Riverdale: Afterlife with Archie Fan Theory Update

I’ve been keeping up to date with Riverdale – which I am continuing to enjoy despite its ups and downs – and I haven’t really seen anything that would further suggest that they are going to go down the Afterlife route which is what I said in the original article. It didn’t get a lot of traction at the time, in hindsight it was probably a bad time to post the article on reddit considering it was right after the third episode aired in the US and I’d only just finished the second one. However, overnight, for whatever reason, the article blew up and it has had over 1000 views in the last two days alone. Buzzfeed even linked to it in an article which was pretty nice.

With that in mind I would just like to do a quick update going over some new developments in relation to either supporting or disproving the theory that Riverdale will eventually go the Afterlife with Archie zombies route. I wasn’t going to do one of these before any more really strong evidence was suggested either way but there have been a few notable advancements which I’d like to sum up.

anigif_sub-buzz-27925-1488327993-2

Going into episode 5, I kind of stopped thinking about the whole zombies thing because nothing really seemed to happen to support it and then this gem of a troll happened at the very start of the flippin episode. You can imagine my reaction right? Considering this turned out to be Cheryl dreaming, I initially thought that this actually disproved the idea that it would go down the Afterlife route, because it’s really on the nose and kind of just seems like a nod to the comics. However this seemed to give a few other people the idea that Riverdale would do the whole zombies thing, and now they’ve gone back and maybe that’s why my original article, which was published three weeks ago, started to get some traction. Anyway, I wouldn’t really look too much into this other than the fact that the creators are obviously thinking about the whole zombies thing. The first thing you learn as an English/media/film student is that 99% of the time, nothing is put in by accident.

So let’s break down the new things we learned, with the main one being the fact that showrunner Roberto Aguirre Sacasa has stated that Sabrina (the teenage witch) is going to appear in the last episode of the 13 episode series. The Sweetwater river, which is the side where everything occurs with Jason, splits the two towns of Riverdale and Greendale where the Sabrina universe is. The creator has specifically said that Sabrina, a character who is almost wholly defined by being a witch, exists in this universe and will only be appearing in the last episode – talk about setting up the next season. Plus the whole symbolism of Jason traveling from the non-magical to the magical side and then returning.

In Afterlife, Jughead’s dog Hot Dog is hit and killed by a car. It is Sabrina who resurrects Hot Dog who becomes patient zero in the outbreak. Isn’t it also funny how Archie’s dog, (I think it’s Spot?), is specifically shown at his house yet Jughead’s more famous dog Hot Dog is very specifically shown as not existing in Riverdale. There is a quite touching scene where Spot sacrifices himself for Archie in Afterlife as well. Dogs aside, it is not too much of a stretch to see that Sabrina will have something to do with Jason and resurrection, with the reveal being right at the end of the first season thus setting up the next as full blown weird voodoo magic Riverdale.

chilling-adventures-of-sabrina-5-cover-780x491

Considering that we’re nearly halfway through the season, and we’ve learned barely anything more about the killer since episode 2, it suggests that it’s not the traditional murder mystery type story that it is pretending to be. There are still huge questions relating to the scene with the coroner and Jason’s body. We know: his feet were frozen, he was bound with rope, he was shot in the head and he died a week after the 4th of July which is when Archie/Grundy heard the shot fired which everyone is assuming is the one which killed Jason. The couple of new posts on reddit I’ve seen have barely mentioned this. There’s no way he went missing a week before the 4th of July and then got killed on the day. He has to have been killed a week after the 4th of July.

Then there’s Dilton. No one really believes that Dilton is the one that killed Jason, yet he fired the only shot which was heard on the 4th of July, the day Jason went missing and a week before he was killed. I think in coming episodes, they’re going to have to go deeper into Dilton firing the gun because that shot couldn’t have been the shot which killed Jason because even if he’d been reanimated as a zombie, the headshot would’ve killed him (also the whole out of place thing with Dilton being a survival nut could very handily work out if Afterlife happens). I still think the most likely explanation, which was mentioned in the first article, is that someone out there (possibly Sabrina) had to tie up a zombie Jason or ended up with him after stuffing up some witchcraft and then was forced to kill him. Somewhere along the way, someone or something got bitten, which will eventually emerge from the woods, leading to the outbreak right at the end of the season, where Sabrina will reveal what happened and the next season will be full blown Afterlife.

Apologies for the long-windedness of this but I haven’t seen a very clear summary of the theory as yet. I’ll be keeping up to to date with the show and will update with any new info. As always, let me know what you think and have a good one.

Cheers,

JK Pimento

 

 

Theory: Is Riverdale going to turn into Afterlife with Archie?

I just finished watching the second episode of Riverdale on Netflix and it is phenomenal so far. I had this idea that the show will actually be turning into a loose adaptation of the super popular and widely praised graphic novel Afterlife With Archie which just so happens to be written by Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa who is also the showrunner and chief writer on Riverdale. So I thought I saw some obvious things in the show which hint at this so I assumed considering how the internet works, there should be some theories of this nature already floating around. However after a quick search, I couldn’t find anything. Very interesting I thought, below I will outline some of the reasons why I think Riverdale may be going the zombies route.

First of all the characters are very similarly based on how they are written in Afterlife (which I own and absolutely love if it needs mentioning). Afterlife was the most successful Archie run in years and kickstarted the company down the more mature story lines it has since started. Aguirre-Sacasa has obviously translated his takes on the characters from Afterlife, the way he can make these characters complex, modernise them, give them contemporary problems and generally make the characters more complex and genuine and thus the relationships between the characters are more interesting – whilst still alluding to many of the old aspects of the comics.

Secondly and I think this is the biggest point, is the character of Cheryl Blossom and the importance of the twins. They played no small part in Afterlife, and were portrayed as having a really weird and troubled semi-incestuous relationship which really set the tone for the rest of Afterlife. Considering their central role in Riverdale, Aguirre-Sacasa is clearly intrigued by these characters. At the end of episode two, Cheryl says that she’s “guilty”. She doesn’t specifically say what but we can assume it’s murdering Jason. Now the weird thing is, we kind of suspect this at first because of how creepy they are and how apparently remorseless she is about the whole thing HOWEVER when the body washes up at the end of the first episode, Cheryl is genuinely cut up after that.

The two biggest examples are when she blows up at Betty about possibly her sister shooting Jason and the other is her breakdown after realizing that he is “never coming back”. Now here’s the real kicker and what set me along this train of thought in the first place. I don’t remember when she says it exactly but I remember the words perfectly. I think it’s in the scene in the change rooms when Veronica is comforting her but she explicitly says, “You don’t understand, he was supposed to come back!” to which Veronica kind of offers a puzzled expression and brushes it off.

afterlife2b002

Now think about this, it seems clear to me what happened. Considering that Cheryl is genuinely cut up about Jason “not coming back” and also she really seems like she doesn’t know who shot him, plus what kind of sick maniac would kill their twin? So we can assume that Cheryl and Jason for whatever reason (with Jason’s consent as evidenced by the “are you ready” quote at the very start of the show) have entered into some voodoo ritual which was either meant to or ended up in Jason becoming a zombie. Something goes wrong during the process, maybe Cheryl kills him or gets him killed another way but Jason gets loose. His body shows up much later with a bullet through the brain (how else do you kill a zombie?) and frozen feet and rope marks also on the body.

Here’s something else that I only just remembered, the coroner specifically states that he died a week after the boat incident where he was meant to have drowned. So here’s what I think happened, Cheryl and Jason go to the river to perform this ritual, perhaps meeting up with someone else or perhaps not, it goes wrong or right and Jason turns into a zombie but Cheryl doesn’t know whether it worked or not. Somebody encounters zombie Jason, they try to kill him somehow, he ends up with a bullet to the head and back in the river. Perhaps the person who killed him got bit but freaked out about killing somebody, dumped the body in the river and didn’t tell anybody. The bit person will lead to the outbreak.

Now you can see what I’m getting at and I would absolutely love, love, love this to happen but at this stage it’s just a theory…but a pretty convincing one huh? I probably won’t be disappointed if the show doesn’t go this way because it’s been pretty awesome so far but I just needed to get this out there. Let me know what you think in the comments and share with friends if you agree. We might know tomorrow with the new episode anyway!

Cheers,

Pimento.

A Coen Brothers Critique: Who is Hail, Caesar For?

I just finished watching Hail, Caesar! the latest film to be written, directed and produced by the Coen Brothers. For some reason, I PAID for this film on blu-ray and when it finished all I could think was ‘I got nothing out of this’. Now I don’t know why I bought the film, I think for some reason I thought it was a Wes Anderson film. Considering that The Grand Budapest Hotel is one of my most favourite films of recent years, I was looking forward to a new Anderson film. But no, just another Coen brothers affair and I’m left dissapointed.

Hail, Caesar! is a day in the life of a big shot producer, Josh Brolin, at a big movie studio in the Golden Age of Cinema, 1950’s Hollywood. Now I’m no schmuck, I’ve studied film and what the Golden Age was like, so I’m not one to miss the references and all that. Also many of the actors in the film I really enjoy, but for the most part, there are so many shoved in that many only have a single scene or two, so there is limited character development or even room for comedy. This has the added overall effect of taking time away from the main plot lines. In the end, I was left feeling like Hail, Caesar! was a fun, kinda quirky historical piece and that was it. I’ll probably never think about it again.

giphy1

Don’t get me wrong, for all intents and purposes it’s a very well crafted and executed film but there’s so little substance, and I know the Coen Brothers films are more about characters than plot, but come on give me something to follow, someone to root for. I think that’s the problem with Coen Brother’s films, they are well made and unique movies with lots of star power so they’re really hard to criticize. I like the fact that they’re meant to be for an audience of a certain educational level and you get more out of them the more you watch them. However, this is meant to be a comedy and I barely laughed a single time. I like the actors in the movie, appreciate the characters, understand (most) of the movie industry references and yet I have no reason to watch it again and have no idea who I would recommend this to.

Maybe my expectations were too high, but if someone like me found the film forgettable then who is it for? 1950’s cinema historians, the George Clooney Josh Brolin fan club, anyone still alive today who worked in the Golden Age of Cinema? The Coen Brother’s could take a lesson out of Anderson’s book in that The Grand Budapest Hotel featured a tonne of actors playing oddball characters, yet each was given appropriate screen time for their role, the narrative was charming and engaging and we had likeable characters to root for, oddball characters to laugh at and villainous characters to despise.

Just like Anchorman 2 was criticized for straying into the self-indulgent at times, I feel as though the Coen Brothers are at risk of the same here. Fargo was a fine film, I enjoyed it much more the second time when I understood more about the subverting of cinema conventions in the narrative. The Big Lebowski is a cult classic that I have to watch again, No Country for Old Men was a great film with a strong central plot and Inside Llewyn Davis was a critically lauded film that I’m yet to see. The Coen Brothers make well crafted movies…when they focus on the narrative.

Once again the problem remains, who is Hail, Caesar! for?

Thoughts: Stranger Things+Bonus Video!

I finally got around to watching Stranger Things on Netflix and boy was the hype justified for that show. It just nails that 80’s vibe, without seeming too on the nose or hokey. The characters are instantly likeable, the premise is pretty original for the genre that it is and there’s a tonne of awesome references to other stuff from the 80’s as well as some modern stuff.

The music is great as well, its decently budgeted in terms of visual effects and this honestly seems like what would happen if Steven Spielberg directed a tv show during the 80’s. Stranger Things is great, definitely worth watching even if you’re not a fan of the 80’s or genre stuff, just an all round great show and I’m looking forward to the next season mid-way though 2017 where the story is apparently going to continue from where the first season ended.

giphy

BONUS

A few years back, whilst procrastinating from uni work, I decided it would be fun to try some video editing. I didn’t really have any experience in the area but I decided it would be a handy skill to possess. So I made a montage video about the best games of the xbox360/PS3 generation as that generation was winding down at the time in late 2013. The result is the video below. I’ve only showed it to a couple of close friends because it’s probably the nerdiest thing I’d ever done up until that point in my life – well maybe apart from spending $200 on a pro lightsaber but that’s a story for another time.

I actually think the video holds up pretty well watching it now but anyway I hope you enjoy it. (Flume incoming warning)

*WordPress won’t let me upload videos unless I pay a bunch of money every month (Boo!), so you can find it here.

Cheers!

 

Thoughts: Dishonored 2 and Kids on the Slope

In the course of a very productive weekend, my days went like this: Wake up, start watching Kids on the Slope (Sakamichi no Apollon) on Netflix, go to work around 5 in the arvo, work till 10-11, come home, play Dishonored 2, go to bed and repeat. Not a bad few days if I say so myself.

Kids on the Slope is a 12 episode anime series directed by Shinichiro Watanabe, he of Cowboy Bebop and Samurai Champloo fame, with music by noted composer Yoko Kanno. It’s a coming of age story set over a few years from 1966 onwards. The protagonist, Kauro, is a freshman high schooler who’s on the honour role and a gifted pianist. He ends up befriending the school bad boy, Sentaro and his childhood friend Ritsuko, forming the core group of oddball characters the series follows as they go through high school.

Don’t worry about all those anime tropes, this series is real quality. The portrayal of domestic problems, societal stresses and teen romance is spot on. The characters end up bonding over jazz, so if you’re a jazz lover then you’re in for a real treat here. The animation is so on point here, particularly the animation when Sentaro is drumming is so damn good. The music as well is amazing. The OP is so damn good, normally I don’t really care about anime OP’s, especially the ones with generic Asian pop songs, that I usually skip them, but I watched the opening damn near every time.

I was really surprised with Kids on the Slope. I rarely watch this type of show, let alone anime’s of this genre but I’m so glad I did because it was really amazing. The whole series is on Netflix and it’s only 12 episodes so I definitely recommend it. Also it’s a very Japanese anime, if that makes any sense, so I ended up watching it subbed just because the voice acting is really good and it felt more appropriate to the story.

tumblr_mmkoac2vom1s2gu1ko1_500

I’m probably close to the end of Dishonored 2, so my thoughts here will most likely be the final ones. I really enjoyed the first Dishonored as something new, the art design was phenomenal and you really had a tonne of options. So I was really looking forward to the sequel, I’ve been craving a really good single player experience after mainly playing the Modern Warfare: remastered and Battlefield 1 multiplayers.

To be honest, I was a bit let down initially. The visuals are noticeably dated, as in this looks far more like a good looking 360 game than an xbox one game. Also, the controls felt a bit clunky and it took me a while to get used to the sensitivity. It was like the look acceleration setting was off but there was no option for me to change it.

Thankfully, the game improves dramatically after the first couple of levels. The art design is still top notch and it feels like there are more options to how you approach things. You can play as either Corvo (royal protector and protagonist from the first game) or Empress Emily Kaldwin. I chose Emily with the plan to do a low chaos run and then a Corvo high chaos run. There are a lot of new powers but the overall number doesn’t seem that much higher than in the first game which is a bit of a shame. Apparently Corvo has different powers, so I hope they’re not just the same one’s he had in the first game.

The premise is basically this: there’s a coup involving a witch who may or may not be your sister, you get ousted, whichever character you don’t choose gets turned to stone and you have to take it all back. The story is pretty basic but it’s more about the world building and the little stories that inhabit the environment which are special.

Overall, I’m pretty happy with Dishonored 2, but I was let down by the visuals and initial clunky controls. It almost feels like this game deserved a bigger budget which it didn’t quite get. I remember liking the first game more after I finished it the second time because I discovered a bunch of things I’d missed, so I’m hoping that’s the case with this game as well.

*Also, Vincent D’Onofrio and Rosario Dawson voice characters in the game, plus Emily is voiced by the same person who voices Sapphire in Steven Universe!

Thoughts: Finished Inside and FMA:Brotherhood

So I finished work, got home around 10ish and started playing Inside by Playdead, the developers who made Limbo, with this game sort of being a sequel to that. Roughly 3 and a half hours later and I finished the game and holy shit was it good.

Firstly it seems a little short, but I have to mention that I’ve finished Limbo a few times and gotten all the secrets and that stuff. This is a very similar platformer to that – basically just run, jump and interact – so if you haven’t played Limbo then it would probably take longer. Furthermore the pacing is so goddamn on point, in the sense that I was never like ‘oh I wish this section was over’ that I didn’t mind. There was only one section where I had to look up how to c0mplete the puzzle, and I realised I’d already tried that method but didn’t execute it properly so forgot about it and spent ages doing the wrong thing.

The amount of new areas and mechanics and ideas that the game throws at you is just phenomenal. I’m already thinking about replaying it and getting all the secrets to unlock the secret ending. I only found the first one and apparently there’s like 10 which is crazy because it’s not like I didn’t know they were there. In Limbo, they were hard to get but you accidentally stumble upon them by going a certain way or doing a certain thing.

tldr; Play both games they’re great, the order doesn’t matter but if you play Inside before Limbo then you may feel let down a bit just because of the advancement in production quality, although the art style on Limbo certainly holds up.

d8b9a1761ba0fe8024b8b8007024aa18

I smashed through the last three seasons of Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood in the last week after finishing uni for the semester. Boy does that show pick up speed after the first couple of seasons. There’s so much going on and it seems like the internal logic of the show makes sense but there were a couple of things I didn’t understand at the time. I’m sure it’d be like one of those things where you watch it again and pick up on a tonne more stuff…but I rarely rewatch things unless I’m crazy about them.

Would highly recommend, if you’re finding the first season a bit slow then I reckon you can just wiki plot summary the first couple of seasons and blitz through the last three seasons. They’re only 24 minutes episodes so it’s not hard. One thing which bothered me about the show was that the two main love interests finally get together but they never kiss! The whole goddamn, five season, 60 whatever episodes and they never kiss. Now I gotta go OVA hunting, what a pain.

That’s all for today, Have a good one!

ONE OTHER THING! I was flicking through tv late the other night and I started watching Peep Show. I recognised the show but I never really got it, probably because I’m not the biggest David Mitchell fan. Anyway, it’s this unique British comedy which is shot entirely (or almost) from the point of view of the characters, with their inner monologues narrating the scenes as they go. In the episode, the two guys go to this party, end up going bowling and then back to their place with their respective women they hook up with. The sex doesn’t go well for one of the dudes and is interrupted. Later he thinks about going back in for another try and then gets put off by the sound of his mate doing it in the next room. So he leans over and grabs a tissue box, on the nightstand next to the bed the girl is on, as we watch him from her eyes. The unapologetic face that he makes as he shuffles off was the funniest shit.

Here’s a link to the episode, I thoroughly recommend watching the whole thing but if you want to skip to the part I mentioned, it’s right at the end (23 min). It may be somewhat NSFW also. I can’t speak for the series as a whole but this episode was great.

Cheers,