Scott Fairley – STUFFER SHACK

Robin Williams, so easy to relate to.

Williams was also, like us, a gamer…

On Monday, August 11th, film-goers, gamers, and countless others lost a dear friend. Robin Williams succumbed to his personal demons and took his own life. He was 63.

He was my first favourite actor, something shared by many of my friends. You knew that if he was in a movie, you were likely to laugh yourself silly. And as you got older, you knew you were going to get a performance with a little more heart and authenticity. His Oscar-winning performance in Good Will Hunting is a standout in a career that was more excellent than not, ranging from over-the-top comic characters to desperate optimists to serial killers.

Williams was also, like us, a gamer. He made no secret of this in interviews. The titles he expressed affection for look familiar to ours: Warcraft III, Half-Life, Ocarina of Time, and Battlefield 2. His daughter, Zelda, is named after exactly who you think. He counts Isaac Asimov and C.S. Lewis among his favourite fantasy authors. Blizzard Entertainment are set to create a digital tribute to him in World of Warcraft.

Williams’ joy seemed infectious, and was seemingly never without a joke, quip, or impression ready to go at a moment’s notice. He was also known to be generous with his time, participating in six USO tours for troops stationed worldwide, donating blood immediately after the September 11th terrorist attacks, and even buying Conan O’Brien a bicycle during his public dismissal from The Tonight Show. Even within a few days of his death, stories and anecdotes from his co-stars, fellow comedians, and other entertainers about his generous spirit and humility towards his peers are pouring out.

He was also troubled. His struggles with addiction were public, and he, like me and countless others, lived with depression. After a lengthy period of sobriety, Williams relapsed in 2003 and sought treatment in 2006 and again in 2014.

In 2006, before his relapse and death, Phillip Seymour Hoffman ominously told Aaron Sorkin that a celebrity death from an overdose could be a wake-up call and save others from meeting the same fate. I hope the same is true of Williams’ suicide. But that doesn’t make it sting any less.

For information on mental illness, including depression, please check out NAMI. Tons of education and support programs, as well as awesome discussion groups. NAMI.

Fantasy Football is essentially D&D… with linebackers

As someone who identifies as a nerd, but dabbles in jock territory, I found the RPG elements of Fantasy Football very intriguing…

Last year, I was invited by a friend to join his Fantasy Football league. While I do maintain a healthy interest in pro sports (I’m required to cheer for an NHL team by Canadian law), my interest in the NFL was hard to rekindle after losing interest in pro sports during college. But I do enjoy watching the Super Bowl every year, and have teams I cheer for and teams I cheer against. I took him up on his offer, and stepped into a much more familiar world than I anticipated.

It starts with the fantasy draft. You select your stable of players from all 32 NFL teams. Teams consisted of a Quarterback, two Running Backs, three Receivers, one Tight End, a Kicker, the Defence and Special Teams of any one team in the league, and a Flex player, who could be from any position other than Quarterback or Kicker. Mine was a head-to-head league, where each week, your team faced off against someone else’s team. When a player on your team performs well in the game he’s playing on the field, he gets points in your game. Whoever gets the most points wins, and as the regular season winds down, the most successful teams face each other in a playoff bracket to determine the champion.

So you’d expect this to give long-time, hardcore NFL fans the advantage. They follow the game extensively, understand the positions, and might know which rising star to bank on and which veterans still have something left in the tank. And to some degree, this is the case and their understanding of the game, and passion for it, is an asset. But while the concept of fantasy sports seems like a jock’s playground, those of us with gaming know-how and experience have some key advantages, especially for those of us in head-to-head leagues. From a certain point of view, fantasy football is essentially D&D with linebackers.

Like combat in an RPG, attribute strategy is key. In Fantasy Football, each play gives you points, not that different from damage points. Your players have different attributes, and each has their place. Examining statistics and researching reputations of players with RPG attributes in mind can reveal an awful lot. The players with high strength are consistently ranked near the top of fantasy rankings, but those who favour other attributes are still valuable, and can sometimes be the better choice.

To use the most recent Super Bowl quarterback matchup as a rough example, Denver’s Peyton Manning has considerably more strength than Seattle’s Russell Wilson, but Wilson’s very high dexterity and perception, particularly compared to Manning’s, was what won him the day.

Luck, of course, plays a role. This is professional sports, after all, and anything can happen. There’s countless takes of improbable victories, epic collapses by superior athletes, and heroism from unlikely sources that become the stuff of legend and hagiographic reporting on ESPN. While it is impossible to quantify those kinds of things, the reputation of players can be telling. Certain players are known for performing better under pressure. Call it clutch, call it elite, call it lucky, opinions on who has it and who doesn’t are not difficult to find. It might not be important in all match-ups, but should one of your players be against a tough opponent in a high-stakes game, picking the one with the reputation of luck will make you look like a savvy veteran.

Another possible advantage is objectivity. While fantasy sports is essentially a numbers game, a passionate football fan’s intimacy with the game is also a weakness. In my particular league, I saw one player who stubbornly started his idol each week despite poor results, and another who turned down a proven asset because he hates the Colts. While there is certainly overlap between gamers and sports fans, those who approach their league as an RPG to win rather than a way to get more invested in their team’s season can make those strategic decisions with greater ease. As a means of testing your RPG strategy with the maximum objectivity possible, allow your team to be drafted automatically. This may cause some initial concern about your dedication to the league, but those concerns will vanish once you begin tweaking your lineup.

As someone who identifies as a nerd, but dabbles in jock territory, I found the RPG elements of Fantasy Football very intriguing. We’re worlds beyond the simplistic jock v. nerd stereotype from the 80’s, but there are still clear boundaries. Fantasy sports, however, blur the line more than I ever expected. So if you’re looking for an RPG that’s a little different, consider joining a Fantasy Football league… getting together in a local tavern near you.

Why I’m Pro-Batfleck

Sometimes we can be a difficult group to please. And it makes sense. Whenever you take a franchise with multiple decades of history and mythology behind it and try to change it, those changes will inevitably rub some people the wrong way. So when it was announced that the next actor to play Bruce Wayne and Batman would be Ben Affleck, some of us were less than thrilled. After all, his previous attempt at a superhero was 2003’s Daredevil, a film most of us don’t remember (though word on the street is that the Director’s Cut is a marked improvement over the theatrical release).

I, however, feel that Affleck is a solid choice for the role. Solid, but not perfect. Perfect doesn’t work for me with Batman. Not that long ago, Warner Brothers were similarly faced with the task of replacing the man who would play Batman. As luck would have it, there was a mature, handsome, and charismatic actor with a very bright future as a leading man already on their payroll. Women wanted him, and men wanted to be him. He was by nearly every measure, the perfect choice. His name was George Clooney, and he was the star of 1997’s Batman and Robin. So you’ll understand why I believe that perfect is sometimes overrated. Ben Affleck might be a flawed choice due to his past films, his perceived physicality, and his range as an actor, but a flawless choice in a flawed movie won’t help anyone. In 1997, Clooney couldn’t have been more of a sure thing to be a great Batman. Now Clooney (allegedly) refunds anyone who tells him they paid to see it in theatres out of his own pocket.

But back to 2013. It’s been clear for a few years now that Ben Affleck is taking his work seriously. His directorial debut Gone Baby Gone was a damn fine crime film, and his follow-up The Town was exceptional and boasted a solid performance by Affleck himself. It was even talked about as a contender for Best Picture in 2009. Argo, of course, recently won Best Picture (though not without controversy in my Home and Native Land, but that’s a different topic). Affleck’s also rebuilt his reputation as an actor, winning significant acclaim for his performance in Hollywoodland, winning the Volpi Cup for Best Actor at the prestigious Venice Film Festival. His rebuilt reputation isn’t something he’s going to throw away by turning in a bad performance as Bruce Wayne.

And it’s unlikely anyone with the power to do so will allow it. This post won’t focus on Batman and Robin too much, but one of the harshest lessons Warner Brothers and DC learned from it is that a bad Batman movie can result in a major film franchise essentially laying dormant for 8 years. Given how big of a business comic book movies have become since the release of Batman Begins, it seems unlikely that Warner Brothers will take a chance on another high-profile flop with it’s biggest asset, especially with what’s being planned. While I doubt Affleck’s Batman could be bad enough to derail the franchise a second time, there’s too much at stake to gamble on that.

Affleck’s first appearance as Batman will be in Zack Snyder’s sequel to Man of Steel, but if Warner Brothers plans on building not just a Justice League franchise, but another Batman franchise, Affleck’s involvement could be quite significant. There’s not much of a downside to a popular, Oscar-winning filmmaker involved in your main franchise. While many wanted Joseph Gordon-Levitt to take over the cape and cowl, Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy was always intended to be a stand-alone story. If you’re going to hire someone to get a franchise off the ground, people with Affleck’s level of experience and success are very rare. For Warner Brothers and DC Comics, Affleck is the Batman they need. Time will tell if he’s the Batman we deserve.

Review: Iron Man 3

One question has been bugging me about Tony Stark ever since since 2008… What’s going on in the man’s head?

Everyone seems to be interested in their TV shows and movies answering their questions. I’m guilty of this as well; I wanted to know the the symbolism of the smoke monster, the history of the cigarette smoking man, and I still need to know the identity of Ted’s future wife. But these are questions being asked by all fans. What question has been bugging me about Tony Stark since 2008? What’s going on in the man’s head?

It’s a question that couldn’t go unanswered in Iron Man 3. Outing one’s self as a superhero, saving the world at least twice, and enduring considerable amounts of trauma in the process has to take a toll on your sanity. So naturally, I was pleased with how much time Tony spends outside the comfort of his suit(s) in Iron Man 3. And how much time was spent inside his head.

That’s not to say the entire film is psychodrama. It’s still chock full of spectacular scenes, sharp dialogue, and clever twists (though you might see some of them coming). But Downey has a meatier role here than he did in previous films. His armour gone, he’s forced to rely on the ingenuity we saw in the cave with a box of scraps all the more. Unable to cope with the events of The Avengers and the previous two Iron Man films, he struggles to keep anyone closer than arms length. He’s still funny, but the toll of being a celebrity and a superhero is quite evident. His swagger is fading, and we just might see him buckle under the weight of his own brand.

So when the action heats up, the stakes for Tony are as high as they can be. His suit protects him from harm, but now that Pepper, Rhodes, and Happy are all in the line of fire, it’s no longer just about him. It helps that the supporting cast all give stellar performances, with Guy Pearce and Ben Kingsley stealing their share of scenes from Downey. It’s also the biggest role yet for Gwyneth Paltrow’s Pepper Potts, and she gives a game performance.

Shane Black, best known as the screenwriter for Lethal Weapon and the Director of Downey’s first true comeback film Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang, sticks to his guns. Perhaps too much, as the film’s Christmas setting (a favourite of Black’s) proves to be fairly redundant, given the film’s Malibu and Miami locations. But Black knows his way around a well-written action film, and Iron Man 3 doesn’t disappoint. For those who felt let down by Iron Man 2 (myself among them), Iron Man 3 serves as a strong conclusion to the trilogy, and makes for a compelling follow up to The Avengers.

But the real strength of Iron Man 3? It’s not dependent on whether or not you’ve seen The Avengers, Thor, Captain America, or even if you remember all that much about Iron Man 2. It’s a sequel that can stand on it’s own merits and only has it’s own story to tell. Iron Man 3 may have implications for future Marvel films, but I didn’t leave the theatre feeling like I had to wait for the next Marvel blockbuster to get my money’s worth.

Iron Man III can be found at AMAZON.

“Our Goal is to Kill all the Bad Guys” – Crashing a Diablo II LAN Party

I’ve always felt a little bit like I abandoned gaming too early. So when my friend was planning on having a Diablo II LAN party for her birthday, I knew I had to see what I’d been missing…

When I was first approached to write for Stuffer Shack, I felt compelled to make one thing very clear: I am not much of a gamer. Sure, I grew up with an NES console and logged countless hours on GoldenEye 007 and Perfect Dark, but I haven’t really played a game seriously since 2003. I enjoyed the first Halo, dabbled in Morrowind, and nearly completed Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, but haven’t logged much time in anything other than a casual game since starting my undergrad that year. Since then, other interests have taken over, ranging from Theatre production to long distance running to vintage guitars. But I’ve always felt a little bit like I abandoned gaming too early.

So when my friend Stef was planning on having a Diablo II LAN party for her birthday, I knew I had to see what I’d been missing the last decade. I’m somewhat familiar with Blizzard’s past games; I played a considerable amount of Warcraft II in my early teens, and some of my friends in College played a lot of World of Warcraft. Despite not having ever played Diablo II, I asked to attend as a curious, somewhat impartial observer. Stef was enthusiastic about the idea, and I came to the party with much to learn.

The first thing I noticed was how much RPG knowledge I retained from playing those games, even after a decade of not playing them. Mana? Inventory items? Experience points and leveling up? I felt oddly at home watching my friend Craig level up his sorceress HelenHunt (the only sorceress he knows). The six players mostly elected to bring in existing characters they had worked on for a while. Two newer players began the game from scratch, and leaders quickly and amicably emerged. Soon after, questing began and the party got rolling.

The fun, of course, begins with character names. Over the course of the evening, our server was graced with HughJackman, HelenHunt, Mal (named for everyone’s second favourite intergalactic smuggler, of course), and, uh, Alex. His lack of creativity can be forgiven, as one has to save something for the trash talk, which I noticed has changed for the better in the last decade.

In the dorm room, trash talk was pretty predictable. Within the first few minutes of Super Smash Bros. or NHL 2004, someone was going to be called a fag, a retard, or a bastard. Combinations thereof were also common. Political correctness and creativity were on roughly the same level. Trash talk on this night was different. While it was not quite at the level of George Bernard Shaw and Winston Churchill’s caustic banter, it was mostly clean and refreshingly clever. I might not invite my Nana to the next LAN party, but I doubt she would have been offended to listen in. I, for one, found myself pretty amused for most of the night.

It didn’t take too long for me to start feeling left out. In retrospect, it wouldn’t have been too difficult for me to obtain a copy of Diablo II in time. Even my lowly MacBook Air has the computing power necessary to run it. I wouldn’t have been the only beginner present, after all. But I did promise to return as a participant rather than an observer next time. Will this be enough to get me back on the videogame bandwagon? Perhaps. Carving out a few hours per week to level up can’t be that hard, and if last Friday night was any indication, it’s just like riding a bike.

What can you Kickstart?

The history of financing independent films is certainly an interesting one. To finance his first feature, El Mariachi, Robert Rodrigez signed up for a series of medical experiments, some of which he still bears the scars from. Kevin Smith financed Clerks by signing up for a slew of credit cards, all maxed out during the production of the film. Presumably, they were later paid off in full…

This article originally posted at The Gamer Effect on April 17th, 2013.

The history of financing independent films is certainly an interesting one. To finance his first feature, El Mariachi, Robert Rodrigez signed up for a series of medical experiments, some of which he still bears the scars from. Kevin Smith financed Clerks by signing up for a slew of credit cards, all maxed out during the production of the film. Presumably, they were later paid off in full.

So while the buzz surrounding the incredibly successful Kickstarter campaign for a Veronica Mars seems, at least to me, less interesting than some of the tall tales from independent film history, it certainly speaks volumes about the passion many fans have for their favourite characters. Which, naturally, leads many to wonder if their favourite long-lost franchise could be revived through similar campaigns.

Much has already been written about Veronica Mars being a unique case, but I’d still argue that it proves crowdsourcing can be a viable funding method for certain types of projects. Which types? I’m glad you asked! Let’s look at an upcoming example.

Joss Whedon’s Much Ado About Nothing adaptation ~~is due to hit theatres in the coming months~~ (and here it is), and was shot at Whedon’s home with friends and past collaborators. Pitching “a movie I shot over the weekend with my friends” is generally not something studios will go for, even if your last name is Soderbergh and you own several Oscars. Financing such projects is difficult even among top-level talent, but giving fans of these filmmakers a chance to be a backer is enticing. There are limits to this, however. It’s unlikely you’ll see something with a budget past seven figures (other than Veronica Mars) crowdsourced unless a major name or property is involved, but not all projects need that much capital to get off the ground. Such as documentaries.

With only a few exceptions, documentaries usually sell themselves on their topic. Similar to fans backing a Director they’re passionate about, the topic of a documentary alone can bring in a crowd to, well, source. Passionate about, say, the surprisingly high overlap between veganism and endurance running? Maybe on the portrayal of women in comic books? Chances are, you’re not alone, and there’s someone willing to make a documentary about it. Documentaries are also, with rare exceptions, much less budget-intensive. Rights for archive footage and speaking fees for talking heads can go a long way in documentary filmmaking, and special effects are a rarity. Even an incredibly polished and slick documentary like Bart Layton’s The Imposter could be produced for less than the average feature.

Cross-platform projects are also in the running. Say you’d love to hear a song written and performed by your favourite author. Odds are, their publisher couldn’t do much about it, and record companies aren’t really that interested in such projects. But if it only costs $1000 for, say, Neil Gaiman, to book some studio time to get it done, crowdsourcing seems like the most viable option. Crossing platforms used to be a sign of celebrity excess. Now, it’s just smart business. And it certainly seems to be working for YouTube personality Hannah Hart, known for her My Drunk Kitchen series, which successfully crowdsourced a tour across the United States and Canada. But for total non-celebrities? I decided to ask around.

Local playwright, actor and friend of the author Ryan M. Sero was willing to discuss his experience with his attempt to get a play he wrote financed with a crowdsourcing site. “For me, it didn’t really work,” he explained. “I raised a little money, but not a lot. I covered my poster budget.” But he didn’t dismiss crowdsourcing entirely. “I think in order for those campaigns to succeed, you need a strong social media presence. I would consider using it in the future, but I would have to become much more savvy with things like twitter, instagram, reddit, facebook, etc.”

So for creators deeply in touch with their audience, there is hope. While a lot of these examples have to do with name recognition, they perhaps have more to do with connection. Social media, at it’s best, is just that. Social. Crowdsourcing requires a crowd, and because of that, the creator with the best crowd often wins.