One of television's most devilishly charming series on air currently is Fox's Lucifer, starring Tom Ellis as the wickedly good-looking and charismatic Lucifer Morningstar. The television series has been on air for three seasons so far and continues. On Camera with Kam gives Lucifer a five-star rating and highly recommends watching the series. However, before tuning in to the show, here is the basis of what is going on in case this particular story isn't suitable for your preferences.
WARNING: Potential spoilers involved.
Lucifer tells the story of the Devil himself, Lucifer Morningstar, after the fall from Heaven and his escape from Hell. Lucifer decides to leave Hell to live in Los Angeles and break free from running the prison he was cast to. Now it is advisable to not go into a show such as Lucifer and watch it with the intent of expecting it to remain factual to Christianity or the Bible. In no way does the show promote to worship a certain religion or worship Satan himself. Therefore, it is recommended that the show be watched purely for enjoyment and nothing more.
What is exactly involved? Tom Ellis plays Lucifer, the Devil, the King of Hell, and the fallen son of God. Ellis' portrayal of Lucifer is witty, charming, and sensitive. For a huge portion of the show, Lucifer is what most people are familiar with. He is over-the-top, manipulative, selfish, and vindictive, but he does it with flare and humor. He also owns a club in Los Angeles called Lux. He is an admirer of the good life and definitely endorses sin when sin is committed, but he also punishes the evil. Lucifer doesn't threaten or attack those who do good. In fact, he is a very complex character underneath all of the flare and charm.
Lucifer has a deep emotional element to his character that Tom Ellis plays with such vulnerability and honesty. He struggles with the world expecting him to be one way, but despite his darkness, Lucifer cares about people. Lucifer cares for his angel brothers. Lucifer cares about his family.
His character also connects with a special woman, Detective Chloe Decker played by Lauren German. Throughout the series, Lucifer and Chloe develop an intimate bond with each other as Lucifer becomes fascinated with the fact that Chloe is pure of heart and isn't affected by his charms.
In the first episode, fans immediately see Lucifer's effects on others around him. He has a special kind of power to bring out people's deepest desires and confess the truth to him. However, Chloe Decker is the one person in his life that is unaffected by Lucifer's power. This encourages Lucifer to become Chloe's partner and work alongside her with the LAPD in the homicide department. Together, they solve cases and Lucifer helps Chloe by using his connections with the city and his charm.
Now from the beginning Lucifer admits to Chloe that he is the Devil. Lucifer immediately tells the truth not only to Chloe, but to mostly everyone, but seeing as how insane it sounds, most of the characters don't really believe him. Lucifer even forms a bond with a therapist named Linda Martin (Rachael Harris), whom he goes to for advice and she indulges what she calls delusions. Lucifer is also invulnerable to death, therefore, can't be killed by mortal weapons. However, there is one exception discovered. Whenever he is around Chloe Decker, Lucifer is capable of dying because somehow she makes him human.
Aside from the procedural aspect of the show in regards to following Chloe and Lucifer on a case by case episode, Lucifer also delivers on massive story arcs each season. These particular story arcs involve Lucifer's past and his constant battle with Heaven and Hell. Lucifer's battles with angels and demons sometimes interfere with his life as a consultant for the LAPD which presents great challenges for him to overcome. Perhaps one of the most interesting elements of the show is Lucifer's humanity.
One of the qualities to notice about Lucifer is how in this particular show, Lucifer doesn't kill people. He might punish evil and he does torture humans who have been sent to Hell, but he never kills them. Part of the reason for this is that Lucifer is still, to his core, an angel, despite being cast out of Heaven and cutting off his wings. According to the show, angels do not kill humans and it appears Lucifer chooses to not kill because of his connection to humanity. While he does partake in sins of other sorts, his bond with Chloe and his time on Earth helps him get in touch with the good inside of him. This tortures him as he struggles with being the Devil and being a good person. When Lucifer does kill, it is clear that it destroys him inside as Tom Ellis delivers a masterful performance with vulnerability and sensitivity.
For those who might be afraid that because the show centers around Lucifer, the Devil himself, do not go into the series believing it will partake in the worship of Satan as he is the epicenter of the series. In no way does On Camera with Kam promote a specific religion by endorsing Lucifer. Simply, five stars is for good story and character development, wonderful cast performances, and interesting subplots. Television isn't real, folks. There's no need to type this at the end, but there is always one person who might compare this show to worshipping Satan. Just watch television for what it is: Entertainment.
If one can't tell the difference between real and fake, don't watch it.
Now, Lucifer is five stars for us. Absolutely phenomenal!
Wednesday, December 20, 2017
Friday, December 1, 2017
Superheroes in Film & Television
Let's talk about the many faces of the superhero. Specifically, let's draw the attention on film and television adaptations. For years, the film and television industry have made various adaptations on superheroes and in line of the recent release of Avengers: Infinity War trailer, there are a few things to capitalize on here.
First off, despite there being a Marvel versus DC battle in the comics, there should be no comparison of the Marvel Cinematic Universe to the DC Cinematic Universe. There should also be no comparison to any of the television universes either. The reason this is important to note is because Justice League was just released in theaters. The tone of the Marvel films are extremely different from DC films. Marvel tends to be colorful and light-hearted. The witty banter between The Avengers team does make it easy to love the characters because they seem relatable. The Avengers come off like a group of people you would want to hang out with at a party because of who they are without their superhero personas.
Marvel also had time to develop the personalities of each individual Avenger for a good amount of years. Tony Stark led the charge in Iron Man and Robert Downey Jr. immediately embodied him in every way. Now that Downey has spent a long time being Stark, the fans associate the character's personality to the actor. Chris Evans is another example of an actor who embodies their superhero persona. In every sense, Captain America's courage, honesty, and heart is a picturesque version of the actor himself. Marvel had the sense to specifically search for actors who are not just physically the image of their superhero personas, but similar to them in personality. This project was long established by Marvel way before Iron Man. After the release of Iron Man, Captain America: The First Avenger, and Thor, the characters had already been given a platform to grow and develop.
Taking a look at DC, the tone is very different. Christopher Nolan helped reshape Batman with Christian Bale's portrayal for three films. Bale played a different Bruce Wayne because of the platforms he was given. Ben Affleck's Batman first came into the story with Batman vs. Superman, therefore, not giving him a stand alone film of his own to develop a relationship with his audience. Understanding that this is very important in story development is crucial in separating comparisons when going to the cinema. Affleck had the challenge of presenting his Bruce Wayne for the first time ever sharing the screen with Henry Cavill's Superman. Cavill had already had the ability to introduce his Superman to the world in the stand alone Man of Steel. It wasn't until Affleck had the chance to take on a more leadership role in Justice League that helped him find his footing. For fans, it's easy to connect with characters that have established a relationship with their audience for what seems like a lifetime of films.
For example, fans got to know Tony Stark in three stand alone Iron Man films. Like in television, when the fans have the chance to go through that journey with a character, it's easier to reach them on a personal level.
DC, in an effort to bring in the Justice League team so soon has hit some bumps in the road. The film was well shot and the tone matched the familiarity of Christopher Nolan. However, the lack of connection to characters hurt the film. Jason Momoa, while doing a brilliant portrayal of Arthur Curry, had not been introduced prior to the film. Gal Gadot was instantly supported by her stand alone film Wonder Woman and her first appearance in Batman vs. Superman. The fans did meet Ezra Miller's Barry Allen for a brief moment in Suicide Squad, but according to reviews, some of the fans didn't like how childish Barry came off.
This is where I can shift gears and explain why comparisons can't be necessary just yet.
Example One: Tobey Maguire vs. Andrew Garfield vs. Tom Holland
When Civil War came out, Tom Holland was finally given his first film debut as the webbed superhero, Spiderman. This particular superhero over a short period of time has been recast and played by two other actors. Sony owned the rights to Spiderman until Marvel finally fought to have Spiderman back, therefore giving them the ability to place a new version into their Cinematic Universe.
Tobey Maguire starred as Peter Parker in three standalone films while Sony owned the rights. In a lot of ways, Maguire embodied Peter Parker more so than Spiderman. The nerdy portrayal of Parker was spot on and the only downside to Maguire's performance was the story in Spiderman 3. He was loved by many fans, but unfortunately, creative differences cast Spiderman 4 aside as an option when director Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire tried to fight for creative control. Maguire had the ability to connect to the fans for three films.
Andrew Garfield, in every sense, was the Spiderman. The sarcasm and the playfulness just came naturally to Garfield and was easily read on screen. His chemistry with Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy was instant and fans could enjoy this lighter version of The Amazing Spiderman. Garfield was given the ability to be Parker for two standalone films, once again establishing a connection with fans.
The drawback to replacing Spiderman so much was once fans get attached to the characters, it's hard to let them go. Then, it also becomes difficult for the new actor to follow in the footsteps of those actors.
Tom Holland was cast as Peter Parker/Spiderman for the Marvel film Civil War. Fans were uncertain to how Holland would do, but once the film was released, there was already comparisons to the other Spiderman actors. This doesn't work for a few reasons. Tom Holland came into the MCU among a cast of actors who had been playing their roles for a long time.
Holland jumps in on the scene with legends like Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Jeremy Renner, Scarlett Johannson, Paul Bettany, Sebastian Stan, Anthony Mackie, Paul Rudd, and Elizabeth Olsen. By this point of the timeline, all of these characters have already created a bond with each other, so it makes it difficult for Tom Holland to just ease into that kind of situation.
Holland's first portrayal of Spiderman was great for the platform he was introduced on. His character was witty and light. He was also young enough to pass for a teenager more so than Maguire and Garfield was when cast. Tom Holland was given the opportunity after his first film to star in his standalone film, Spiderman Homecoming. Once again, fans were calling it the Robert Downey Jr. film since Tony Stark was in it as well.
However, it was no mistake that Marvel chose Tom Holland for Peter Parker. Tom Holland trained for the role as well as offered a refreshing interpretation to what was already familiarized with the audiences. The Peter Parker that Maguire and Garfield portrayed was at a very different point of his life. Tom Holland's Peter Parker has met the Avengers and is just starting out as Spiderman. Apples and oranges in most cases as each actor can be appreciated for their individual interpretations.
Example Two: Batman Film vs. Batman TV
I want to compare two very different Batman characters because there is something impressive to admire about each version. You take a look at someone like Christian Bale, who brought the Batman character to a whole new level. On one hand, as Bruce Wayne, he was sure of himself and yet had a sense of doubt on certain things. As Batman, he was the caped crusader in true form.
Again, establishing earlier that Ben Affleck's Batman is on a very different path than Christian Bale's Batman. Affleck came in under the light of Henry Cavill and had to jump in with a not-so-easy first script. Rather than getting an origin piece, Ben Affleck has to play Bruce Wayne/Batman as someone who is immediately seeking vengeance on Superman. There was a lot of familiarity in style thanks to Christopher Nolan, but Affleck's Bruce Wayne in Justice League was becoming a strong leader. He seemed to fall into place among the team once Bruce had a purpose.
Now compare this Bruce Wayne to David Mazouz on Fox's Gotham. Gotham tells the origin story of Bruce Wayne/Batman. This format had been done before when Smallville aired back in 2001. Tom Welling was cast as Clark Kent/Superman in the origin story that lasted ten seasons on the WB turned CW. Despite both shows being about the origin of the superheroes, when cast, David Mazouz was asked to play Bruce Wayne. Tom Welling was asked to play Clark Kent. Neither one of them were cast as Batman or Superman. However, both characters will become their superhero personas.
That's the wonderful advantage of those origin stories. David Mazouz gets to focus his attention on playing Bruce Wayne and not Batman. He doesn't have the added challenge just yet of playing both personas. Batman and Bruce Wayne are two separate personalities. This was clearly established in Christian Bale's portrayal of Batman. In fact, it's very clear in most superhero stories. Batman would choose to react to a situation differently than Bruce Wayne would. David Mazouz's Bruce Wayne is currently starting to train under Alfred to become a vigilante and prowl in the night, protecting innocent people. Alfred (Sean Pertwee) had to remind Bruce that there were going to be times where he would have to separate his life as Bruce Wayne and his life as the vigilante. Mazouz recently started playing his Bruce Wayne as a billionaire party boy in order to separate himself from the Batman. The reason you admire this is because while someone like Ben Affleck has to be both the Batman and Bruce, David Mazouz gets to spend a huge amount of time getting to know who Bruce Wayne is going to be before he ever has to become Batman.
Clark Kent was the same way. Tom Welling talked to Christopher Reeve when Reeve was on the show about Superman versus Clark Kent. Christopher Reeve informed Tom that the character that Reeve played was Superman and Clark Kent was the disguise. Tom Welling was Clark Kent and Superman would become the disguise. Welling spent ten seasons getting to know Clark Kent and living as the man before the superman. Giving these actors the ability to separate the two personas puts them at an advantage of being able to develop not only a personal relationship with the audience, but to the character.
DC Cinema Universe should definitely not rush the connection between audience and character. DC Television has masterfully outdone themselves by creating the Arrowverse and continuously doing crossovers every year. Fans have come to develop bonds with Grant Gustin's Barry Allen, Stephen Amell's Green Arrow, Melissa Benoist's Supergirl, and the entire Legends team. When given the opportunity to get to know the man/woman behind the mask first, it adds a very unique element to the show/film.
Marvel and DC have created these incredible universes with such believable characters and that is definitely something to revel in. It's amazing what the film and television industry is capable of doing after so many years and there are challenges that come with it. The most important thing to remember is every storyline is coming from a different part of time. Every character is at a different stage of development in their story. Therefore, spending time comparing all of the films and shows is quite redundant.
First off, despite there being a Marvel versus DC battle in the comics, there should be no comparison of the Marvel Cinematic Universe to the DC Cinematic Universe. There should also be no comparison to any of the television universes either. The reason this is important to note is because Justice League was just released in theaters. The tone of the Marvel films are extremely different from DC films. Marvel tends to be colorful and light-hearted. The witty banter between The Avengers team does make it easy to love the characters because they seem relatable. The Avengers come off like a group of people you would want to hang out with at a party because of who they are without their superhero personas.
Marvel also had time to develop the personalities of each individual Avenger for a good amount of years. Tony Stark led the charge in Iron Man and Robert Downey Jr. immediately embodied him in every way. Now that Downey has spent a long time being Stark, the fans associate the character's personality to the actor. Chris Evans is another example of an actor who embodies their superhero persona. In every sense, Captain America's courage, honesty, and heart is a picturesque version of the actor himself. Marvel had the sense to specifically search for actors who are not just physically the image of their superhero personas, but similar to them in personality. This project was long established by Marvel way before Iron Man. After the release of Iron Man, Captain America: The First Avenger, and Thor, the characters had already been given a platform to grow and develop.
Taking a look at DC, the tone is very different. Christopher Nolan helped reshape Batman with Christian Bale's portrayal for three films. Bale played a different Bruce Wayne because of the platforms he was given. Ben Affleck's Batman first came into the story with Batman vs. Superman, therefore, not giving him a stand alone film of his own to develop a relationship with his audience. Understanding that this is very important in story development is crucial in separating comparisons when going to the cinema. Affleck had the challenge of presenting his Bruce Wayne for the first time ever sharing the screen with Henry Cavill's Superman. Cavill had already had the ability to introduce his Superman to the world in the stand alone Man of Steel. It wasn't until Affleck had the chance to take on a more leadership role in Justice League that helped him find his footing. For fans, it's easy to connect with characters that have established a relationship with their audience for what seems like a lifetime of films.
For example, fans got to know Tony Stark in three stand alone Iron Man films. Like in television, when the fans have the chance to go through that journey with a character, it's easier to reach them on a personal level.
DC, in an effort to bring in the Justice League team so soon has hit some bumps in the road. The film was well shot and the tone matched the familiarity of Christopher Nolan. However, the lack of connection to characters hurt the film. Jason Momoa, while doing a brilliant portrayal of Arthur Curry, had not been introduced prior to the film. Gal Gadot was instantly supported by her stand alone film Wonder Woman and her first appearance in Batman vs. Superman. The fans did meet Ezra Miller's Barry Allen for a brief moment in Suicide Squad, but according to reviews, some of the fans didn't like how childish Barry came off.
This is where I can shift gears and explain why comparisons can't be necessary just yet.
Example One: Tobey Maguire vs. Andrew Garfield vs. Tom Holland
When Civil War came out, Tom Holland was finally given his first film debut as the webbed superhero, Spiderman. This particular superhero over a short period of time has been recast and played by two other actors. Sony owned the rights to Spiderman until Marvel finally fought to have Spiderman back, therefore giving them the ability to place a new version into their Cinematic Universe.
Tobey Maguire starred as Peter Parker in three standalone films while Sony owned the rights. In a lot of ways, Maguire embodied Peter Parker more so than Spiderman. The nerdy portrayal of Parker was spot on and the only downside to Maguire's performance was the story in Spiderman 3. He was loved by many fans, but unfortunately, creative differences cast Spiderman 4 aside as an option when director Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire tried to fight for creative control. Maguire had the ability to connect to the fans for three films.
Andrew Garfield, in every sense, was the Spiderman. The sarcasm and the playfulness just came naturally to Garfield and was easily read on screen. His chemistry with Emma Stone's Gwen Stacy was instant and fans could enjoy this lighter version of The Amazing Spiderman. Garfield was given the ability to be Parker for two standalone films, once again establishing a connection with fans.
The drawback to replacing Spiderman so much was once fans get attached to the characters, it's hard to let them go. Then, it also becomes difficult for the new actor to follow in the footsteps of those actors.
Tom Holland was cast as Peter Parker/Spiderman for the Marvel film Civil War. Fans were uncertain to how Holland would do, but once the film was released, there was already comparisons to the other Spiderman actors. This doesn't work for a few reasons. Tom Holland came into the MCU among a cast of actors who had been playing their roles for a long time.
Holland jumps in on the scene with legends like Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Jeremy Renner, Scarlett Johannson, Paul Bettany, Sebastian Stan, Anthony Mackie, Paul Rudd, and Elizabeth Olsen. By this point of the timeline, all of these characters have already created a bond with each other, so it makes it difficult for Tom Holland to just ease into that kind of situation.
Holland's first portrayal of Spiderman was great for the platform he was introduced on. His character was witty and light. He was also young enough to pass for a teenager more so than Maguire and Garfield was when cast. Tom Holland was given the opportunity after his first film to star in his standalone film, Spiderman Homecoming. Once again, fans were calling it the Robert Downey Jr. film since Tony Stark was in it as well.
However, it was no mistake that Marvel chose Tom Holland for Peter Parker. Tom Holland trained for the role as well as offered a refreshing interpretation to what was already familiarized with the audiences. The Peter Parker that Maguire and Garfield portrayed was at a very different point of his life. Tom Holland's Peter Parker has met the Avengers and is just starting out as Spiderman. Apples and oranges in most cases as each actor can be appreciated for their individual interpretations.
Example Two: Batman Film vs. Batman TV
I want to compare two very different Batman characters because there is something impressive to admire about each version. You take a look at someone like Christian Bale, who brought the Batman character to a whole new level. On one hand, as Bruce Wayne, he was sure of himself and yet had a sense of doubt on certain things. As Batman, he was the caped crusader in true form.
Again, establishing earlier that Ben Affleck's Batman is on a very different path than Christian Bale's Batman. Affleck came in under the light of Henry Cavill and had to jump in with a not-so-easy first script. Rather than getting an origin piece, Ben Affleck has to play Bruce Wayne/Batman as someone who is immediately seeking vengeance on Superman. There was a lot of familiarity in style thanks to Christopher Nolan, but Affleck's Bruce Wayne in Justice League was becoming a strong leader. He seemed to fall into place among the team once Bruce had a purpose.
Now compare this Bruce Wayne to David Mazouz on Fox's Gotham. Gotham tells the origin story of Bruce Wayne/Batman. This format had been done before when Smallville aired back in 2001. Tom Welling was cast as Clark Kent/Superman in the origin story that lasted ten seasons on the WB turned CW. Despite both shows being about the origin of the superheroes, when cast, David Mazouz was asked to play Bruce Wayne. Tom Welling was asked to play Clark Kent. Neither one of them were cast as Batman or Superman. However, both characters will become their superhero personas.
That's the wonderful advantage of those origin stories. David Mazouz gets to focus his attention on playing Bruce Wayne and not Batman. He doesn't have the added challenge just yet of playing both personas. Batman and Bruce Wayne are two separate personalities. This was clearly established in Christian Bale's portrayal of Batman. In fact, it's very clear in most superhero stories. Batman would choose to react to a situation differently than Bruce Wayne would. David Mazouz's Bruce Wayne is currently starting to train under Alfred to become a vigilante and prowl in the night, protecting innocent people. Alfred (Sean Pertwee) had to remind Bruce that there were going to be times where he would have to separate his life as Bruce Wayne and his life as the vigilante. Mazouz recently started playing his Bruce Wayne as a billionaire party boy in order to separate himself from the Batman. The reason you admire this is because while someone like Ben Affleck has to be both the Batman and Bruce, David Mazouz gets to spend a huge amount of time getting to know who Bruce Wayne is going to be before he ever has to become Batman.
Clark Kent was the same way. Tom Welling talked to Christopher Reeve when Reeve was on the show about Superman versus Clark Kent. Christopher Reeve informed Tom that the character that Reeve played was Superman and Clark Kent was the disguise. Tom Welling was Clark Kent and Superman would become the disguise. Welling spent ten seasons getting to know Clark Kent and living as the man before the superman. Giving these actors the ability to separate the two personas puts them at an advantage of being able to develop not only a personal relationship with the audience, but to the character.
DC Cinema Universe should definitely not rush the connection between audience and character. DC Television has masterfully outdone themselves by creating the Arrowverse and continuously doing crossovers every year. Fans have come to develop bonds with Grant Gustin's Barry Allen, Stephen Amell's Green Arrow, Melissa Benoist's Supergirl, and the entire Legends team. When given the opportunity to get to know the man/woman behind the mask first, it adds a very unique element to the show/film.
Marvel and DC have created these incredible universes with such believable characters and that is definitely something to revel in. It's amazing what the film and television industry is capable of doing after so many years and there are challenges that come with it. The most important thing to remember is every storyline is coming from a different part of time. Every character is at a different stage of development in their story. Therefore, spending time comparing all of the films and shows is quite redundant.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)