Independence Day and the Sketchy Ping Pong Ball of Intelligence

As of yesterday, I’ve seen both of the Independence Day films twice.

I hadn’t seen the first one until earlier this year. How that oversight came about? I have no idea.

As always, I have opinions. But for this particular post, I’m going to focus on one particular thought and its surrounding items.

The virtual life form that looks like Marvin’s head from the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy film.

I get the worst vibes from that spherical entity. And maybe I’m alone in that, but something about showing up to collect refugees and taken them back to a planet feels super sketchy. Pretty sure that’s the lead-up to the subjugation of the human race.

DO NOT TRUST THOSE CLAIMING TO BE PURELY ALTRUISTIC.

And maybe I’m prescribing too human of attributes to it, but its motivations and the story it feeds Okun and the others does not feel legitimate. If the virtual being thinks us so primitive, why would it come to collect survivors to help in its quest to destroy the harvesters? Why would it need us? Ignore, for a moment that in this AU, the world has managed to defeat the harvesters twice—it wouldn’t have known that when it set out—what use does it have for so-called primitive life forms? Does it’s “rescue” come with the demand for manual labor?

Sure SF humanity has a way of thinking outside of the box and pulling miracles out of our asses from time to time, but the sphere of intelligence doesn’t know that.

I don’t trust it and neither should you. DO AS I SAY!

This is probably one of the less problematic issues with the film, which I like on a purely alien-candy enjoyment level, but it’s one that keeps surfacing among the other thoughts that actually make me mad.

Why I Haven’t Seen Logan Yet

There are three reasons I haven’t watched Logan yet (and yes, I probably will eventually. I think Earl wants to see it, but he knows how much I don’t and hasn’t pushed for us to find the time)

1) I am afraid as hell that they’re going to miss an opportunity.

I don’t need another story about the past-his-prime hero saving the girl (however old or young). And I’m worried that’s what this is going to be about--based solely on the trailer. And I’d rather just assume it’s going to let me down, rather than have it confirmed.

2) The inferred insurmountable tragedy

The trailer makes two things “clear”: Professor X is going to die; Logan is going to die. If that’s the case… I don’t really need to watch the film--after all, I’ve seen Xavier die before. If that’s not the case, the lead up is going to feel like a cheat. I wouldn’t say I’d be walking into this one bloodthirsty… but playing with emotional expectations of that variety and then saying “oh, nope! Maybe he’s not dead after all!” is a cheap parlor trick and I’m tired of it (especially since they’ve already done it with a Wolverine movie *cough* Weapon XI *cough*.)

3) I’m honestly tired of the “Put Wolverine in it” mentality.

The same thing seems to be happening with Tony in the MCU (and spiderman) and I’m pretty much over it. I’m not sure if the studios don’t think people will want to watch an XMen film without him, or what, but I’m honestly tired of him showing up everywhere.

Tie In Marketing

Because, occasionally, accusations fly when drinks are involved, but the other person won’t let you defend yourself… this one’s for you, John. (But don’t read it like a letter to you personally. I’m using the general “you.”)

Previously, I have talked about the fact that I hate geek snobbery. And really, I do. You like what you like, and that’s great. I like what I like, and that’s great too.

But tie-in marketing bugs the crap out of me.

I understand why it’s there. I understand that other people like it. I’m not going to sit here and tell you you can’t like it.

For the most part, my personal loathing of tie-in marketing is limited to consumables. Things with the appropriate pictures slapped on their labels to drive sales…. Labels that are going to be thrown away shortly after purchase. Guardians of the Galaxy Doritos, Game of Thrones beer, and Superman Pepsi are all things that I don’t see a point to.

But my low opinion of those products and their marketing shenanigans doesn’t fall on the people who buy them. For one thing, there is every possibility you just wanted a 12pk of Pepsi and there was no other option. But even if you bought that bag of chips because  you think Gamora is the hottest green lady since Star Trek TOS, that's cool (you wouldn’t be wrong). You do you.

My annoyance is with the marketing departments.

I get it. Everything is about making money. Tie-in products trigger a switch in fan-brains because we love this thing, we think favorably toward things that our brains connect with this thing we love. And this leads to more sales.  

When I was a kid, it didn’t bother me. I LOVED me those Shasta Mario sodas (Yoshi Green Apple was the best). I honestly don’t remember when it started to bug me, but it’s the nonsensical connections that make my head tilt at an impossible angle.

This all came up because of baseball.

I love baseball. It’s pretty much the only sport I watch. But when the TV at our favorite neighborhood bar popped up an announcement that the first however-many fans to a future Diamondbacks game would get a white walker-ified bobblehead of Taijuan Walker, I groaned a little too loudly and commented on the ridiculousness of this. This was the same week I caught sight of Diamondbacks branded wine--of all things--in the grocery store, I couldn’t stop myself from losing a little bit more faith in humanity.

So, John, if disliking a product-based marketing scheme is snobbery, then I guess I’m a snob.