Essays

Cube (1997): What Is the Cube?

HalsdollLeave a comment

If you have the internet, you can watch things for free at the expense of your data being collected. Isn’t life full of contradictions? Recently, I had the pleasure of watching Cube (1997) again. You can watch the film on Pluto TV and/or on YouTube. It was one of my favorite childhood films. If you ask me to explain why I liked it back then, I wouldn’t be able to answer it properly. I just thought the idea of telling a story about being trapped inside a giant cube was cool. Now with some life experiences under my belt, I can explain why I like it. It’s smart, edgy, and thought-provoking.

Disclaimer: I sound like I am about to write an essay! Nope, this is a writing prompt, a sneak peek at a potential essay explaining why I find it smart, edgy, and thought-provoking.

If you have not heard of this film before, it is a science fiction thriller film directed by Vincenzo Natali. The story involves six strangers (not counting Alderson, the false protagonist) waking up inside the Cube without any recollection of why and how they got there. As the story unfolds, the characters learn that they have unique talents and skill sets to solve the Cube’s puzzle. But of course, things eventually take the wrong course when each character’s personality clashes with one another. There is David Worth, a nihilist. Quentin, the fascist cop; Dr. Helen Holloway, a free clinic physician; Joan Leaven, a high school math genius; Rennes, a sensor expert; and Kazan, the autistic savant. They must work together to escape the Cube that is designed to be a death trap. Making the wrong moves can cause instant death. So then is there a logical mathematical way to escape the Cube? You’d be surprised how well the plot ties in well with life’s biggest questions. The most profound question of them all is what purpose does the Cube serve? 

If you are like me, an independent thinker, you would enjoy this film for its ambiguity. I like how each character provides a different insight and viewpoint. I can empathize with all the characters; however, I detest the antagonist, Quentin. Like the majority, I don’t like folks who abuse their authority. He is the benevolent cop who pretends to have everyone’s best interest but only thinks about himself. That’s why his wife left him. So, then you must think I must like Dr. Holloway because she is the opposite of Quentin. Not quite. I sympathize with Worth the most. Worth represents the mass majority. Despite his ingenuity, he breaks down when facing the unknown and is motivated by a paycheck without ever questioning how his line of work is impacting others. He likes to pretend he’s doing something meaningful when in reality he could be creating a deadly weapon to annihilate humanity. His guilt paralyzes him as soon as he realizes he is part of the death trap. I suppose there is some humanity in him like most of us. So that is why his character left a bigger impression on me than Dr. Holloway who is also a likeable character.

In contrast to Worth Rennes is indifferent to those around him. Rennes is the type of person who doesn’t ask a lot of questions. Sometimes “You gotta save yourself from yourself,” he said. Don’t think. Just do what you have to do in front of you. While that may seem like a form of strength, it doesn’t solve anything. More importantly, his attitude doesn’t benefit anyone. That’s why his personality clashes with Dr. Holloway, the aging, single woman with no children who likes “sticking [her] nose up in other people’s assholes, sniffing their business,” according to Quentin. She is fueled by conspiracy theories, believing that she is fighting an ongoing battle against Big Brother. She is the symbol of social justice and the fabric of humanity. Despite her good intentions, she may very well be suffering from a delusion and Worth is not afraid to bust her theories. But if you ask me, I rather take her side than side with Quentin. He may appear stern but he is actually nothing more than a frightened boy who uses his fist to get people to obey him. You could even argue he is the product of patriarchy gone mad. The only thing he cares about is procreation and passing on his genes. So, this is where Leaven fits into the equation. She is young, beautiful and brilliant. She represents the young and the restless of our society. She is eager to utilize her talent but is easily exploited by someone like Quentin who hides behind the identity of a caring father figure. She may be brainy but she is also naive. Lastly, there is Kazan. He is the most vulnerable and innocent of them all. By no fault of his own, he was born with a disability. Quentin believes he is a danger to the group and wants to leave him behind. No wonder Dr. Holloway called him a Nazi. These characters make up our society as a whole. It paints a picture of humanity and its ugly struggles to co-exist.

So not only is the film entertainingly thrilling to watch, but it’s like listening to a philosophical conversation between different people from different backgrounds. There is not much happening in this film other than someone dying from “accidentally” walking into a death trap. So, then what is the Cube? Is it Big Brother’s creation? Is it part of the government experimentation, or even scarier–the works of aliens? Or perhaps, is there no one operating the Cube? Does it exist because it just happens? Lastly, is it some twisted rich man’s form of entertainment? There’s no clear answer to what the Cube is but I do know what one of the characters thinks about the world:

“[Outside the Cube is] boundless human stupidity.”

– David Worth

P.S.

I haven’t seen the remaining movies (Cube2: Hypercube and Cube Zero) from this series, so I am excited to learn more about it! However, I have recently watched the Japanese remake version of the Cube, which is pretty decent.

Fatal Frame IV: Blossomed Death

Halsdoll

Subscribe to continue reading

Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.

The Last Guardian: A Fairytale for Boys

HalsdollLeave a comment

I watched an interesting video on the development of The Last Guardian where the creator, Fumito Ueda states that video games allow people to feel empathy. The video clip made me think about his statement regarding empathy which I rarely feel because most video games are designed for boys. Even though I share some similar traits such as finding satisfaction in conquering and defeating my enemies, I have always felt a disconnection between the playable male character and myself. For instance, while I empathize with the character Yorda from ICO and want to escort her to a safe place, I never found the urgency to protect her. Well, that’s because I never saw gender as an indication of fragileness.

Feeling trapped and small is one thing but being trapped is another thing. We all need a helping hand from time to time.

This got me thinking about why I enjoyed the Last Guardian more than Ico. It was a video game analysis of the Last Guardian by Game Overture that points out that the player was playing a supporting role which made a lot of sense since it’s Trico and not the boy that takes the spotlight in the game. As time goes on, we see the mystical, frightening but child-like creature becoming stronger and stronger whereas we see the boy becoming weaker and weaker as he takes on the subservient role.

boy giving food to the injured Trico
Here is your food…”.Say ahh.”
boy holding trico poop
Yes, the green goo is Trico’s poo!

As I mentioned in my non-spoiler review, I love this game and feel more deeply connected to it than Ico and Shadow of Colossus. I wonder why. Then I realized it has to do with my personality. While I’m quite capable of making quick decisions, I rather reserve my energy in the background problem-solving than take the spotlight in the frontline. Thus, playing as the “defenseless boy” in this game produces a familiar experience. If the theory about playing as a supporting character is correct, then the game is not about making the player feel like he or she is the Chosen One. There is nothing unique and special about the boy. He and the other Chosen Ones happen to be the unfortunate ones who are captured for human sacrifice. Well, depending on your worldview, I suppose it’s an honor. Dig a little bit deeper, this game is an allegory of the business side of game development exploiting children to keep a business running. How did I come to this conclusion? It is not until toward the end of this innocent, dream-like journey of great teamwork that comes to a dark twisted turn. It made me wonder why was I protecting the predator in the first place. The boy could have left the poor creature alone shackled up in a cave. Yet he decided to save him anyway. Was he trying to be a hero? No, he simply just has a good heart like most children. He didn’t even know that he is a sacrifice until later on.

He’s a good kid. That is why I find it so shocking when players complained about playing as the awkward boy. He moves funny. He waits on Trico to save him several times. As a result, it’s frustrating and the gameplay makes the player feels small; therefore, the game is not as impressive as its predecessors. The boy is not badass enough. He doesn’t take on giant colossus. Instead, he babysits a giant baby! Okay not quite (I’m assuming Trico is a kid because of his child-like behavior). But let’s get this straight, according to the creator’s interview, he was purposely designed to be independent, which makes sense to me. The story wouldn’t be as effective if it revolves around the defenseless boy (who I can’t recall even has a name which I can only speculate it was a modest decision on the creator’s part). In this game, players don’t get to be the hero of the day. Instead, he or she gets to witness a hero in action. I find the concept to be quite ingenious and refreshingly humbling.

Boy pulling down the level to open the gate for Trico
What’s so bad about playing as a gate opener? It’s so gentlemen-like.

So, I wonder what sort of person doesn’t like this game. Would it have made a difference if they were to play an all-powerful man-eating-fearing beast? Surely, the boy is braver than Trico on many occasions. Ironically, it’s his naiveness that makes him naturally more confident about finding his way home than Trico who seems lost inside his own home, which reminds me of a giant cage. Trico may be strong but he also needs guidance, which is why he is controlled by signals and waves from within the valley in the first place. Yet, he and his kind are not to be mistaken as dispensable slaves because the creatures do seem to be revered and respected as important residents of the valley based on the buildings’s architecture.

trico standing by the door
If you look closely, the entire place is designed around griffin-like creatures. Look at the size of the door.

This made me ponder who are the real captives in the game. Is it Trico and his kind or the boy along with the other chosen ones? Some people say it’s the boy and some say it’s Trico. There is no clear answer because the creator wants the player to decide for themselves. As for me, the logical answer is both of them. They are the last guardians who put the sadistic cycle of the god-like entity Master of the Valley to an end, which the more I think about it–might not even be all that evil because we don’t know its full story. For all we know, it’s trying to maintain order and balance despite sacrificing children in the process.

Trico versuses other beasts
The world does feel like a dog-eat-dog type of place when you have to compete for resources.

Despite its grim plot, I find this game emotionally comforting. It’s a story about growth, loyalty, friendship, and ultimately what it means to be a leader. It’s all the little spices that make life worth fighting for. It’s nice to know that in this dog-eating world, there is compassion. A good friend will always try to catch you if you fall because life, as we know it, can be quite rough.

Trico trying to catch boy

References:

  1. Game Masters: Fumito Ueda Interview
  2. The Last Guardian | A New Perspective for Gaming by Game Overture
  3. The Last Guardian creator: ‘I can’t face playing my own game’
  4. Picture of Yorda in a cage: Team Ico Wiki
  5. All other pictures were taken from my playthrough

AI: Somnium Files: The Rational I

Halsdoll

Subscribe to continue reading

Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.

Reflecting on Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

HalsdollLeave a comment

One thing I admire about J.K Rowling’s writing style is that it’s clear and concise. I had no problem remembering the plot from the previous books because she did a good job at refreshing readers’ memories by taking the time to explain important events. But the greatest magic she did to me has opened my eyes to a new way of seeing the world. As I mentioned before in one of my previous posts, I was never really a fan of sports, but I could appreciate it now when the author used Quidditch to illustrate teamwork and good sportsmanship to support and fight for the right cause. Also, I learned what bravery looks like and why it’s the greatest trait above all else. It takes a lot of courage to conquer death. In fact, the entire story of Harry Potter is like the Christian Gospel for the Wizarding World. It’s meant to soothe and cradle the anxious soul who are fearful of death or have lost a loved one.

Since the beginning of the first book, particularly Book 6, I have always seen Dumbledore as the embodiment of good and wisdom (p.360). To me, he is like God, all-knowing and omniscient and Harry Potter had to have faith in Dumbledore’s instruction even though like Christ he was on a mission to be slaughtered like a pig (p.687). How is this not a parable of the Christian faith? The entire series is bombarded with Christian tropes such as the trinity (Hermione, Harry Potter, and Ron are metaphors for mind, body, and soul); the serpent as being the lesser being; the number 7 as a holy number; finally love, love conquers all. If you are familiar with the Christian faith then you know what I am talking about.

The scale of the story followed the same structure. God sent his beloved son to die for our sins. In other words, a hero sacrifices his life for the greater good. Harry Potter was born to destroy evil and that’s why he is the Chosen One who comes from the House of Gryffindor, which is the greatest House out of all the Four Houses. Why is that? Wit, ambition, and hard work are all great traits but bravery tops it all because they don’t fear death. The Four Houses are just metaphors for the virtuous traits that benefit and develop a stable society. I agree with the author. Great leaders don’t just lead by example but are selfless. Harry Potter puts himself in danger many times for others even for Draco, his enemy! That’s why the author made her point about bravery as the biggest virtue on several occasions by using Ron, the insecure character to show readers that anyone can be great and that there’s bravery in everyone. An example is a part where Ron saved Harry from drowning in Forest’s frozen pool in Chapter 19:

‘You’ve sort of made up for tonight,’ said Harry. ‘Getting the sword. Finishing off the Horcrux. Saving my life.’

That makes me sound cooler than I was,’ Ron mumbled.

‘Stuff like that always sound cooler than it really was,’ said Harry. ‘I’ve been trying to tell you for years.’

Book 7, p. 379

As I was reading, I kept wondering what’s the significance of the Chosen One in relation to the story other than fighting evil. That plot in itself is too generic. Then I realized Harry Potter is the symbol of youth and bravery on the verge of corruption in a society. When I saw it in that light, I became more appreciative of the story as something more than just a children’s book. You see, if Dumbledore is the embodiment of goodness and wisdom, then Harry Potter is the embodiment of hope and change. Wouldn’t all parents want to see their children become better than them in some form? Parents would only hurt their children’s future if they make their children serve them by abiding by old outdated traditions. The western concept of rearing children is far different from Asian cultures (particularly Eastern and Southeastern Asians) and that came as a shock to me. We are taught to respect and serve our elders–not challenge them as we see in the Order of the Phoenix. Harry Potter’s behavior was appalling to me in Book 5 when he was upset that Dumbledore left him in the dark, but sometimes it’s necessary to continuously challenge an established society for the sake of the “greater good” which will benefit all. After all, it takes a brave person to stand up and make changes to a decaying society even at the expense of one’s own life.

So, has my opinion of Dumbledore changed after learning that he’s not a family man and that it was out of selfish ambition that he wished to make peace with the Muggles so that both worlds can live in harmony? Not quite. Like Harry Potter, I felt a little betrayed, but the author did a great job at explaining his actions and redeeming him. Like Voldemort, Dumbledore operated in secrecy, pulling strings to see his plans come through. He wasn’t all that different from Voldemort who was lusting after power and domination. But there is a huge difference between the two. If you can recall the statement in the Sorcerer’s Stone: “To the well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure (p. 297), Dumbledore accepted his immortality whereas Voldemort didn’t. That’s why Voldemort will always fall short. It’s kind of like how Satan will always be less than God or why the number 6 is less than 7. So yes, I still like Dumbledore for many reasons and believe that his traits reflect Christian virtues. One of them is the fact he is modestly humble. He is talented and gifted but chose to be a headmaster of a school rather than be the head of the Wizarding ministry. The logic is that if you want to make a huge impact in the world, you start off in the classrooms. Training and disciplining young wizards and witches have a huge impact on the future of society. That’s where changes really happen. It always starts small, especially if you want to make the world a better place, but of course, great ideas don’t always follow through as we see with Tom Riddle, who turned out to be the evilest wizard. But it’s better to try than not try at all.

Another interesting point made by the author was the concept of respect for all life. Dobby, a slave elf who falls at the bottom of the wizarding community food chain is as grand as Dumbledore. However, when he died, all he got was a small burial and not an elaborate ceremony. It made me think about how society tends to place importance on social structure. Someone from the bottom of the food chain is just as impactful as someone on top. It was a nice touch to say that no matter how small someone’s place is in society, they can make a huge impact!

I could go on and dive deeper into the world of Harry Potter because I enjoyed every single moment of it and learned how to see new perspectives such as the concept of gold and treasure from the point of view of the goblins, but I decided to conclude my thoughts for now. Everything in this book makes sense. There’s the notion of empathy, forgiveness, and acceptance just like the Christian faith. Perhaps, it’s the statement that Harry Potter and Voldemort are one of the same kinds but at the same time different that confused religious people. Still, when it comes to great literacy work, nothing should be taken literally. It’s the lessons that are important.

Now I just need to watch the first two Fantastic Beast films before I can see the third one in the theater to get caught up with Harry Potter. While I was reading Harry Potter, each time I finished a book, I watched the film, comparing and contrasting them. Of course, the books are way better, but the films are cool too. This whole experience took me about 4 months but I am glad to say I have now graduated from Hogwarts and know what bravery looks like. Snape is the bravest and is my favorite character. Maybe if I feel like it, I might write an essay about why I think so, but I will just leave it for now. That was a lot to take in, I am sure.

Reflecting on Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix: It’s All about the “…ism”

Halsdoll3 Comments

There’s not much difference between classicism and racism. Both have the same prejudice in regard to superiority over others when we apply it in a social context, and you’ll see a lot of it in this book. Contrary to the film, one slight change in the event could change the entire tone of the plot. That’s why I am an advocate for presentations. Don’t underestimate it. It’s everything! The film version turned Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix into a story about friends, family, and love as something to be fought for. Whereas the book, cleverly mentioned all the “…ism (s)” (i.e., classism, racism, ageism, criticism, sadism, favoritism, etc.) that society goes through with seriousness and humor, making it more than just a story about fighting evil. The introduction of Professor Umbridge entering into the series is now and forever engrained in my mind. There is a line between punishment and sadism when it comes to teaching. What a witch!

Looking back at my questions, I am glad some of my questions were answered in this book such as why Harry Potter was given over to the care of the Dursleys and why Voldemort is so fixated on killing Harry Potter. To my surprise, I wasn’t so thrilled to get the answers because Harry Potter sort of reminds me of Oedipus Rex, a play by Sophocles. In the play, the protagonist was prophesized that he would murder his father. Therefore, his father attempted to kill his own son when he was still an infant. Doesn’t it sound just like the little famous Harry Potter who lived to tell the tale that he would destroy Voldemort who is terribly afraid of death? Harry Potter is the Chosen One. I often wonder why western media is so obsessed with being the special one. The difference, of course, is that Voldemort is not Harry Potter’s dad, but both are half-bloods, which makes them both the perfect opponents for the classic tale of good versus evil. However, what distinguishes Harry Potter and the Order of Phoenix from a generic plot is that it emphasizes that the good guys are not always wise.

Albus Dumbledore may be strong and powerful, but he is not immortal. Even wise people make bad decisions, and no one is prone to escaping ageism at his age. Dumbledore even admitted to Harry that he failed in judgment when he asked Snape to put his old grudge away and teach Occlumency to Harry Potter whose thoughts were penetrated by the Dark Lord with nightmares and visions. Snape loathed Harry Potter’s father, James Potter. And it’s in this book, we learned the reasoning behind it when Harry took a sneak peek into Snape’s memory during the Occlumency lesson. Snape was heavily bullied by James and his gang of friends for simply just existing. And to be honest, I was a little disappointed in this section of the book to learn that Snape has a legitimate grudge against James Potter. He is made out to look as if he is some sort of weirdo shunned by society because of his obsession with the Dark Arts. For that reason, it’s easy to empathize with Snape, especially coming from someone like Harry Potter who has also been heavily mistreated by his cousin, Dudley. I was turned off by Sirius’ and Lupin’s justification for bullying: they were teenagers who didn’t know any better. Emotional scars don’t heal overnight. Emotional scars in fact rarely heal, which by far is worse than having a cut on your hand. The wound lingers and it stays. Sometimes it subsides but then comes back in waves. Sometimes there are things in life that can be forgiven but NEVER forgotten. His prejudice toward Harry Potter formed out of nowhere. His grudge runs so deeply that he forgets Harry is nothing like his father; even Sirius, his dad’s best friend and godfather, admitted it! Yes, Snape has a reason to justify his hatred toward Harry, but it still doesn’t make it right.

Speaking of prejudice, the house-elves exist to serve their master and we learn a little bit more about their nature by examining the house-elf Kreacher who serves the Black family. They are not entirely innocent and deserving of freedom. It is in their nature to serve their master and they are content to serve as long as their masters don’t mistreat them just like we see in Doby with Lucius Malfoy and Kreacher with Sirius Black. I see the author’s point of view: everything has a functional structured hierarchy. House elves are loyal to a fault as long as you treat them well.

This book opens up a lot heavy loaded topics on social issues: classism, racism, and ageism, and what I found a little disturbing is the conclusion and justification that come from it (I noticed a pattern in the series: everything falls into place at the end of each book). I don’t know if I entirely agree with the author. Harry Potter as a character is not what I ideally pictured as a hero or someone I can admire. He is kind of too arrogant for my liking. Then again, the book did mention Harry’s Potter weakness is heroism. Also, I don’t like how Neville Longbottom and Luna Lovegood are portrayed as pitiful misfit characters in comparison to Harry Potter. Far too often writers make jokes about it in a way where it becomes insensitive. In this book, Harry Potter is framed as unstable and a liar by the Daily Prophet, a newspaper for the Witchcraft and Wizarding community–simply because he tried to tell the truth about Voldemort’s return. I find it ironic, considering that such a community is able to define what normalcy is considering that magic is involved because there’s nothing normal about magic. The Ministry of Magic should know better or perhaps this is a weak point of the plot. Mental illness is not a symptom of weakness. It’s an invisible disability. You can’t really expect a maimed person to compete in a sport like a basketball if they have no hands to grab the ball, or do you? It’s the same concept with the oddballs. Anyway, that’s beside the point of my analysis and I still got two more books to go to make a final conclusion about Mr. Potter. I want to define the Order of Phoenix as a book about prejudice, but that would simplify it because it’s more than that. It’s more about the abuse of authority. Even the “right authority” (Order of Phoenix) is not immune to failure. And if there is one lesson I took out from this book: be aware of the biases and prejudices when we make a judgment about a person. We are all prone to making mistakes. We are only human, after all.

Now I recalled the time my old boss defended his trusted employees from breaking a company’s procedure. With my own eyes, I attested it; however, my boss was too blind in favoritism to acknowledge it. Tsk…tsk…favoritism can be such a good bad thing. And that concludes my thoughts on this book, the book all about the “…ism”.