at retiring for some time. Both “Iron Man 3” and “Age of Ultron” have now given him final scenes that could be seen as a farewell if he gets cold feet about future sequels. Presumably, Marvel will do everything in their power to keep him on board, but the time is fast approaching when he will become prohibitively expensive, if he hasn’t already. Similarly, at least two other characters are given a way out of the next Avengers shindig, perhaps again in the hopes of keeping production costs for a sequel below a level that would make Scrooge McDuck nervous.

 Finance aside, the legal complications between studios mean that both Fox and Marvel own the rights to Quicksilver and the Scarlett Witch, hence the former turning up (played by a different actor) in the recent “X-Men: Days of Future Past.” For the record, the X-Men movie’s take on Quicksilver’s powers was far more entertaining, although Aaron Taylor-Johnson probably gives the better performance in “Ultron.”

 The inclusion of characters from the X-Men franchise* is, honestly, a bad idea. As Fox owns the rights to “super powered mutants” as a concept (yes, really…) both characters are denied their original back-story and feel unfairly shoe-horned into things, adding another layer of confusion to a cinematic universe that is already becoming far, far too complicated without the addition of real-world litigation.

 All of this bitching is, once again, not to say that “Age of Ultron” is terrible. It’s enjoyable, and at this point in time feels, for the most part, like a night spent with old friends. Just not one of the great nights. Only a good one.

 A longer run-time might have benefitted everyone involved, although perhaps the studio thought that audiences wouldn’t want to go past the two-and-a-half hour mark. This is silly, of course. It’s the Avengers, and most movie goers will literally wait in their seats to watch them eat shawarma.

 It’s a good film. It’s great to see the characters again. But things are noticeably starting to fray, and it’s worth pointing out that there has never been a decent third movie in any franchise, ever. Marvel has left itself the task of producing a final act that is epic in scale and also more tightly reined in.

 From here, it feels like a superhuman task.

*Simmer down, comic nerds, I know that one is up for debate in historical terms.

**********************SPOILER FILLED BITCHING*********************

DO NOT READ IF YOU DON’T WANT SOME MAJOR PLOT POINTS GIVEN AWAY.

 Okay, seriously, Joss Whedon? You allegedly lobbied to have Quicksilver included because “his powers will look cool” and then you kill him off?! Never mind that you created a massive legal headache and needlessly complicated the whole shooting match, you’re going to introduce a character just to kill him off?! He might as well have been wearing a fucking Red Shirt, for Christ’s sake!

 And the Vision? I already said, the whole reason Marvel works is that the characters are at once larger than life and intimately relatable. To create a Superman-esque robot is a waste of time and raises far too many issues. Or did Paul “I’m sick of just doing voice work and want my own action figure” Bettany have someone by the balls?!

 Why are most of the sidekicks black?! Does anyone else find that a bit uncomfortable?!

 Opposite point: Did we really have to go to Wakanda just to set up a Black Panther movie?! Couldn’t someone have just wondered aloud where the Vibranium was coming from and then have that as a link?! If we’re smart enough to untangle the Quicksilver debacle as an audience, we can probably take that big a hint.

 Did anyone really want to see Hawkeye’s secret wife/kids/farm?! Hawkeye is supposed to be a cynical loner, not one of the fucking Waltons!

 I get that Nick Fury always has something up his sleeve, but how exactly did he manage to hide a helicarrier?! Did he smuggle it out under his coat one afternoon before he faked his own death?