BEFORE MIDNIGHT, RUSH, PACIFIC RIM & THE HOUSE OF HADES

It's been ages since I got to indulge myself in three new movies in the space of seven days, each completely different to the other, in addition to chalking down the latest and penultimate adventure in Rick Riordan's The Heroes of Olympus series. But I'm short of time to go into each of these in full depth at the moment, so I'll just briefly go through them and perhaps individually go into detail at another time.

First off... FILMS:

1) Before Midnight

2) Rush

3) Pacific Rim

BEFORE MIDNIGHT:

I'm not a guy who enjoys romantic movies that much. Most of them are schmaltzy works of garbage over-saturated with pop songs and populated with actors and actresses who look as if they walked off a modelling runway. I sort of blame these films for the increased divorce rates around the world for creating false notions about romance and relationships. Sure, there are a few films now and then that get it right but it's quite, quite rare and Richard Linklater's Before Sunrise trilogy is one such exception. 

The history behind these three films is as interesting as what goes on in the story. Each movie was made nine years apart- Before Sunrise in 1995, Before Sunset in 2004 and now, Before Midnight in 2013. The same time lapses within the trilogy, where we catch up with the protagonists first when they're 23, then when they're 32 and lately when they're 41, capturing them in three different moments in life, each offering a different perspective on love, romance and life. It doesn't hurt that all three films are the rare golden trilogy (on Rotten Tomatoes, they hold scores of 100%, 95% and 98% respectively).

As of now, Before Midnight is my favourite film of 2013. It's brilliant, it's gut-wrenching and it's a jarring reminder of how even the best relationships can get worn down by the realities of day-to-day life. It's also probably the film in the trilogy where both young and older audiences will connect with best. More on Before Midnight at another time.

OSCAR POTENTIAL: Before Sunset received a nomination for Adapted Screenplay, so chances for Before Midnight are good. The other categories are doubtful- Julie Delpy might have a shot at Best Actress but given the predictions already for Best Actor, Ethan Hawke might not be so lucky. Best Picture and Best Director also cannot be entirely ruled out (given Woody Allen's Midnight in Paris earned nominations for Best Picture, Director, Art Direction and Screenplay, winning the latter).

 

RUSH:

Ron Howard made one of the best films set in space (at least, probably until Alfonso Cuarón made Gravity) in Apollo 13 before striking Oscar gold with A Beautiful Mind. After that, his most successful films- commercially, at least- were the adaptations of Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code and Angels & Demons. Finally, with this year's Rush, he's returned more or less to the kind of films that made him initially famous.

Think of it as "Fast and Furious" in real-life with a more sensible story and bolstered by some truly great performances by Chris Hemsworth as James Hunt and Daniel Brühl as Niki Lauda. Brühl, in particular, is commendable but Hemsworth also delivers. The story, in particular, was approved by the real Niki Lauda for its authenticity and even though Formula 1 fans know the outcome of that final race in '76, it doesn't stop Rush from being any less thrilling- indeed, it doesn't have the bells-and-balls and glossing over historical facts that many biographical films usually do, inclining closer towards the realism of Apollo 13. It's a reminder that it isn't the end result that's fun but the journey in getting there.

OSCAR POTENTIAL: Difficult to say. Might get nominated for Best Picture and Best Supporting Actor for Daniel Brühl at least as well as spots in the technical categories. Best Director for Ron Howard is 50-50 and depends if there will be any slots available for him.

PACIFIC RIM:

When Guillermo del Toro makes a movie, you are guaranteed to have a great time. When he combines brilliant storytelling with iconic visuals, you end up with films like Pan's Labyrinth. When he's working from other people's scripts, you get Blade II (the best of the trilogy, in my personal opinion). At other times, you get the Hellboy films and this year, Pacific Rim. 

It might not sport the intelligent themes of his superior films but Pacific Rim is still a good deal of rollicking fun, where giant robots fighting monsters is actually fun instead of an incoherent mess like Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen and Dark of the Moon, not to mention being bolstered by the calibre of Idris Elba, Charlie Hunnam, Rinko Kikuchi and others. On top of that, the visuals are simply eye-catching and splendid.

OSCAR POTENTIAL: Virtually nil when it comes to the top awards. It has a chance at the technical categories, however, and might be a likely candidate for Visual Effects.

And now... BOOKS.

THE HOUSE OF HADES:

Have you ever felt like walking up to the people behind the dismal Percy Jackson films and hitting them with a sledgehammer while screaming, "DO YOU IDIOTS HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT A POTENTIAL GOLDMINE THESE BOOKS ARE?!". I mean, with nine books and one more on the way, it could easily beat out the Harry Potter films if done right. Instead, they gave us a generic Young Adult fare with a terrible botched adaption where, for some inexplicable reason, they thought the action-packed story of the book was inferior to the stupider ideas they chose instead for the films. 

The House of Hades is, by far, the most action-packed story yet. It was also a radical departure from the formula of the stories being driven by a prophecy while being narrated by all seven characters for the first time- this one was really the Avengers version of the Percy Jackson universe. 

* SPOILERS FOLLOW *

At the end of the Mark of Athena, Percy and Annabeth fell into the depths of Tartarus (basically, the worse version of Hell) and must now make their way across the treacherous landscape to the Doors of Death where they've arranged to meet their friends to shut off the doors once and for all. Of course, they've also got to contend with every single monster they've ever faced in the past who are out for their blood.

Meanwhile, the rest of the Argo II's crew must face equal treacherous foes out to stop them from reaching the House of Hades and in the process, make life-altering decisions which will affect the rest of their quest. 

I keep saying it with each book but the House of Hades is by far one of the superior books though it isn't without a few stumbling blocks here and there. What gives it the edge this time is Rick Riordan's treatment of the characters- they may be demigods, gods, Titans and Giants but never have the cast been more human than in The House of Hades. Secrets are revealed, familiar faces make an appearance and for the first time, EVERYONE has a huge personal stake in surviving their dangerous mission. Probably the most touching is Leo Valdez's story where he finally has a person worth returning to and it affects his character drastically by the book's end. Somehow, out of the new cast, Leo is possibly the most three-dimensional and fun but that's most likely because he fills up the humourous shoes Percy left behind when he disappeared for a while. 

All in all, it's been a great week.

Cheers!   

Justice League Movie: Why The Delay?

The "DC Comics Better Than Marvel/Marvel Better Than DC Comics" has raged endlessly for decades. Personally, as a fan of both, my stand on that issue is: they both have their good and bad points. End of story.

The highpoint of each brand, however, is when their individual characters team up: in DC, it’s the Justice League and with Marvel, it’s The Avengers. 

Of course, there are more teams (Teen Titans, Guardians of the Galaxy) but… you know what I’m talking about.

Marvel has already got the ball rolling with their highly successful film, The Avengers, with a sequel on the horizon for 2015, in spite of the fact that the team’s lineup consists of what would be considered “B-Team” characters (let’s be honest: Spider-Man, Wolverine, The Fantastic Four are more popular than Captain America, Thor and Iron Man).

Justice League, on the other hand, found success in the animated TV show Justice League prior to animated films like Justice League: The Flashpoint Paradox and Justice League: Doom. Most people, even if they’ve never picked up a comic book, are confused about Green Lantern being a white guy because their knowledge of the green-ringed dude is that of John Stewart. 

There was also a Justice League film in the works in 2009 with Mad Max director, George Miller, at the helm before it got cancelled. A film was rumoured in the works at the beginning of 2013 by Will Beal of Gangster Squad fame before it was chucked aside over reports that the script was "terrible". The latest now is that with the success of the Superman reboot, Man of Steel, a Justice League movie is slowly on the way a la the Marvel route.

Question is: why has it taken DC so long to get about it? A JLA movie is practically a goldmine.         

The matter is, if the Avengers movie was a dream come true for fans, a Justice League movie is Nirvana.  I’m not speaking as a DC Comics fan but that of someone who is a fan of both camps. 

First and foremost, DC's JLA line-up is killer.

Marvel has a creative problem and that is their 3 most famous properties— Spider-Man, X-Men and Fantastic Four— reside with Sony Pictures and 20^th Century Fox respectively. In the comics, the former two play a major role in the team. In the films, legal problems prevent it from being so even though the Oscorp Tower from The Amazing Spider-Man was initially scheduled to make an appearance in the New York skyline of The Avengers but it had already been rendered in the Visual Effects before both parties reached a decision. With the upcoming X-Men: Days of Future Past, Fox is keen to create their own shared universe between the mutants and FF, DOFP being a sort of reboot button to everything (that’s not how their talk about it but it’s obvious). Whether there will be a day when Fox, Sony and Marvel Studios agree to share their cinematic universes is all up in the air but I guarantee you, the day that happens, then The Avengers will become REALLY popular. Because everyone— and I mean, everyone— would be extremely thrilled to see Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine clash with Andrew Garfield’s Spider-Man compared to an alien invasion. 

DC does not have such a problem. They are free to select their line-up and fans will be certain to get favourites like Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern and Flash sharing the same screen without worrying about any legal issues. That’s why we’re getting a Batman-Superman team-up in 2015 and we won’t get a Wolverine vs. Spider-Man film anytime soon. 

DC’s lineup is one for the ages. Marvel’s lineup is equally impressive albeit in the comics.

Secondly, epic stories.

 

The Avengers had one god— two, counting Loki. The rest were a man in a suit of armour, a super soldier from another era, a man with anger issues and two spies.

The Justice League is basically full of gods— it’s like a bunch of Thor clones coming together. Superman’s abilities speak for themselves. Wonder Woman is an Amazonian and can go toe-to-toe with Superman without impunity. Aquaman controls the oceans. Flash is the fastest being alive. Green Lantern can construct anything he imagines with his ring. Cyborg can hack into all the computers in the world. And Batman, with no superpowers, is the smartest tactician of the team.

Alien invasions can’t be on the scale of the Chitauri because Superman neutralised a similar and far more dangerous threat in Man of Steel by himself. Whatever threat brings these gods together has to be an extremely massive one like that in The New 52’s formation: Darkseid’s invasion. Once that’s established, it’s easier to tear them apart because of their massive-sized egos and because of how much significance their actions can have (think Mark Waid’s Tower of Babel or even the threat of David Graves in the New 52 which led to Hal Jordan’s resignation from the team). 

The latter is a storyline seemingly to be explored in the sequel, Avengers: Age of Ultron, but come on— seeing Superman’s, Batman’s and Wonder Woman’s friendships being torn apart is more impacting than Iron Man, Captain America and Thor disagreeing with each other (note: if Iron Man and Hulk become distant, I’d be hurt because that was the best part about the Avengers).

Thirdly, it’s the Justice League.

In terms of popularity, the Justice League has always been more famous than the Avengers, thanks to the excellent animated series from Bruce W. Timm and Paul Dini whose previous credits include the brilliant Batman: The Animated Series and Superman: The Animated Series— even if only Supes and Bats have had a successful career on the big screen. Iron Man is famous now thanks to Robert Downey Jr. but before the films, the character of Tony Stark was nowhere near the level of Spider-Man, Daredevil, the X-Men and the Fantastic Four.

DC Comics needs to emulate Marvel’s formula to generate success— not just in having solo films leading to a team up but by firstly, having a strong focused producer like Kevin Feige and secondly, hiring a creative architect like Marvel has with Joss Whedon and Fox with Mark Millar. DC Comics seem to be doing that by handing those reins to Zack Snyder and David S. Goyer… which doesn’t necessarily inspire confidence given their pretty underwhelming and critically divisive resumes (Man of Steel is a great example).

With a new Superman already established in the form of Henry Cavill, Ben Affleck signed on as the new Batman and Glee actor Grant Gustin chosen to play Barry Allen a.k.a The Flash in the second season of Arrow, the question on everyone’s mind is: are all these pieces coming together to form a Justice League movie? Using cross-platform of television and film to establish the heroes is a novel approach, one originally considered by Ron Howard for his adaptation of Stephen King’s The Dark Tower.   

It remains to be seen but DC Comics seriously needs to be shaken out of its stupor or at least have the incompetent people kicked out for having taken so long to get a DC Cinematic Universe underway.

 

Harry Potter Reboot Will Inevitably Happen In Our Lifetime

  
The adventures of the Boy Who Lived ended its first run in 2007 in print, then later in 2011 in film. In that time, J.K. Rowling became a billionaire, the film franchise was the most profitable series in history and the stars were so rich they didn't need to ever work again though they went on to different pictures (at least, Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson did— Rupert Grint is probably tinkering around with that ice cream truck he bought). Harry Potter has earned a well-deserved spot in the field of pop culture alongside other classics and will endure for many decades to come. 

Except it is anything but over.

Following Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows-Part 2 in 2011, J.K. Rowling and Sony collaborated in launching the interactive site, Pottermore, though it’d be almost another year before it was ready for worldwide launch. Pottermore offered users an opportunity to rediscover the Harry Potter saga in a different light by offering a plethora of untold material and information from J.K. Rowling herself while taking part in wizard duels, earning house points to win the House Cup, etc etc. 

In some ways, it was a website version of a game that spanned from the Philosopher’s Stone to the Deathly Hallows. 

As of now (September 28^th, 2013), the first three books are available with the remaining four still on the way. Given that they release it in a bunch of chapters at different intervals and that the last four books are behemoth narratives, expect the final chapter of the Deathly Hallows to be online between 2016-2018. 

On September 12^th, 2013, Warner Bros. announced plans to produce an adaptation of the book Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them, the first in a new series with J.K. Rowling acting as scribe, marking her debut as a screenplay writer. “The first in a new series” means that they are looking at this as a long-term project, not merely a one-off film (unless the film flops at the box-office). By calculation, the film could go into production as early as 2014 or 2015; filming might commence late 2015 or early 2016; post-production could last as long as until 2017. 

In short, expect Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them hitting cinemas either by 2017 or 2018- EARLIEST. 

 

Should the film succeed and Warner Bros. greenlight at least two more sequels for a trilogy, say, it would likely finish either in 2024 (if they go about it one film straight after the other) or if they space it out, by 2028 (one film every three years). 

All in all, we could be getting Harry Potter and Harry Potter-related works as far as 2020 and beyond. The books still sell (Scholastic, the American publishers, recently launched a new edition line up with new cover art and it’s GORGEOUS!), there’s a theme park with another one under construction and there will always be the DVD Collector’s Sets. If Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them succeeds at the box-office as well as they’re expecting it to, Harry Potter will be sticking around for a long time to come and then will come the fateful day when Warner Bros. may decide to revisit the original goldmine itself: Harry Potter.  

 The Scholastic new edition

And God Bless the chumps who:

     a)  give the all-clear for a Harry Potter reboot and 

     b)  have to step into the large shoes of the filmmakers of the original franchise.

At first, the idea of a Harry Potter reboot is akin to the suggestion of remaking the original Star Wars films (that’s why we’re getting a new trilogy instead) or The Lord of the Rings trilogy; like attempting to do a modern version of The Godfather or Casablanca (there’s probably a special place in Hell reserved for people who ever attempt the latter— looking at the crew involved in the upcoming Ben-Hur remake). It’s only going to drive fans mad and cause them to cry "foul!", citing the move as nothing but a greedy cash grab. The chances of a reboot being an absolutely spectacular disaster is also quite high: not only will the reboot be required to match the critical and financial success of the film franchise but also replicate the same phenomenon that kept the franchise running for ten years- that's why other Harry Potter-esque adaptations never work, they don't take the time to careful work it out. It is like trying to capture lightning twice but this time with a high possibility of getting struck down by it instead. 

Only… why not? A reboot isn't an entirely unwelcome consideration.

In this dangerous game, there is one trump card that could work in the favour of a new Harry Potter series: the chance to offer something new- to get it right this time.

The biggest problem that the film franchise faced when they bought the rights all the way back in the late 90s was that at that time, only four books were published. The last three were still works-in-progress and while J.K. Rowling advised them on the creative direction the filmmakers took, she never gave away any major reveals- hence, they had to make up a great deal of it along the way. It was only until 2007 by which time Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix was released that fans knew the end of the story. By which time, plots which were dropped out in previous films would factor in a major way towards the last films but it was too late to change. Hence, some shoddy twisting was needed to cover up some of the gaping plot holes that were starting to appear in the films. 

But now, having knowledge of how everything plays out would allow for a more faithful and smoother adaptation, perhaps with a singular vision from start to end with one director at the helm throughout like Peter Jackson and the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

That being said, I’m not in favour of another film series. While some material left out might be able to be put back in, there will still have to be sections cut to fit a film’s running time. 

No, if Harry Potter is to make his return, the best medium to do so would be that of television. But not in a live-action format— instead, it should be an animated series. 

Why? 

1) No worries about the special effects

This is a no-brainer. A live-action Harry Potter television series would require a large budget to bring the magic of Hogwarts to life and regardless of the popularity of the brand, it is unlikely that any television network would sanction the money for it. 

 

With animation, however, the imagination is limitless and much of the wizarding world magic can be created with little worry about budgets. As Avatar: The Last Airbender and The Legend of Korra have demonstrated, the medium of animation allows for some truly spectacular sequences which simply cannot be replicated in real life (as M. Night Shymalan’s adaptation, The Last Airbender, learnt to its critical mistake). 

While most animated fare on American television stick to half an hour episodes, however, an animated Harry Potter series would benefit more from a one-hour episode not unlike those of drama shows. It could take the Game of Thrones approach to approximate one book per season (until you get to the Goblet of Fire), easily carrying on the show for seven to eight seasons at LEAST. 

Besides, it’s about time someone showed Americans and Brits that animation is a serious medium and not merely kid’s fare, as veterans like Hayao Miyazaki has proven time and again with adult mature-themed classics  like Princess Mononoke and Spirited Away. And what better than Harry Potter, having previously revolutionised the fantasy genre in both literature and film, to make a third stride in the realm of television this time?   

2) Allows for a better paced out story and exploration into the world of Hogwarts

One-hour episodes would not only cover a good portion of the story each week but also give enough time to delve deeply into the worlds of the supporting cast. Examining the lives of characters like Neville Longbottom, Malfoy, Dean Thomas, etc. and how they cope with surviving in the magical world would be a fantastic chance to flesh out the characters on-screen rather than off-screen and see the world through their eyes and perspective. 

Also, we might finally get to see Peeves the Poltergeist in catastrophic mayhem.

3) The opportunity to add new material that could not otherwise be put in a film

Not just subplots like the house elves working at Hogwarts, S.P.E.W., the Quidditch matches (IMAGINE THE GREAT QUIDDITCH MATCHES THAT COULD BE DRAWN!) but also opportunities to see the shenanigans which the students get up to. This is, after all, a magical boarding school. Angst, rivalries, friendship— all these themes are in the books and would work wonderfully on television. Also, character favourites like Winky, Ludo Bagman, Bill and Charlie Weasley, etc. can be given a chance to appear.

*

Given that it’s done right, handled smartly and offers something new, a Harry Potter reboot wouldn't be unwelcome. Certianly, it is on the horizon, I'm sure people at Warner Bros. are simply saying, "Not yet". Perhaps not even for the next twenty to thirty years. 

But within the sixty years? It wouldn’t be surprising, not surprising at all.

MISCHIEF MANAGED!

How The Final Season of Dexter Should Have Ended

This isn't a parody or my original creations which I'm about to suggest: it's taking the ideas which were used in the show and showing how they could have been used to great effect than it was.
* WARNING: SPOILERS FROM THE FINAL SEASON AND SERIES FINAL FOLLOW *

Alright, let's get down to it, shall we? We don't have all day, after all. 

(NOTE: this is about how the final season could have played out, not other seasons. With exceptions...)

Here’s how I would have— given the opportunity— have the final season of DEXTER play out:

1) Have one Big Bad over 3 seasons

Remember Louis Greene, the creepy computer programmer from season six? The one who showed Dexter his latest game where the user played a serial killer, sent him the hand from The Ice Truck Killer case, seemed to know about Dexter... and then was unceremoniously killed by a bullet to the head?

 

That was one of the biggest wasted opportunities and a shameful one at that because it could have played out interestingly. In fact, he would have been the perfect foil to Dexter, as I will list out in Reason Two. A Big Bad who remained mysterious while operating from the background (think Thanos from The Avengers) before revealing himself in the final season would have been far more exciting than a poor copycat killer of the Ice Truck Killer, the forgettable The Brain Surgeon.

Wait, you still want to tie it into Vogel’s story? You could make Greene turn out to be Vogel's son- perhaps tracking down his mother since his escape, learning about Dexter and wishing to get rid of him as revenge. It’d still be more compelling than what was delivered. As for sounding too far-fetched, well… in this show, it’s a norm. 

There could still be a way to bring in Vogel without needing the Brain Surgeon. Even then, it wouldn't need to be too much bother because what they should have done next is... 

2) Have the Big Bad (in this case, Greene) blow Dexter's secret wide open and put him on the run

QUICK! Think- what was the most interesting season of Dexter, apart from season one and four?

Your answer was SEASON TWO, right? 

Why would that be? Well, apart from the fact that it was bloody brilliant, it was because it was NAIL-BITING and TENSE storytelling from start to finish. Dexter didn’t have to go up against a Big Bad- he had to fend off a cop doing his duty (Doakes), contend with a crazy lady (Lila) and struggle to keep everyone else from uncovering his secret. AND IT WAS ALL GOOD! 

See, Dexter has always been at his best when backed into a corner and forced to use his wits to escape. He never really needed a Big Bad to always go up against and besides— the two best villains could never be topped. The Ice Truck Killer is brilliant because of his connection to Dexter and the Trinity Killer gets the top spot because of John Lithgow's brilliant scenery-chewing performance. 

 

So instead of a Brain Surgeon messing Dexter’s life, it would have been more poetic for Dexter to be undone by something he deemed inconsequential and forgot about- a fatal mistake. Perhaps the Big Bad could have slowly started leaking information to the Miami Metro about how The Bay Harbor Butcher may be connected to the Ice Truck Killer, The Skinner, Trinity, Miguel Prado, the Barrel Girl Killers (you get the picture), prompting an investigation that ends with them realizing *gasp* it's been Dexter all along! 

In one move:

- LaGuerta's death becomes relevant;

- the characters stop acting stupidly;

- GOOD EXCITING TENSION-FILLED DRAMA! 

And another way to achieve the above (amongst other ways) would have been by...

3) Debra also being responsible for Dexter's downfall

The best thing about the last two seasons (and the only good thing about season eight) was the relationship between Dexter and Debra once the latter discovered her brother's secret. Jennifer Carpenter's performance is worthy of an Emmy and absolutely compelling to watch. Ultimately, it caused her to kill LaGuerta to protect Dexter, resign the force, turn to drinking and ended stuck in a downward spiral. To top it off, she seemed to really hate Dexter for what he'd done, even driving his car off the road to kill him before ending up saving him. It was some great stuff… until they patched it all up over the course of one episode.

What should have happened:

When Deb was at her lowest and if she hated Dexter so much, she ought to have started plotting to bring Dexter him down by dropping clues to Elway before eventually having a change of heart and tossing it all aside, like the Hannah McKay case. But like what happened in season eight, it would have set in motion an unstoppable chain of events which could have happened concurrently with the Hannah McKay storyline (see how much potential was missed out?!). All this could happen parallel to the Big Bad's schemes before it all explodes in one huge fireworks display.

Not to mention, it would have created an extremely sticky situation for Dexter. Once he was on the run, his first response would be to turn to the one person he could trust- Deb, only to find out that she was unintentionally involved as well. If this happened EVEN WITHOUT the Big Bad, it would have still worked out beautifully because Dexter wouldn’t just be treading water in a deep dark well— he'd be drowning in it.   

With the above three possibilities, now picture how the last couple of episodes could have played out: 

Elway is closing in on Dexter’s trail, maybe helped from the shadows by Louis Greene. Perhaps Miami Metro is also connecting the pieces. Hannah returns and Dex has to hide her (incorporating that storyline effectively without merely shoehorning it in like what happened). Deb and Dexter have just returned things to a more stable relationship. Then the Big Bad reveals himself to Dexter and promises to destroy Dexter for ruining his life (Greene was dedicated to destroy Dexter in Season 7- see, I'm not even making it up, just taking what they already did and modifying it). He disappears... and makes a sudden appearance one day on television to reveal the Bay Harbor Butcher's identity. BOOM! Miami Metro is shocked and forced to hunt down their colleague, Dexter finds out what Deb had done, Elway and the US Marshall are closing in on both Hannah (like what happened in season 8) and Dexter (which did not happen). Deb is forced to choose sides— to hunt Dexter or help him. And Dexter can't go after Greene now because it wouldn’t help.

Now isn’t THAT a final season you’d rather have watched?