How Far Do You Need To Go Before Bouncing?

I was thinking about how I “bounced off of” (failed to engage with) (didn’t find intriguing) a story, and then when I guilt tripped myself into going back to try reading it again, I wound up actively disliking the story and writing a bad review. 

Then, later, I got mad at myself for writing that bad review, since the author’s probably one of those exquisitely sensitive people, so I almost took it down, but at the same time, I spent some time thinking about how my dislike for the story seems to keep growing larger. Especially in the context of wondering why the DC Carl books are completely absent from the Hugo ballot. So in light of that, I let it stay up. 

Bad reviews are very unusual in a realm where everyone is constantly giving their pals five-star reviews to game the marketing algorithms. Even if you don’t like a work, you’re well aware that you need to give five-stars if you want people to return the favor and five-star you, and talking smack about fiction has become one of those “just not done” type of activities. I was eagerly playing the five-star game at one point but then I sort of dried up, with no more stars left to give. 

Now I’m wondering if it’s better to nope out after reading a few paragraphs, while my opinion is still rattling around in the “not for me but you might like it” bin. 

So I looked at the movie nominees for inspiration. Besides Sinners and K-Pop Demon Hunters, which I already wrote at length about, we have Andor (Season 2), Frankenstein (del Toro), Mickey 17, and Superman (James Gunn). 

I had to look up Mickey 17, a South Korean film which didn’t do very well over here about clones disagreeing with their other editions. It sounds like an intelligent take on clone tropes so it’s on my inner “maybe if I feel like watching a movie” list. I used to be a big old cinema nerd but lately I only seem to watch a few movies a year, so you might say I’m bouncing off this entire category, although I did see two of the entries. 

I did watch some of Andor, because I really liked Rogue One and was interested in the Cassian character’s backstory. I got all the way through a couple of the Star Wars series, like the first one about Yoda Jr., and I’m usually neutral or positive about the new improved extended universe. I bounced off of Andor after watching a few episodes because it seemed really heavy-handed and plodding. Cassian gradually becomes radicalized while other characters slide towards fascism in kind of an Afterschool Special about the very important issue of fascism and resisting it. 

And it came out in a world that was actually sliding into fascism, so it was kind of like putting the “dare to keep kids off drugs” lion in a time machine and transporting him to late ‘70s Studio 54 to deliver his abstinence message to Liza Minelli and Bianca Jagger. And that lion probably had even more success than most preachy lecture type entertainment. These days whenever I see any of those “hey kids, don’t snort fascism” propaganda messages from the pre-fascism era, I shake my head sadly. Totally ineffective use of moralizing. Although in the case of Andor, you can also file it under “troubling foreshadowing.” 

I had a hard time with the shame and harangue stuff when I was attempting to slot myself into the creative writing subculture. It felt almost like they were chasing all the strategy-minded people away (the ones who might be giggling at Carl’s adventures) and trying to do some kind of Cathar-like death spiral. I put up with it pre-fascism because I really didn’t want fascism to happen, but now that it has, I have even less regard for the preachy lectures that didn’t do jack to forestall it. STFU Becky, you just wanted to bully Heather and when disinfo gave you that chance, you seized it with both fists. All that glazing about the power of programming to shape mass opinion when, under field conditions, it actually seems to inspire people to say “fuck all this programming including the counter-programming, I’m voting for the evil guy because I’m tired of preachy lectures.” So much for preachy lectures, one might hope. 

(I do feel a lot better now that I’m not trying to run a wholesome YA-writer persona, thanks for asking.)

A lot of my friends loved Andor, for its preachy lecture qualities, but I backed off for the same reason.

Which is also behind the reason I haven’t seen Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein yet. I’m mixed about del Toro. I thought his stop-motion Pinocchio was wonderful and brilliant. I did not like his acclaimed Pan’s Labyrinth because I thought it was yet another grimdark story for kids, baiting audiences with the promise of a magical fairyland and then exiling them in a land of disturbing nightmares. With a light coating of preachy lecture, but del Toro is much better about keeping that part balanced with the story he’s telling. I thought the amount of Grimdark in Pinocchio was just perfect -- nightmarish for sure, but the stop motion decreases the threat. Pan's was more like sadistically getting a rise out of this particular girl and the audience members identifying with her.

So I haven’t seen the film, but I know it probably has opulent period costumes and pays more attention to inclusion themes than prior editions of Frankenstein, because that’s how del Toro rolls. It’s on my maybe list with Mickey 17. I did actually connect the TV to the media services so I can watch things like YouTube on it now instead of just having it run as a spare monitor. Slow progress. 

And finally there’s another Superman. I guess people still need to say new things about Superman. I have no real need to witness this. In fact, I’m bouncing off the entire subject of superheroes. During the pandemic I forced myself to catch up with the MCU and that was plenty, thanks. 

Superheroes reflect a philosophy that bounces me, in fact, like I did with the story I heartily disliked about the moral dichotomy between one’s authentic self and one’s DNA. They’re a good metaphor for musing on the gap between the gifted/talented/rich kids and the kids whose parents let them watch grimdark movies and then beat them for having nightmares. 

I looked up the reviews for this latest Superman and learned it represents the first step in the brand new DCU (shrieking violins), and that it focuses on Superman as moral paragon, so it seems likely to have a high preachy lecture quotient, and I’ve already examined how I feel about that. 

So that’s a bounce based on (1) sounds intriguing but unsuccessful and awarding it in the year of KPDH seems bizarre; (2) familiar enough with the director to be neutral about wanting to see more of his films; and (3) likely to contain themes (superheroes, preachy lectures) that tend to inspire me to write horrible reviews, and the world doesn’t need more of those. 

Even if I try to keep my disses aimed at big corporate media with thick hides rather than small creators who have a few opinions that differ from mine. I’m not always successful though, and I’m going to both leave my bad review standing (and any future ones I feel moved to compose) and respect my inclination to bounce early in the media consumption phase. Before I get the urge to reach for the sarcasm.