Colossus, The Forbin Project (1970) is from my perspective something from the annals of history. One of those things that happened years before my birth that I would never hear of if it weren’t for freak accidents like manatic bringing it up (thanks for that!). So, today, I managed to dig a copy up and watched it. I had preconceptions about the film, that it might be a more polarized view of the Cold War politics, but in fact it turned out to be quite the opposite. This will contain spoilers, so be warned. Also, there is no fancy gaming angle to this – it’s just because the movie touches two things I’m interested – communication and the Cold War.

The movie poster, from wikipedia

The movie is based on a book, which in the end turned out to be a trilogy – something that explains the references near the end, where the computer mentions about something being built, that will take five years to complete (the second book of the trilogy takes place five years after the first one) and probably the reason for the very bleak situation it ends with, even if those weren’t exactly uncommon at the time when the movie was filmed. And while the book was published in ‘66, which sets some backdrop to the events, I’d like to see the movie more as the product of those later years (69-70).

So it’s interesting how the Soviets are pictured in the movie. Considering that they “just” had invaded Czechoslovakia with their allies, the fact that the biggest atrocities the Soviets commit are exactly the same ones the Americans do (shooting of their own when presented with choice between that or destruction of a whole city), is actually quite endearing. And that both sides use the same, unified tactics to combat the computers brings them to light as not as polarized superpowers, but as simply members of the same human race. The Soviets in the film even don’t do things the way they usually are portrayed in movies like this – behind the backs of the Americans and in effect working against the heroes as their plans backfire. In fact, it’s the Soviets who get to pay the human price before the Americans do, and the viewer gets to feel sympathy towards them with no strings attached.

And there is a lot of that anti-war and unity-between-all sympathy in the movie. For example the president of the USA is pictured as something of a Kennedyesque character who wants to explain things to the public as frankly as possible and who is horrified when he has to explain to them that there’s been a nuclear incident, even if the administration at the time was in the hands of Nixon. And Nixon at the time was the conservative right wing man who approved secret bombings in Vietnam instead of being the president who negotiated the peace there. Also, the crew of scientists the main character is a part of is like the bridge of a Star Trek ship, filled with men, women, white, black, asian alike, with what seems to be equal status. Another nod at the world of man being at least somewhat unified.

But then there’s the language theme that keeps popping up that parallels and mirrors the other questions of unity. Even as all men stand united when they face the technological threat, humans are ineffective because they don’t share a language. This comes up at many points – there is the need of interpreters between the Soviets and the Americans. People keep explaining that their language skills are lacking and others saying that their skills are much better than they were saying. There are conversations that happen in one language that needs to be repeated in the other because there had been someone in the group who didn’t speak the first language. There seem to be moments of misunderstanding when the interpreter is asked to explain things. And so on. Also, the computers don’t speak the same language from the start, but the first thing they do is develop a language they both can use equally well. They are effective. And when humans don’t understand the computers, the computers immediately respond with the language the humans understand – force. Eventually, when they have had time to communicate with their shared language they become one, the ultimate computer. Unity.

The president calls out for a “human millennium” when the movie starts, an age where they may get rid of famine and suffering. And the way to that will be peace through the impersonal guardian computer. The exact same words are later echoed by Unity, who has been working for that very goal, through the subjucation of the human race. Leaving us with the question if the needs of the whole human race are more important than the needs of each member of it.

And in the end, even if we kept asking for the end of war, of a world united as one, a world without suffering, when we’re asked to actually sacrifice our illusion of freedom and love Unity as our master, our defiant answer is “Never”.

I guess there is some unwritten law that every person who went to see Watchmen blogs about it. (will probably spoil some bits about the movie, so be warned)

It was a nice movie. People have complained about the fight scenes and the sex scenes being too long, but I didn’t think so, even if the whole movie was a bit on the long side. I think they both brought out the physicality and reality of the needs these people had, even if they donned on masks and set out to fight justice. Especially how brutal the violence got when it got rolling. It brought the question of the characters’ sanity much better to the surface (The lovers switching approving glances while breaking thugs’ arms and legs) and kept the viewer nicely reminded that this is not a Superman or X-Men movie where violence is more fun and games for all.

The casting was top-notch down to Nixon.

The huge blue smurf … manifestation… that was such a huge deal was pretty natural in the end and didn’t at least bother the flow of the film. As said, the sexuality in the movie was quite apparent a lot, but we are talking about people who dress up in rubber suits, so it’s to be expected.

And the ending. The controversial ending with no squid. It worked for me. The squid would have made the movie a bit less serious – this way it still filled the needs of the story, while fully focusing on the characters. While in the comic (with the pirate story-within-a-story and whatnot else), the presence of yet another major character (the squid) is easy to do, it was better to focus on what was there. The five Watchmen.

Ok, I’ve finally managed to browse through Mouse Guard RPG – not read it completely, but enough to make some notes about it. The production values of the physical book are high – Full-color hardcover book with solid typography all the way through. The layout is given a lot of room, which is nice after the cluttered Burning Empires. Art is of course top-notch, not a surprise since it’s from the Mouse Guard comic. The rule system seems quite good (well, it’s Burning Wheel and then some), but so-far, nothing in it really makes me go “Ooh, I want to steal that for my homebrews”, which usually would be a marker that the game has reached its goals for me. That doesn’t mean the game is bad (good things I spotted were, for example: more or less formalized plot-twisting, animals getting and edge with their basic natures, seasonal changes), just that they don’t really inspire me.

That is also a bit of a problem with the whole book. It’s good. I can easily see the appeal and it works out just about as I imagine it would. And there are cute mice and villainous weasels. It’s very loyal to the comic and you could easily represent the events of the comics with it. All in all, it does what it promises very well. And yet, I feel somewhat cheated when I’m reading a 320 page RPG book that doesn’t stray from its purpose. I’m odd like that.

I’ve used the “RPG books are like cook books for me” -metaphor before when talking about games with friends. I originally stole it from some conversation thread on some forum, but it’s so true in describing what I get from RPG books these days. They contain recipes, ideas and inspiration. “Ooh, coriander chicken, sounds good, I’ll try something like that next time I’m inviting my friends to eat some chicken-based food. I’m not really keen on the idea the recipe has on the rice, so maybe pasta would be better” When you’re starting to play games, you follow the instructions by the letter, but once you know your own (and your group’s) tastes, you just cherry-pick things from new material and use the ideas to spice up the stuff you know that works.

And in this respect, Mouse Guard feels like a 320 page book about a wedding cake. After reading the book, you can do a wedding cake with it, and you know a lot more about wedding cakes and their history. But you already knew how to make a cake, and the recipe itself is quite normal. Also, you now know how to do the groom and bride from sugar, and sure, you could use that in your future cakes, but do you really want to the next time you’ll bake a cake for your birthday? Mouse Guard is that book for me. I could probably use it to host a great game about Mice with Swords, but if I wanted to do something else with the rules, using the game as a basis seems a bit more trouble than it’s worth. And no, playing Rabbits with Axes isn’t “something else” in this context

I have to compare the book to Burning Empires again – both are very narrow in scope, but at least with BE, changing the color of the game doesn’t feel so awkward. The innovations in that game are quite re-usable and they are on a higher level than just mechanical – the structural stuff is really something that draws me in (which is funny, as MG’s structural stuff just seems bland and uninteresting to incorporate into a game other than MG) there, as are the basic ideas of the world.

I’ll probably read Mouse Guard RPG through properly once, and then give final judgement to it. At the moment it seems like it’s a great game that I probably could never GM as it feels very uncustomizable. But then again, if I ever want to do something that has to do with little animals with a human side and a human society, I’ll use this game for it, for sure.

Summary: Great book, just not for me.