Monthly Archive for October, 2008

The Godfather (Puzo)

Laid down
by
Paul
on October 29, 2008
in Reviews
. 6 Comments Tags: .

The Godfather

I’ve seen the movie version of The Godfather several times, but I’d never read the book until this past week. Despite some intermittently clumsy writing, I’ve gotta say that Mario Puzo’s most famous creation is pretty damned entertaining. It’s all there — a complete template for the movie can be found within the pages of the novel. I’m not implying that Francis Ford Coppola brought nothing to the table when he directed the film — the movie is perfectly cast and wonderfully made — but from a story standpoint, Puzo definitely did the heavy lifting. In fact, it’s easy for me to see how the book must have been an absolute sensation in its time. Though I haven’t done the research, I have to assume that The Godfather represents the first treatment of the Mafia as it really is (or at least a much truer approximation than Hollywood had ever offered). It’s clear from the level of detail that Puzo did his homework. In our current age of Goodfellas, the “Godfather” films, and The Sopranos factoids concerning la cosa nostra are readily available. I feel fairly safe in asserting that Mario Puzo must have launched that particular arm of pop culture with his riveting little book.

Do I have complaints about The Godfather? Oh, absolutely. As I mentioned, some of the writing is very clunky. Puzo has a tendancy to use the same catchphrases repeatedly and the repetition becomes wearying. Also, there are a few passages that are so inelegant I wondered if Puzo proofread his own work (or even had an editor do it for him). And  I have to hand it to Coppola for streamlining the part of Kay for the film. Kay — Michael Corleone’s wife played by Diane Keaton — is much more aware of her husband’s true nature in the book and this rang false to me. Maybe I’m just being naive, but I think most normal, well-educated women would head for the hills if they found out their husband was a cold-blooded killer and Mafia kingpin. Again, Coppola was wise to trim down the character of Johnny Fontane in his adaptation. (Johnny is the Italian singer for whom Brando makes his unrefusable offer.) Fontane is much more prominent in the book and this represents, for me at least, one of more disappointing aspects of the work. In the novel, Johnny Fontane is Frank Sinatra. Puzo takes Sinatra’s life whole cloth and “fictionalizes” it to create his own fading former boy crooner. Honestly, the parallels are so numerous that I have to assume that Sinatra at least considered legal action.

But none of these complaints are deal breakers by any stretch. The Godfather is an absolute blast from start to finish and I’m tempted to dive right into the movie as soon as possible so that I can look at it with my experience of the book still fresh in my mind.

Remember When MTV Played Music?

Laid down
by
Paul
on October 28, 2008
in General
. 0 Comments Tags: , .

I don’t know how long this site’s been around, but it makes me happy. It’s like old school MTV only I’m in charge.

MTVmusic.com.

Here’re a few things I dig just for the ever lovin’ hell of it…

1) Jeff Buckley: “Forget Her”

2) Radiohead: “Paranoid Android”

3) Prince and the Revolution: “Let’s Go Crazy”

What Does Ron Howard Think of the Election?

Laid down
by
Paul
on October 23, 2008
in General
. 4 Comments Tags: , .

I don’t do politics on this website. Ever. It’s one of my Unwritten Laws. That being said, I was floored enough by the video I embedded below to share it with you. As far as I’m concerned, Ron Howard’s little commercial for Barack Obama is a textbook example of how to win people over to your cause with simple honesty and good humor.

See more Ron Howard videos at Funny or Die

Close Encounters of the Third Kind

Laid down
by
Paul
on October 23, 2008
in Reviews
. 0 Comments Tags: , , .

Close Encounters of the Third Kind (30th Anniversary Ultimate Edition) [Blu-ray]

Over the years I’ve come to associate Close Encounters of the Third Kind with 2001: A Space Odyssey — both films have a spiritual core which causes them to transcend their more mundane elements. I once heard Stanley Kubrick’s widow refer to “2001″ as an “agnostic’s prayer” and I feel that this is a fitting description for “Close Encounters” as well. Both directors — Kubrick and Steven Spielberg — are examining the Divine via mysterious extraterrestrials making historic contact with humankind. Kubrick’s E.T.s remain offstage and unknowable while Spielberg’s appear and make small talk. The differences speak not only to the discrepancies between the two directors, but also in the times. CE3K’s uplifting finale and message of commonality were, I think, well-suited to the post-Watergate/post-Vietnam era (much as Star Wars was the right movie for the right time too). I enjoy “Close Encounters” as a whole, but to me, it all really boils down to that ending. I find myself becoming impatient as I sit through the picture because what I really want to see is the last thirty minutes. (Again, this is less a condemnation of the first two thirds of the movie so much as it is praise for the final act.) That ending works so beautifully for two reasons: 1) It is a lovely payoff to the aforementioned spiritual through-line and 2) It brilliantly flips a longstanding Science Fiction cliche on its head. Before CE3K all aliens were hideous beasties, armed to the teeth and spoiling for a fight. The extraterrestrials Spielberg gives us are curious, friendly and anxious to open a dialogue. This juxtaposition alone makes the film worthy of a place of honor in the Sci-fi hall of fame (if there is such a thing, which there probably is).

One of the attractions to the most recent home video release of Close Encounters of the Third Kind is that it includes all three versions of the film. Here’s a little history lesson for those of you who may not be up to speed… “Close Encounters” was originally released in late 1977, but if he’d had his druthers, Spielberg would have preferred to wait until spring 1978. Columbia, the studio which produced the movie, was in financial trouble so deep their whole future was reliant on Spielberg’s little alien movie. The director was urged to have the flick ready for the ‘77 holiday season despite his protestations that it was not finished. “Close Encounters” did make it into theaters on time and it saved Columbia from bankruptcy. But Spielberg was so bothered by the fact that he wasn’t able to make the picture that he wanted to make that he went back to Columbia and asked them for money to complete CE3K properly. Columbia agreed but under one condition: Spielberg had to show what Richard Dreyfuss sees once he’s inside the alien mothership. The director agreed and Close Encounters of the Third Kind: The Special Edition appeared in 1980. Flashforward to roughly 1997 and you get a third and final version of the movie. Close Encounters of the Third Kind: The Director’s Cut reconciles all the best material from the two prior versions and excises the mothership interior shots (which Spielberg always felt were a mistake).

Out of curiosity, I watched the original cut — a version I had not seen since 1977 in the theater when I was 11 years old (how trippy is that?). Though I had a good time with the picture overall, I found myself missing certain scenes which were added to later versions and which I felt enhanced the experience. I didn’t miss the mothership interior shots (Spielberg’s right: that was a mistake), but little things like Dreyfuss’ freak-out in the shower are solid additions to the drama. Though I enjoyed revisiting the film a great deal, I think I’m going to hold off on shelving it for a few days. Once I’ve gotten another film or two under my belt, I think I’ll watch The Director’s Cut. If memory serves, this late 90s version really was a solid synthesis of the ‘77 version and the 1980 Special Edition.

The Problem of the Ending:

Steven Spielberg has stated several times that if he were to make “Close Encounters” today the ending would be very different — Richard Dreyfuss would not get on the mothership at the end and abandon his wife and three young children. I get that. When you stop to think about it, it is pretty f’ed up that those kids are never going to see their dad again (or, if they do, they’ll all be thirty years older and he won’t have changed). Maybe it’s a testament to the power of the finale that you tend not to ruminate over this too much while you’re watching the movie. If Spielberg hadn’t called attention to it, it might not have occurred to me at all.

Sleeping Beauty

Laid down
by
Paul
on October 22, 2008
in Cartoons & Animation and Reviews
. 0 Comments Tags: , , , , , .

[Updated 10.29.08]

Sleeping Beauty (Two-Disc Platinum Edition + Standard DVD and BD Live) [Blu-ray]

Sleeping Beauty isn’t one of Walt’s best animated features.  In many respects, it’s a triumph of style over substance. The background paintings by Eyvind Earle are stunning in their sheer detail and masterful technique and, coupled with the stylized verticals in the character design, they make “Beauty” look like a medieval tapestry come to life (if that medieval tapestry were somehow filtered through a nineteen-fifties design aesthetic). For me, however, it’s like the filmmakers poured the majority of their efforts into the look of the film and the story suffers a deficit of warmth as a result. As is usually the case in these films, the ostensible heroes of the piece — the prince and princess — are virtual ciphers and the supporting characters are allowed to take center stage. This tendency has never really bothered me, however, since princes and princesses are generally pretty boring people; it’s the sidekicks and villains we’re usually most interested in. The Good Faeries (Beauty’s de facto guardians) are sufficiently motherly and amusing and the villain is a real doozy. Maleficent — despite the blandness of some of the supporting material — is one of Disney’s best villains. Not only is she a chilling presence in every scene she inhabits, she has a speech late in the film where she mocks the prince for his naivete and hope. At the end of this bit of dialogue, Maleficent probably has the audience believing that they may not get their expected happy ending. But this stately and cruel villainess is not enough to lift Sleeping Beauty to the level of the great Disney animated features that preceded it (or the ones the followed it in the late nineteen-eighties and nineteen-nineties). Although the film is indisputably gorgeous, the story obviously never received the much-vaunted input of Walt himself. No, by 1959, Walt was much too interested in theme parks, and television, and live action fare like 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea to give animation the loving attention it once enjoyed. Does that mean Sleeping Beauty wasn’t worth my time? On the contrary, it’s a perfectly enjoyable way to spend 75 minutes. It’s just not one of the true classics is all.

In parting, let me just say that “Beauty” was a terrific choice for the first ever Disney animated feature on Blu-ray. The aforementioned detail really pops on this new high definition disc. Both the sound and picture were superlative. Soon I may even violate a long-standing rule of mine and listen to the disc’s audio commentary which features John Lasseter, Leonard Maltin and animator Andreas Deja — three guys I really admire and respect.

[I tend to avoid audio commentaries for two reasons: 1) Time is fleeting and death awaits and 2) Most of them suck.]

The Commentary:

Well, I did indeed listen to the commentary track and it didn’t suck at all. The aforementioned Maltin, Deja and Lasseter are all obvious fans of the work and their knowledge and enthusiasm made for a very pleasant 75 minutes of audio. The comments of the three hosts are periodically bolstered by the addition of archival audio from some of the men who actually worked on Sleeping Beauty (including Walt Disney himself).  Out of everyone, I’d say Lasseter brings the least to the table (he comes off more as a fan than an expert), but this is a very minor criticism.

I have no qualms at all in telling you that, if you bought the disc, you should definitely put in another viewing to experience the commentary.

Indy 4 Once More

Laid down
by
Paul
on October 17, 2008
in Reviews
. 9 Comments Tags: , , .

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull [Blu-ray]

Okay, so it’s been nearly 5 months since I saw Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull so I had to see whether or not my opinion would soften upon a second viewing. I’m man enough to admit that it did. Maybe it was the fact that it was just me, a darkened room and my TV, but the flick seemed to make a little more sense to me this time around. There are still a few glaring lapses in logic, two characters are so poorly or confusingly written that I felt bad for the actors (John Hurt and Ray Winstone), and a couple of scenes still made me wince (”Tarzan Shia”), but I did have a slightly better time on this go-’round. I’m sure that’s attributable somewhat to the quality of the presentation found on the blu-ray. Not only does the movie look fantastic, the documentaries (overseen by the always reliable Laurent Bouzereau) are also a real treat.

There’s no doubt in my mind that “Crystal Skull” would have been better had Frank Darabont been kept on as writer, but there is enough here for me to give the flick a marginally passing grade.

On Writing Well

Laid down
by
Paul
on October 14, 2008
in Reviews and Writing
. 2 Comments Tags: .

On Writing Well, 30th Anniversary Edition: The Classic Guide to Writing Nonfiction (On Writing Well)

I worry sometimes about how my writing style has evolved in this bullet-point-only, blog-on-demand world where so much of our communication is overly-chummy and, worse, unclear. I’m all for writing which speaks directly to the reader, but I also enjoy a point — preferably a point which is delivered artfully with clean English sentences. After completing my recent freelance writing gig, my head was stuck in Non-fiction Prose Land. The fact that I am re-reading Roger Ebert’s terrific “Great Movies” essays has only served to keep me there. Last week I found myself wondering if there was an equivalent to By Cunning and Craft for non-fiction writers. I’m happy to report that not only is there such a book, it can be had cheaply.

On Writing Well by William Zinsser has been in print for over thirty years and I’ve been ignoring it for close to twenty. I think it’s the title: On Writing Well sounds like a philosophical treatise for grammarians. Since I’d rather read a compendium of celebrity laundry lists than a treatise for grammarians, I never gave “Writing Well” a proper looking over. As it turns out, this was my loss. The book, though it does get into technique, is never stuffy or preoccupied with rules of usage. The chapters on craft all deal with clean, clear communication. Zinsser, a veteran writer for newspapers and magazines and a former teacher at Yale, also delves into writing for particular markets. Travel, Sports, Science & Technology, Humor, the Arts, and Business each get their own concise, well-reasoned essay. But the thing which impressed me most about On Writing Well was Zinsser’s emphasis on the writer’s voice. He encourages aspirants to use first person and to allow opinion and personal experience to inform the work. As a writer, he argues, your most valuable asset is you — your style and your point of view. He drives this point home with surprising warmth and with clean English sentences.

On Writing Well is a terrific book for those interested in non-fiction styling and, as I mentioned, it can be had cheaply. I first examined the fifteen dollar paperback in the Writing and Publishing section of my local Borders. Then, on my way out and quite by accident, I stumbled upon the seven dollar hardcover in the Bargain section. Same content, cheaper price. Go figure.

Blizzcon 2008

Laid down
by
Paul
on October 11, 2008
in General
. 0 Comments Tags: .

Through the good graces of a friend of mine who works at Blizzard Entertainment, I’ve gotten comped for the last two Blizzcons. For those of you who don’t know, Blizzcon is a weekend event held at the Anaheim Convention Center in celebration of  the video games Blizzard creates. Off the top of my head, I can’t think of another developer with a following zealous enough to warrant its own convention, but then Blizzard isn’t exactly a conventional developer. All three of the company’s major IPs are successes within the field, but World of Warcraft is a monster (so much so that I’ll wager even the non-gamers amongst you have heard of it). WoW has more than ten million subscribers worldwide and is rumored to generate something like a billion dollars a year.

In some ways, this year’s convention wasn’t as thrilling as last year’s. Part of what I look foward to is the keynote and the product announcements therein. Last year, Wrath of the Lich King, the second World of Warcraft expansion was unveiled and it was fun to see the crowd go nuts for it. This year, the big announcement was a new playable character class in the forthcoming Diablo 3 — not a bad thing, mind you, but not nearly as earth-shaking as a full-on product. I can’t really hold Blizzard accountable for this anti-climax, really — it’s going to be impossible for them to make a boffo announcement at every one of these deals so it pays not to get too excited for the keynote each and every time.

On the other hand, they did have both Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 playable on the convention floor and that’s a pretty big deal to those of us who play computer games. (For those of you who don’t, forthcoming installments in both of these series are roughly equivalent to new Star Wars films — back when new Star Wars films were actually good). I’m happy to report that both of these titles look spectacular, but I’m not letting myself get too worked up about it since Blizzard has a standard “we’ll release it when it’s ready” policy and they’re real sticklers about this. Maybe that’s why they have such a zealous fanbase, come to think of it.

The one downside to the whole experience was the substantially larger crowd this time out — something like fifteen thousand people showed up for this little soiree. As I think I might have mentioned in a prior post, big crowds and darkened convention centers have a tendency to wear me out. I’m thinking Blizzard may actually need to investigate a bigger venue next year so that the crowds aren’t quite so thick. Blizzcon’s starting to outgrow it’s humble roots. Oh well, good for Blizzard.

Beer League

Laid down
by
Paul
on October 11, 2008
in Reviews
. 6 Comments Tags: , , .

Artie Lange's Beer League [Blu-ray]

I watched Beer League – a movie which, let’s face it, ain’t Citizen Kane – primarily because of my affection for Artie Lange. Artie’s been Howard Stern’s radioland sidekick for about seven years and he brings a lot to that show. He has a very Blue Collar amiability and a crassness that I really respond to — plus you get the impression that he’s a genuinely warm guy. Maybe it’s that affection that’s motivating me to give the movie a passing grade despite the fact that it’s highly flawed. Beer League is unrepentently aiming for glory in the Drunken Loser comedy sub-genre, but it just doesn’t have enough belly laughs to deliver. Lange’s not Bill Murray or (his idol) John Belushi, but he is likable enough here that I was more than willing to give him ninety minutes of my time. For his sake, I wish he’d hit a triple instead of a solid single.

Plot Envy 2: Character and Premise

Laid down
by
Paul
on October 9, 2008
in Writing
. 2 Comments Tags: , .

A few months ago, I posted a jaunty little essay called Plot Envy wherein I vowed to pay greater heed to plotting in all of my personal fiction writing. While I admire the aplomb of my younger self, I’m forced to take issue with his naiveté. There’s a lot of posturing in Plot Envy but almost no strategy, a lot of what, but strangely little how.

In thinking about it further, I’ve concluded that plotting for plot’s sake is a mathematical exercise doomed to yield soulless results. Starting with plot and ending with plot isn’t storytelling, it’s puzzle-making. There is now and always has been a market for these sorts of puzzles – the Mystery and Science Fiction sections of your local bookstore are full of them – but that isn’t the sort of writing I’m interested in. To me, the best kinds of stories – the stories that last – are the ones that elicit genuine emotion or reinforce some core human value. This cannot be achieved without interesting characters with whom we empathize.

Oddly, I mock my own predisposition toward character in my original essay. Here’s a sample: “I tend to create a character and follow him to see where he goes, taking notes all the while like a cub reporter or some kind of half-assed literary peeping tom”. Upon reflection, I don’t see anything wrong with this approach as long as it isn’t allowed to proceed without regard to premise. My understanding of the word premise is that it is the springboard or gist upon which a plot can be built. Plot is the series of events which connect together to deliver on the promise of the premise. While either a strong character or a strong premise can provide the impetus which sets the writer to writing, both should be considered in conjunction with one another if the goal is a story with emotional resonance. As we’ve seen, if premise is fleshed out into plot without regard to character, the result is the Puzzle Story. If character is the springboard and premise is largely ignored, you get the Character Study. Again, both can be valid forms, but neither should be viewed as holistic. As an aside – and as something which is strictly a matter of personal taste – I would choose Character Study over Puzzle Story were I forced to adopt either approach. But then math never was my strong suit.

One of the observations I made in Plot Envy was that it is good to know your ending so that plot can be reverse engineered toward that conclusion. I am sure there is some truth to this, but taking it as a universal principle would be a mistake. I would wager that just as many writers don’t know their ending at the outset as do. Furthermore, I’m afraid there’s a danger in following the know-your-ending rule too assiduously. Down that path lies plot for plot’s sake and the awesome power of the unconscious mind to invent is waylaid. If an ending comes organically, then it should be honored. But since writing is not truly a mathematical exercise, it could be wrong to discard a story simply because an ending doesn’t immediately suggest itself. If the tale’s other elements – character, premise, setting, theme, etc. – are compelling, the work should be allowed to breathe for a while before it is aborted.

Anyway, here is my evolving strategy (such as it is): When plotting, throw two stones into a pond. One stone is character and the other is premise. Where the ripples intersect, plot begins to form. Perhaps this sort of thinking is at least a small step between the what and the how.

The Prestige

Laid down
by
Paul
on October 8, 2008
in Reviews
. 4 Comments Tags: , .

The Prestige is the only one of Christopher “The Dark Knight” Nolan’s movies I had never seen so I decided to rectify that oversight this very evening. I’m sure glad I did too.

The film tells the story of two rival magicians in Victorian London. To say any more than that would be giving away some of the trick. If you haven’t seen The Prestige, do so. It’s a smartly-told tale which will reward your patience and your attention.

Plus, it’s got Batman versus Wolverine. What more could you ask for?

Three Quasi-related Topics

Laid down
by
Paul
on October 6, 2008
in Reviews
. 4 Comments Tags: , , , , .

[Revised and Expanded 10.07.08]

THE MARVEL ENCYCLOPEDIA SKIMMED:

The Marvel Encyclopedia

Here is book five from my Science Fiction Book Club introductory package. Why would I get a coffee table compendium of superheroes, you ask? Because it retails for forty bucks and I got it for seventeen cents. I’m not going to lie to you though — I didn’t exactly read this one from cover to cover. I picked it up, perused it for an hour or two, and then slid it onto a shelf with all of my hardcover art books. Ultimately, this is a reference volume and a silly one at that. Imagine taking a comic book character with a forty year history and condensing his entire biography into three paragraphs. Many of the entries are positively arcane and I found myself utterly baffled by them. Still, there are a lot of pretty pictures and if I ever find myself needing a refresher on Captain America’s back story, I now know where to look.

ANATHEM ABANDONED:

Anathem

I started reading Anathem by Neal Stephenson and dropped out after fifty pages or so. Like The Lord of the Rings and Dune, the book attempts to draw the reader into a wholly manufactured world. While both Tolkien and Herbert throw a lot of peculiar ideas and terminology at you, they do it at a comfortable pace and you’re able to slowly acclimate yourself to their new realities. Stephenson, perhaps to his credit, doesn’t hold the reader’s hand. Not only does he throw a lot of idiosyncratic lingo at you, he uses peculiar sentence constructions and you’re forced to read very closely. I suppose some would call Anathem “challenging”, and, while  I respect that, it’s not what I’m looking for right now. More than just the fact that the book was difficult to process, it also wasn’t clicking with me on an emotional level. An unhealthy percentage of those first fifty pages was description — of places, of lifestyles, etc. I really didn’t feel like I was getting to know any of the characters — which is weird when you consider that the book is written in first person and I should have at least developed some feeling for the narrator who was ostensibly talking directly to me.

Ah, well. Chalk the abandonment of my fourth Science Fiction Book Club selection up to laziness if you must. I just didn’t have the patience for it.

THE CLONE WARS RECONSIDERED:

I watched the first two episodes of The Clone Wars on Friday night. Given the absolutely horrible theatrical kick-off for this series, my expectations were quite low. Perhaps it was because of this that I was actually pleasantly surprised by what I saw. Don’t get me wrong — the show still isn’t as good as Genndy Tartakovsky’s 2D shorts of a few years back, but we’re still talking about a substantial improvement over the movie version. I think the stories are still skewed a bit a young and they have a tendancy to fall back on cliche, but the show could evolve into a decent enough kids’ program given judicious handling. Here’s my advice to the creators to instantly make the show 25% better: Don’t let the droid soldiers talk anymore. Ever. The “comedy” these characters spew out is nausea-inducing.

Blu-ray Marvelpalooza

Laid down
by
Paul
on October 5, 2008
in Reviews
. 0 Comments Tags: , , , .

Recently, I was lucky enough to be gifted with not only a high definition television, but also a Blu-ray player. I’m not sure what I did to so win the favor of the Gadget Gods, but it’s probably better not to question these things.

Spider-Man - The High Definition Trilogy (Spider-Man / Spider-Man 2 / Spider-Man 3) [Blu-ray]

Almost by happenstance the first four movies I’ve watched in hi-def have all been adaptations of Marvel Comics. I got a secondhand copy of Spider-man: The High Definition Trilogy and the wife and I peeped out Iron Man courtesy of Netflix. All these re-viewings did was concretize the opinions I already had:

  1. Spider-man 1 & 2… Quirky films which occasionally skirt the edge of fatal implausibility, but capture the essence of the source material so well that you’re having too good a time to notice.
  2. Spider-man 3… You had to go and push it too far, didn’t you, Sam? The movie just doesn’t work. Logic has been thrown to the wind and it’s debilitating to the stuff in the flick that does work. If you’re like me, you felt cheated by this one.
  3. Iron Man… Succeeds largely on the charm of its stars and the believability of its effects. The film won’t win an Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay, but I am unreservedly looking forward to a second installment.

Iron Man (Ultimate Two-Disc Edition) [Blu-ray]

And there you go: my first foray into the world of Blu-ray… a bunch of flicks I’ve already seen. And I’m afraid that won’t be changing anytime soon. The other set I picked up at the secondhand store was Francis Ford Coppola’s new restoration of The Godfather films. Looking forward to that one.

Games Journalism for Non-Dummies

Laid down
by
Paul
on October 3, 2008
in Reviews
. 2 Comments Tags: , .

Most video game journalism is aimed squarely at your average semi-literate, semi-brain damaged thirteen-year-old male. I would call this approach horribly out of sync with the times since the median age for gamers these days is somewhere in the late twenties, early thirties range. The only problem with my making that assertion would be that most of that core group — their advanced age notwithstanding — aren’t that much more mature than your average semi-literate, semi-brain damaged thirteen-year-old. But that’s a topic for another post.

So, what’s a fella to do if he likes video games but doesn’t enjoy being treated like a dolt? Sadly, there are only a couple of options, but I can recommend those options unreservedly. Buy these two magazines and ignore the rest.

EDGE:EDGE is, hands-down, the most erudite and thoughtful publication covering the world of electronic entertainment. It borders at times on the scholarly and the esoteric, but I’ll take that any day over the spastic, ungrammatical ravings found in nearly every other magazine on the subject. In addition to the standard reviews and previews, the last couple of issues of EDGE have featured articles on the interface design and the importance/nostalgia value of video game manuals. And the weird thing is both of those pieces were interesting. Oh, and on the subject of those previews… When EDGE does a preview, it isn’t the standard buying-into-the-hype sort of affair often found in other publications. If something looks shitty, EDGE will tell you so. Very refreshing, indeed.

I should point out the one relatively serious downside to EDGE — it’s a British publication and, as such, it’s a bit pricier. But, trust me, it’s worth the extra couple of bucks.

GAME INFORMER:Supposing you don’t want to pay more for EDGE, your next best option is GAME INFORMER, which thankfully, isn’t made by limeys and doesn’t cost and arm and a leg. The best way to describe GI is as “EDGE Lite”. The writing is still good and the coverage is just as comprehensive in most cases, but the level of erudition isn’t as high. Translation: GAME INFORMER is less snooty than EDGE. For most of you, that’s probably a good thing, but I would argue that we need to encourage serious writing and thought on video games if they’re ever to be taken seriously as an art form. That may sound like I’m slighting “Informer” in the smarts department, but I’m really not. I’m often surprised at the topics covered in GI as well as the depth in which they’re treated. It’s just that EDGE has a slight, well, edge when it comes to more philosophical matters.

Anyway, there you go. Like video games? Like to read? Hate being treated like a mental deficient? Buy GAME INFORMER and EDGE.