In Defense of Andrea

***HERE THERE BE SPOILERS. YE HAVE BEEN WARNED.***

As will surprise absolutely no one, I love AMC's The Walking Dead. I love the writing, direction, acting, characters, action, and overall design. I love that it's become a ratings juggernaut. I love that an indy comic is getting so much attention. I like that the showrunners are treating the comic as an integral part of the show. I love that series creator Robert Kirkman is such a visible part of both aspects, to the point where he was on Conan (and actually did pretty well). I love The Walking Dead. But you know what I don't love? I don't love how much hatred there seems to be for certain characters in the show; particularly Lori Grimes and Andrea.

I'm not gonna cry sexism here (though I'm tempted to) since I don't know enough about that subject to get into. However, I will say that the hate seems to be a bit unwarranted. Let's start by looking at Lori, since the hate for her seems to have died when she did. To be honest, I never really got the hate for her. I've heard it said that she seemed to get in the way of the plot...which is kinda BS, since her presence was central to several plots of Season 2, including the escalating conflict between Rick and Shane and Carl's ongoing journey towards complete sociopathy. I also get the feeling that she is seen as an unfit mother considering the amount of times her son is told to "get in the house" and never does (yeah, apparently that was a meme during Season 2. I don't keep up with memes and it's too late to care, so fuck it). Maybe it's that some viewers didn't like the idea of a woman sleeping with someone after her learning that her husband was dead (which, why wouldn't he be, except in the case of the unlikely circumstances which lead Rick to not being dead).

However, I think the final nail in the coffin was the season finale, when Lori reacted with shock and horror at learning that Rick actually went through with it and killed Shane, after she warned Rick that Shane was dangerous and that he should do something about it. This I will defend. I have to assume she meant "Rick, talk to him and get him to back off," which Rick tried, and which failed, and led to the predicament of Shane getting knifed. The killing, however, she didn't expect; hell, most of the viewing audience didn't expect. And to hear that her husband killed a man and does not regret it? That's probably a lot to take in, so I can see why she wouldn't be immediately okay with that course of events. However, Lori died some episodes back and now the fans have a new female main to dislike for various reasons that are probably stupid: Andrea.

Looking back on it, I actually like Andrea's development since season one, starting as the gentle bystander, pushed to a suicide attempt by the death of her sister, resenting the man who 'rescued' her, stepping up and becoming an effective member of the walker defense team, having a brief affair with Shane, seeing Dale die, getting separated from the group, teaming with Michonne for eight months, finding Woodbury, sleeping with the Governor, watching Michonne leave, finding out that the Governor's kind of a psycho, finding out the Governor's really a psycho, finding that her old group plus Michonne are starting to fall apart at the seams and that they're now at war with the Governor (who has superior numbers and a more fortified position), and now trying to make peace between these two camps. That's a lot to do in three seasons.

Now, the hatred for Andrea seems to come from the fact that she's sticking with the Governor, willfully ignorant of or apathetic towards the fact that he wants to kill all her friends and also kept a secret collection of zombie heads in fish tanks. This is not how I see it. She isn't sticking with the Gov, she's sticking with Woodbury, and all the people who live there. She wants to see these (presumably) nice, innocent people not die just because their leader is an asshole. And she knows their leader is an asshole, she said as much in the last episode! But she also knows that Woodbury believes in him and supports him, and that they will follow him into a war with Team Rick that will get a whole lotta people dead. Andrea doesn't want that and is trying to make peace with the two camps.

Now I know what you're gonna say - or rather not say, since nobody posts here and my meager handful of followers don't watch the Dead and have no opinions on it - you're gonna not say "But Andrea slept with the Governor, even after she found out what happened with Glenn and Maggie and Merle!" Well, to that I say...yes, yes she did. But not because she wanted to get some; she was trying to go through with Carol's brilliant plan of "Bang him, then kill him in his sleep". She got the first half done, but the second...well, I imagine it's heard to stab a man that you once really liked through the heart while he's sleeping. Just a guess. Call it weak, I call it human and, more to the point, I call it Andrea trying to keep Dale's morals alive in a world where he's not there to interject into conversations.

If there's any flaws in Andrea's machinations it's that A) she's trying to get Rick and the Gov to make peace, despite the fact that this will never happen because both are ruthless SOB's who are currently setting up timeshares in Crazytown (to say nothing of the fact that this is a TV show and everybody wants an explosive climax over tedious delegations), but more to the point it's that the outcome of Andrea's plan leaves the Governor in power at Woodbury. Ideally, the Gov wouldn't hurt anyone now that he's not at war with Rick, but this guy is too unstable to be left alone, much less be leader of a town and have access to a relatively huge arsenal. The audience knows it, Rick's group knows it, and Andrea really should know it.

I get the feeling that Andrea's going to be the one to eventually put the Governor down, if only so that the writers can redeem her in the eyes of the fans, but for now, I'm liking watching her journey. Optimism from someone who was once suicidal is an interesting shift, but for Andrea it makes sense and it brings a perspective that's otherwise missing from an overwhelmingly bleak and grim show. I like the character, I like the storyline, and, like many of you, I'm on the edge of my seat every Sunday, waiting to see where things go.

Not in Kansas Anymore

I haven't written a movie review in some time (and haven't seen a movie on opening weekend either), so indulge me.

For many people (myself included), 1939's The Wizard of Oz is a staple of our childhood, an iconic fantasy film that has lasted well through the decades and sparked the imaginations of many a viewer. The Land of Oz is as mystifying and engaging as a fantasy land born of a sixteen-year-old's angst-ridden fever dream can be, and has inspired several sequels, prequels, spin-offs, and expanded universe materials. The latest, Oz the Great and Powerful is another one of these, and it's a pretty damn good one.

Focusing on the Wonderful Wizard makes a lot of sense. Despite being the title character of the classic film and the first of L. Frank Baum's novels, we know relatively little of him, but he leaves a huge impression. He's the original man behind the curtain, an enigmatic ruler whose power doesn't begin match his reputation. To whit, our story follows the origin of Oz himself, real name Oscar Zoroaster Phadrig Isaac Norman Henkel Emmannuel Ambroise Digg (played by James Franco), a stage magician, con artist, and womanizer operating out of a traveling circus in black-and-white Kansas. A poorly-timed balloon ride and one tornado later, Oscar lands in the Merry Old Land of Oz faster than you (or any one else in the cast) can say "It's a twister! A twister!". Oscar is immediately heralded as the prophesied savior of the land, and being the opportunistic sod that he is, Oscar takes advantage of the situation and accepts his role, unaware that his welcomers may really be pulling the wool over his eyes.

The film is directed by Sam Raimi, a geek icon who A) has a lot of reverence for older material, and B) knows how to bring the fun to his flicks, making him pretty much perfect for this film. The peril is exciting, the action engaging, and the characters are pretty fun. Franco sells the more human aspects of Oscar, though it took a bit for me to buy into his showman persona, while his traveling companions are entertaining and complement Oscar well. What's more, the film has the right amount of reverence for it's predecessor, showing off iconic images and familiar moments, without being distracting about it. The visuals are stunning, with Oz being the same larger-than-life fantasy realm that it must have been for 1939 audiences. However, the best thing onscreen ends up being the film's leading ladies.

The three witches of Oz (which sort of confuses me, as the witches are based on directions on the compass so logically there should be four, but whatever, three's more Shakespearean or whatever), played by Mila Kunis, Rachel Weisz, and Michelle Williams, look goddamn spectacular onscreen, which is to say nothing of the characters they play. The witches are more nuanced than expected, particularly Kunis and Williams, and make for some of the most interesting (and gorgeous) parts of the movie.

If I had to criticize Oz, it's that it suffers from the same affliction many fantasy stories like it suffer: very simple characterization. The supporting cast is fun, but there's not much to them, and only two or three of them have an actual arc. Hell, I don't remember much from two of Oscar's companions except their job title and the actors who played them. Also, while I won't spoil the second act twist, the movie telegraphs pretty hard where certain characters will end up in the grand scheme of Oz iconography. And finally, Oscar's arc comes off as...well, utterly expected. It's the same lesson learned in Wizard (no, not that one), so I guess its got that going for it, but it's still fairly obvious.

In a time when revisionist fantasy is in, when everything magic on film has to be dark or subversive to relate to the young people, Oz comes off as almost a film unstuck from time; a flashy, optimistic piece that also serves as a loving tribute to one of the oldest and most well-recognized films in the genre. It's an absolute blast of a blockbluster, and comes highly recommended.

Besides, what else is playing right now?