Clover Reviews Volume 1 -> Episode 40

Welcome back my friends to another episode of...

CLOVER REVIEWS!
Marky March Spectacular!

Today's review:

"You know... not bad... surprisingly."

That's all for today. Join us every Saturday for more movie recommendations from our fuzzy friend.

Don't forget that Clover gladly takes requests. Her aim is to please you, the reader.

The Steam Machine

Like many kids growing up in a middle class home in the 90's my gaming options were somewhat limited. Once I got into games I didn't really adapt a dominant opinion toward one company or format or another... with maybe the exception of Sega. So not only was I interested in console gaming but PC gaming, too.
This is something that didn't develop much until much, much later in my life. The most I played on my family's home computer were either demos of modern games that barely ran or older games that only ran because they were older. And even then some of them didn't perform at peak performance because my parent's wouldn't shell out the mega tons of cash to get a gaming PC, rightfully so.

Then I went off to college where I used a Mac. You know where this is going.

While I never had the right hardware for PC gaming I was always interested because it was a territory I rarely experienced. So a couple years ago when I got my current laptop that could play PC games competently (many modern games had to have the settings lowered of course) I was naturally excited. My Steam library grew pretty quickly but it was my GOG library where I played the most. Those being the games I fawned over for years with most of the Steam games I came across also being available for console.
I did try to power through a few more modern games on this lesser machine to not much enjoyment. Two decades of using a controller exclusively has turned me off to using a keyboard and mouse. Sure I could use an XBox 360 controller but event then I still sometimes have to use the keyboard or go through a bunch of customization junk I don't want to deal with.

Then Valve's Steam Controller and Steam Box were announced.

PC gaming from my couch? I loved it! I was very excited at the idea of having a console like machine for my Steam library utilizing a controller modeled after something I was much more familiar with. Would it be 100% compatible? No, of course not. Some of the games I have are definitely made for keyboard and mouse but that's fine. Still I wanted to see what this new machine would bring.
Sadly little seemed to be said about it for a long time. It wasn't until recently that I found an article listing the different prices for the different machines that I finally got interested in talking about this again.

Safe to say the pricing was not surprising and I was left disappointed.

Before going any further you may as well take a look at the article I read. Right HERE.

I really should have seen this coming. It was definitely a "too good to be true" that there would be a PC-like console-esque system at an affordable price. The low end costing around $500 and the high end being $5000. Which of course begs the biggest question... which one should I get? Or more importantly... what's the point?

I cannot stress enough how much I love the idea of playing a lot of these PC games from the couch, what with being console in mind and never dove that much into PC. And I guess it was unrealistic for me to expect a console-like unit to sell for a similar price but do what a PC does as a gaming machine. PC is always better in basically every aspect technologically because of the nature of how it's put together. Yet when I look at that list of prices it makes me wonder why I should even bother.
I ask because... can't you just build a regular PC from the bottom up for those prices? Not to mention you can hook up your PC to your TV and use the upcoming Steam controller on your regular old computer? So what's the big deal with the Steam Machine? Convenience? Sure but these prices seem high for something that frankly feels illogical to buy when you can get something similar or better for the same price... depending on how much you want to spend.

I will give it the benefit of a doubt. Maybe there's something I don't know about this machine that would make it better than I think it will be. Not gonna lie, I'm currently more interested in this than I am a PS4 or XBox One. But that's mainly due to the sheer volume of games I already have, making it a sound investment. And I do like how it's going the 3DO route of "we have this core idea but all these companies can make their own machines and games that will play on it." It gives freedom to an otherwise closed off world.
Yet that makes me wonder what I'd be missing out on if I paid $500-$700 for a machine as opposed to a $2,000-$5,000 machine. And the line in the article that says "...the chances you'd need to upgrade anytime in the next 20 years are slim." I find that hard to believe especially on the less expensive end.
It only may ring somewhat true for someone like me because I don't pre-order or buy day one games on Steam all out of fear that they won't work on my machine. I've accumulated a lot of games from the early to mid 2000's period of gaming with a few really new and really old games in the mix. At some point I may get a game that won't work on my machine (if I were to get one) and I find it hard to believe I'd have to wait twenty years for that to happen.

I know jack shit about modern PC companies but I do know Alienware is known for making really good gaming PCs. Seeing them on the cheaper end gives me mixed feelings of comfort, confusion, and worry, though.

So do I think this would be a good investment? Not particularly. I am still curious. Curious to see what they offer, how they perform between models, and so forth. At the very least I am very interested in the controller. I can tell you one thing for sure, there are things I'd rather be spending that kind of money on despite my initial interest in this concept.
Just feels like a lot of money for something that could be done just as well, or better, doing it the old fashioned way.

...also most of the PC games I'm interested right now come from GOG so it's not like I could play them on this machine anyway.

Review: What We Do in the Shadows

Version I Watched: Theatrical release.

History: This mockumentary from New Zealand was based on a 2006 short film of the same name. It was eventually made into a feature by Taika Cohen and Jemaine Clement who are most well known for creating Flight of the Conchords, but also made the original short this was based on.
Pulled together from nearly one hundred and twenty hours of mostly improvised footage the film was premiered at the 2014 Sundance Film Festival. It would eventually see a limited release which is going on right now (March 2015.) With a budget of only a little over $1 million the film has easily earned back what was put into it.
The film has been getting mostly positive reviews. It even holds a surprising 95% on Rotten Tomatoes, a source known for being pretty harsh in their reviews. To put that in perspective, What We Do in the Shadows holds a higher ranking on their site than most of the best picture nominees (Boyhood and Selma have it beat, Whiplash is equal) at this year's academy awards, jumping just 2% past Birdman, the best picture winner.

Personal History: I didn't even hear about this until I saw a trailer when I went to see The Imitation Game a couple weeks ago. My wife and I were laughing our heads off at the trailer alone, turned to each other when it was done and said "we have to see this."

Review: Vampires have really lost their edge in the last decade or so. And no I'm not talking about the Twilight series. It seems like whenever vampires show up in modern movies they're a lackluster bunch of style over substance. Sure the Blade movies were pretty cool but they were also terribly shallow. Not to mention the shit-tastic Underworld franchise. I have been clamoring for more interesting vampires to come along but my hopes have been low because the results have been mostly terrible...
...with the exception of Let the Right One In and Thirst that is...
...and I clamor because vampires are really cool and interesting characters that are way more interesting than the overly-stylized action movie vampires that are presented in most modern movies. That's a deeper discussion for another day, and while What We Do in the Shadows isn't that super serious character analysis of a vampire it sure as hell is one of the best satires on the vampire character that I've EVER seen!

What We Do in the Shadows takes a slightly overdone concept but does it well in a way we haven't seen for years. They are followed around by a documentary crew (making this a mockumentary) and are recorded as they go about their daily life, all leading up to the annual Unholy Masquerade. Similar to This Is Spinal Tap or a Christopher Guest movie. And really this has to be one of the best examples of that kind of comedy since Christopher Guest's peak.

The hilarity ensues immediately with the brilliant characters that live together in this large house in New Zealand. They all are very different in execution and style, all owning their character, living it beautifully. Their performances reference popular and iconic versions of old vampires. Including but not limited to a traditional Lugosi, Nosferatu, and even Gary Oldman's take from the 1992 Dracula film.
A lot of the comedy comes from them being goofy idiots who are out of touch with modern times and how they conflict with each other in their living situation. Still in this goofiness they perform it all straight. At no point did I feel like they were playing to the audience with a wink as if to say "Hey! Hey! Did you catch that joke?" like so many other satires have done in recent years.
And that's where I really give credit to What We Do in the Shadows. They take their years of comedy knowledge and skill and make something that'd definitely goofy... but is also earnest. You feel a sense of depth and connection with these characters that have a limited screen time because the movie isn't even ninety minutes. Even their non-vampire friend Stu using simplicity as he spends most of the movie sitting in the background with a blank stare on his face.

All done utilizing a bundle of mostly improvised footage.

Which brings me to my thoughts on that method in general. While I was watching and laughing like crazy I couldn't help but admire the level of quality in the comedy despite it being improvised. It made me wonder about a lot of other comedies that are heavily improvised and the best examples I could think of were, again, This Is Spinal Tap and Christopher Guest movies.
I also thought about movies like Anchorman and whatever Judd Apatow is putting together. While I've enjoyed some of those movies quite well they have many fatal flaws, many of which this movie did not have. I always get annoyed with how long some of those comedies get while incorporating too much serious material, which works for some but is a buzz kill for others. Then they'll seem to not know how to cut jokes as to include as many as possible despite relevance to the story or the tone of the scene.
Not that long ago I watched Anchorman 2. I did find it funny but I found it very unsatisfactory as a movie. It had zero structure and a lot of references or jokes for the sake of being jokes. It made a lot of little sense in the long run and instead felt like an extra long, live action episode of Family Guy. Not saying it was bad, just not as pleasing as it could have been.
What We Do in the Shadows accomplishes so much for such a goofy comedy. A lot of the things I mentioned that these other comedies fail to do, whether they're trying to or not, are in fact accomplished here. I cannot stress enough how satisfying this movie was not just as a comedy, but as a story and as a movie.

So much fun with so much character and such great jokes make this one something to remember. Yeah it's silly and doesn't take itself seriously but at least it doesn't bring attention to it like other comedies. So many other comedies seem to feel a lack of confidence so they try to bring awareness to their intentions as much as possible in as simple a way as possible. Not here. Not a chance.
It's only hitting select screens in it's theatrical run so it may be tough to get to. When you get the chance see this movie because it is absolutely hilarious in all the best ways possible. Without a doubt the ultimate vampire comedy. Sure as hell a lot better than Dracula: Dead and Loving It... but it's not much of a competition against that.

Clover Reviews Volume 1 -> Episode 39

Welcome back my friends to another episode of...

CLOVER REVIEWS!
Marky March Spectacular!

Today's review:

"It looked like it was going to be a stupid copycat of Lethal Weapon. Instead it was one of the funniest movies of that year! What a nice surprise!"

That's all for today. Join us every Saturday for more movie recommendations from our fuzzy friend.

Don't forget that Clover gladly takes requests. Her aim is to please you, the reader.

Episode 1 is LIVE!

Episode 1 of Culturally Irrelevant is now LIVE! You can stream or download it HERE!
Head on over and check it out. Sit back, relax with a glass of Scotch or something else classy, and listen to our ramblings about Birdman.
Then be sure to check out our Facebook page HERE... then check out my Tumblr page HERE for fun supplemental material that reflects what I talk about and my general interests expressed here in my blog and on the podcast.

Culturally Irrelevant

Culturally Irrelevant is not some obscure movie I'll be reviewing. Nor is it one of those wacky Japanese games I love so much. No, Culturally Irrelevant is a podcast I host with three college friends where each episode we talk about the obscure and overlooked movies, games, comics, etc, that didn't get enough attention. Some episodes will have something not that obscure, maybe something you've heard of but haven't experienced. Other times there will be things you would have NEVER heard of but we feel you should know about.
The best part is None of us will tell what we bring ahead of time as a means to create a richer discussion and even an element of surprise and genuine interest.

Our website is culturallyirrelevant.com. We're also on Facebook at facebook.com/culturallyirrelevant with a Youtube page on the way. Lastly we are @cirrelevantpod on Twitter.
That's the podcast as a whole. For myself I started a supplemental Tumblr that will serve as an "extra" or "bonus features" to what I talk about here and in my portion of the podcast. My Tumblr page is irrelevantthirst.tumblr.com.
As of right now I don't plan on utilizing a personal Twitter. If you're on Twitter and you want to get a hold of me... use another source like Facebook. But if Twitter is your source then go through the podcast Twitter handle and you can reach me that way. I just can't guarantee how quickly I'll get back to you.

So check out the podcast! Tell your family, tell your friends, help spread the word of the Culturally Irrelevant. The first episode should be up by today or tomorrow. We're working on gettng into iTunes, but for now you can listen on our website. I will post links to each new episode here as well as on my Tumblr. Should have no trouble finding them when they come out.

Going Back to the Beginning: The Tomb Raider Reboot

History: Work began on this reboot right after the 2008 release of Tomb Raider: Underground. At this time Crystal Dynamics had split into two teams, both of which would work on their own respective Tomb Raider games. The team that did not make the game in question started the spin off Lara Croft series, starting with Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light, a download only game released in 2010, with a sequel eventually released late 2014.
The game was officially announced in 2010 with the statement it had been in development for a couple of years. This game would reboot the franchise, taking it in a whole new direction, advising fans to forget everything they know about Tomb Raider. When it was eventually released in 2013 (after a delay, intending to be released in 2012) it really was like nothing before in the franchise. It had many first, including multi-player and the first to get the M rating.
This game experienced a little controversial before release, but mostly due to misunderstanding, or so it seems. Some gameplay footage of Laura being captured by scavengers in the game had a vibe like they were going to rape her. This was mislabeled as the creators never intended to approach that subject in the game, where all they were doing was showing her as a cornered animal in a dire situation she needs to survive. It was an intense and extreme way of showing evolution of character, but was never meant to be an attempted rape scene.
It was released to high praise and big sales, selling over a million copies within two days of release. A sequel was announced in late 2014, Rise of the Tomb Raider, and it will be exclusive to XBox consoles.

Personal History: I dabbled in the older Tomb Raider games back in the late 90's but never got into them. Come to think of it... I don't think I ever completed one from start to finish until this one. The last one I played was one on the Dreamcast. I never played the PS2 sequels or the remake of the original, and of course never played the PS3 game that came before this one. I did have an interest in this new perspective not because I'm a long time fan, but because it looked like it was something different in a franchise that's long since gone stale.

Availability: Released on Playstation 3, XBox 360, and PC initially on disc and digital download. After the game's success it was updated and re-released on Playstation 4 and XBox One as a 'Definitive Edition' which contained all the main features and DLC.

Version I Played: Playstation 3 version with none of the DLC.

Review: I'm not really sure what my real perspective of Tomb Raider is. I've never been a big fan of it per se. As I mentioned in the 'personal history' the newest Tomb Raider game I played before this was back in the late 90's on the Dreamcast (or early 2000's.) And I think the reason is because the franchise never held much interest for me outside of, sadly, the obvious. There was a breif period during the height of Tomb Raider's popularity when Lara Croft became more of a pop culture icon than a video game character and many young boys (including myself, being a young boy at the time) wanted to recognize that if you know what I mean.

Good Lord, how was this ever found attractive?

Outside of that I never got into the game itself. I had a couple for the PC but never got far and I think a big part of that was how the game played. I'm tempted to go back and give it the old college try. Only problem is I think it would be more challenging now since that franchise and it's controls have aged about as well as most games from the 90's.
Then I started to notice the bad reviews coming in for later games and how nothing had really changed. So why bother playing? A shame because looking back the game had more potential but was weighed down by terrible controls and childishly forced sex appeal. Sex appeal that, ironically, was started because the programmers accidentally programmed Lara to become a watermelon smuggler and it stuck. I'm serious, it was by accident.

With a lack of investment in the franchise it may seem surprising I even stuck through the reboot. Well the reason I tried is because the franchise actually went in a different and interesting direction.

Everything was changed for this reboot. EVERYTHING! Pretty much all that stayed was there's a character named Lara Croft who wears a blue tanktop and explores secrets of the world. This includes storytelling changes (especially in tone), changes in controls, mechanics, and best of all changes to Lara herself.
I say changing Lara is the best change because she was the biggest change that needed to happen in this franchise. Now that three Uncharted games have been released, which is basically a modern male version of Tomb Raider, they had to take a different approach. Lara can't be the same girl she used to be and I commend them for that. We actually get someone with the potential to be interesting. And while she changed slightly between the first game and the most recent one before this it wasn't a lot.

Here's a quick, unfair comparison.

While it's an origin story it feels more like growth than anything else. It feels like the character has grown because we see her in a far less Playboy Bunny-esque manner.
While not a completely unsexualized version of Lara I do find this version of her far more attractive. For one she has full pants and that makes her more appealing alone. But also she has this Katiness Everdine feel to her. She's brave, has beauty, but shows her emotions far more realistically than any previous Lara would.
She's also put in a situation that's against her control. To condense it as much as possible, Lara and her expedition crew become trapped and fighting for their lives on a remote island against a bunch of bad dudes. Lara spends most of her time simply trying to survive rather than exploring and kicking ass. Again, a nice change of pace. Makes her feel less like a rich super hero of the tombs and more like a real person.

Story and character aside (for now) I was very happy to see how well the game mechanics were put together... for the most part. Most of the third person action games I've played in recent memory have been multiple Assassin's Creed games so I had to get that out of my mind and get used to Lara's matter of walking, talking, and shooting. Once I got used to it I found the mechanics to be very friendly and smooth. Running from one end of the map to another, climb a wall, shoot a rope arrow to the side of a cliff, slide my way down, jump off the rope and pull out a gun to shoot a bad guy. It all works very well and I'm happy to see this.
This a much needed change to the very, VERY outdated controls that the older games held onto for far too long. While I'm not entirely against tank or tank-like controls, they only work for certain types of games. But the old controls for Tomb Raider were like tank controls but from a specific perspective that didn't even work too well back then, making it super slow. So among any other update and change to this franchise, I like this change the most.

With that excellent control they also give a consistently exciting world to run around in. One thing this world had going for it was there was always something going on. Outside of me doing some tedious side quests to get more material for stronger weapons I always felt a sense of excitement in what's happening and what's happening next.
And I have to say it wasn't the easiest task getting from beginning to end. Many times I found myself very challenged by what's going on, some of which was cheap, but I digress. It was still a very fun experience that forced me to pay attention instead of mindlessly shooting from bad guy to bad guy. Hell, it even incorporated a very basic element of stealth, wherein you can sneak up on a bad guy and choke him.

While a lot of my praises may seem vague and general... that's because there's a lot of good but it's not a terribly unique good. Before I get to the bad stuff would I say the game is worth a play? Hell yes! It's a very fun experience but I wouldn't necessarily say it stands out among the other good and exciting action adventure games outside of the fact the star has something the others don't.
You fill in the blank.

Really I'd say this game has plenty of problems, many of which aren't that terrible, but keep it from being something much better. A shame since a lot of these were simply and/or stylistic mistakes.

The easiest way to describe it is the game is just trying a bit too hard.
The first is the aesthetic. It's dark and gritty which I'm fine with. If anything I like it when a story can be uncut with it's vision. If it gets excessive is a different story, which I don't feel Tomb Raider does too much. But there are some deaths that are a bit more vicious than they needed to be.
Still the dark and gritty reboot is something of a joke these days. Seems like it's happening all over the place with many IP's and not just in the gaming world. So making Tomb Raider dark and violent feels uncreative, like it's jumping on a bandwagon.
Speaking of jumping on the bandwagon it also jumps on the thin morality take that happens in many modern violent games. While I love the idea of morality systems this is a fine example of the story saying "killing is harsh and you only do it when you're forced to," going so far as to have Lara shaking up to the point of her first kill. Then you literally shoot down hundreds of bad guys with multiple weapons with the greatest of ease as if you were trained to do this sort of thing.
Doing it in game is fun, mechanically. But in terms of story and tone it just doesn't feel right and killed some of the immersion for me. Making this a "headphones" game for me. Where I listen to podcasts and other stuff while playing the game because I mostly find it appealing at a more basic level.

I also don't like how it's trying to copycat both the cinematic approach of modern games while also trying to be something open world like Assassin's Creed.
It's an odd mix because you have these set QTE's where you're sliding down a raging river avoiding obstacles or anything else over the top exciting. While cool and tense I don't like this trend. It's incorporating elements of a set piece shooter where so much is happening with little to none of your involvement or interaction. Making it a prettier version of a laserdisc game like Dragon's Lair.
This does not mix well with the supposed open world approach it has because everything is very divided, only easily accessible by doing a quick travel via the bonfires across the map. This, mixed with no contextual reason to collect items or do certain objectives makes it hard to justify doing side quests outside of getting the trophy/achievement for your efforts if that's your sort of thing.
They're a pain to navigate through and give you little incentive to do them.

What I did like that is in a similar realm to these are the actual raids of tombs.
Throughout most of the maps on the island there's a hidden entrance to a tomb wherein you have to solve some sort of puzzle or find the right path to get a treasure. These are short but many are challenging, some involving quick acting. And this was the only section where I felt the award justified the work. You get much bigger prizes going into these side missions than any of the other side missions.

Sadly that's the only side mission that's good and worthwhile. Going in the tradition of the game trying too hard it tries to give you everything you want but in the easiest way possible. Resulting in a big game full of a lot of options but with no real purpose to do them.
Yes you can upgrade weapons but I saw little change. Outside of necessary upgrades like the ability to shoot ropes with your bow and arrow there was little reason to upgrade as far as I could tell. I likely could have beat the game with minimal upgrades outside of what I got from natural progression instead of going around salvaging anything and everything I could, which I did.

Again, does this mean it's worth playing? Does this mean it's bad? No, not a chance. I said it before I'll say it again... this is definitely a fun experience and worth your time. I assure you you'll enjoy it as it is and you may even like elements of it more than I did. I just felt it tried too many things at once instead of focusing on other/better things that could have improved it and not made it inconsistent and unfinished. Otherwise, definitely a blast I enjoyed for what it was. They must have done something right to get me to go through all I did.

I did not play any of the DLC. The main game did not entice me to try.