Arcaneya

Category: Major arcana

  • How One Small Pimple Awakens Self-Awareness — and Births the Hermit Within the Teenager

    When I was a teenager, I had pimples that refused to leave. I tried everything—creams, antibiotics, home remedies, prayer—but nothing worked. At the time I saw them only as a curse, something ugly that kept me from feeling confident or seen. Years later, with a little spiritual perspective, I began to think it might have been something deeper. Perhaps those pimples were not defects at all, but part of a secret conversation between my soul and life itself.

    As children we carry an effortless light. It shines through the skin, through the eyes, through laughter that comes without calculation. That light is pure creation: the world looking out through us. Then adolescence arrives and everything changes. The energy inside flares like a new sun; hormones awaken, emotions intensify, the self begins to separate from the whole. The inner light becomes almost too bright for the small vessel that holds it, and so nature finds a way to balance it. The skin erupts. A tiny blemish appears on the face, and with it comes the first shadow of self-consciousness. One pimple is enough to terrify a teenager, to make them withdraw from the world and hide their radiance. It is the perfect instrument for the birth of individuality.

    For a long time I thought the eruptions were random, but now I suspect the body knew exactly what it was doing. When the soul’s light shines too openly, it attracts every wandering gaze. The world is full of people—good people, just weary—who have forgotten their own light. They are drawn to brightness, unconsciously reaching for it, wanting to feel it again. A child who glows too soon becomes a magnet for that hunger and can quickly feel drained, observed, even possessed by other people’s attention. So perhaps the body steps in as protector, dimming the lamp until the spirit is strong enough to carry it safely. The acne, the awkwardness, the shyness—all of it might be an intelligent veil, a temporary disguise saying, “Hide for now; grow stronger.”

    Seen this way, acne is not a flaw but a balancing act. Creation always summons its counterpart—destruction. Light cannot expand endlessly without burning itself out, so life applies a little shadow. It is not punishment; it is calibration. Through that dimming, the soul discovers something it could never know in pure innocence: self-awareness. Before, the child was the light; now the teenager knows the light and fears losing it. In that moment of separation, individuality is born. This is the making of the Hermit.

    The Hermit’s story is the natural sequel to adolescence. When the inner sun dims, he takes up an external lantern. That lantern is everything we lean on when the effortless glow is gone—knowledge, philosophy, fashion, faith, the search for meaning. We wander through mirrors and judgments trying to find the source of the brightness we once took for granted. The Hermit is not lost; he is learning to walk by borrowed light until he can ignite his own again. Every self-conscious teenager carrying their secret insecurities is walking that same path, lantern in hand, trying to remember the warmth that once came so easily.

    In time, if we listen, the lesson reveals itself. The light never left; it only moved inward to be purified by awareness. The pimples fade, the shame loosens its grip, and we learn to shine again—this time not as innocent children but as self-knowing beings. We realize that radiance without boundaries invites confusion, but radiance anchored in self-awareness becomes compassion. The Hermit sets down the lantern because he no longer needs it; the inner flame has returned, steady and mature.

    So when I look back on my teenage skin, I no longer see failure. I see the intelligence of balance. Life was teaching me how to bear my own brightness responsibly, how to keep my light from being stolen or misused. What looked like imperfection was the universe’s way of sculpting individuality, of turning untested fire into conscious warmth. One small pimple was enough to begin that alchemy—to create the distance needed for self-recognition, to awaken the Hermit inside me who would one day learn to carry the sun again without fear.

    Thanks,

    Ira

  • Sherlock Holmes: The Origin Story – Becoming the Detective We Know

    Few attempts have been made to explore the beginnings of Sherlock Holmes, and Doyle himself left almost no hints about the formative years of his extraordinary detective. Most adaptations either leap straight into the legend or tinker superficially with his youth. Here, we imagine a coherent origin story, showing how Holmes became the brilliant, eccentric, almost mythic figure we recognize today.

    Early Talent and Ambition

    Even as a young man, Sherlock displayed flashes of genius. He could solve minor mysteries, notice patterns others missed, and anticipate outcomes with uncanny precision. Yet these early successes were fragile; they depended on his natural intuition, and he lacked the discipline to sustain it.

    Into this early phase steps a brilliant, independent woman. She sees nothing remarkable in him yet, and this fuels Sherlock’s desire — he wants to impress her, to prove himself. She is unknowing inspiration, the spark that motivates him to push beyond his limited skill.

    The Pressure and the Fall

    Driven by his desire to impress her and live up to his own ambitions, Sherlock begins to force his deductions. He overthinks cases, cuts ethical corners, and even experiments with shady bribes to extract information. His attempts to control the outcomes fail spectacularly. The more he forces the issue, the more his abilities falter, until his talent seems to desert him entirely.

    Eventually, the strain — mental, emotional, and physical — catches up. He falls ill, and the world sees him as a failure. The young woman, who once inspired him, becomes distant. Her judgmental or disappointed reactions, combined with societal whispers, drive him further into isolation.

    The Year of Idleness

    Sherlock retreats completely. For an entire year, he abandons ambition and the chase for recognition. He fiddles with trivial experiments, indulges in odd hobbies, and spends days doing nothing of consequence. This period of idleness, while seemingly wasteful, is actually crucial: it allows his mind to reset, free from the constant pressure that had previously broken him.

    During this time, he develops eccentric habits and begins masking his vulnerabilities. He learns to conceal himself from judgmental eyes, laying the groundwork for the persona Doyle’s readers would later know: aloof, enigmatic, and intimidatingly composed.

    The Spark on the Park Bench

    One day, while sitting on a park bench, completely idle and masked, Sherlock stares blankly at the sky. His mind, finally quiet, begins to see — patterns emerge from ordinary observations. Across the square, he notices his friends struggling with a small case. Normally, he would have needed investigation, questioning, or planning. But now, his intuition pieces together the culprit’s motive, behavior, and likely actions.

    Crucially, he is still masked as he approaches. His friends do not recognize him, allowing him to observe naturally. This moment crystallizes his first true “Holmesian” deduction — a leap from observation to insight — and signals the rebirth of his genius.

    The Woman and the Burden

    By the time Sherlock’s intuition begins to function at full capacity, the woman who once inspired him notices the change. She admires his brilliance, is drawn to him, and even falls for him. Yet her presence, once a spark, now becomes a distraction — a burden on the singular focus his extraordinary mind requires. This dynamic explains why Holmes will remain detached and almost asexual in later life: attachments threaten the clarity that defines him.

    Becoming Holmes

    From these experiences, the young detective emerges fully formed:

    • Eccentric habits become tools, not quirks.
    • The mask that once concealed weakness becomes part of his identity.
    • Intuition and deduction are no longer forced but natural.
    • Emotional detachment, born from inspiration, failure, and burden, ensures he can pursue truth above all else.

    By collapsing, idling, and finally allowing his mind to awaken on its own, Sherlock Holmes becomes more than a clever boy solving small puzzles — he becomes a mythic figure, the brilliant and eccentric detective whose fame will echo through literature.

    This origin story preserves the essence of Doyle’s Holmes while giving him a transformational arc: ambition, failure, collapse, inspiration, and rebirth. The narrative also integrates a humanizing element — a woman who shapes him, yet whom he ultimately outgrows — providing emotional depth without undermining the detective’s legendary detachment.

    Thanks,

    Ira

  • She’s Out of My League (2010): The Justice Balancing Principle And Its Devil Agents

    She’s Out of My League is often seen as a lighthearted romantic comedy about an “average” guy, Kirk, getting the attention of an idealized woman, Molly. On the surface, it’s a funny, awkward story about social mismatches and improbable romance. But beneath the jokes lies a profound archetypal structure that can illuminate why his journey resonates—and why the film’s original execution falters.

    At the heart of this structure is what we can call the balancing principle, a phenomenon rooted both in social psychology and archetypal symbolism. Whenever someone begins to rise—approaching love, light, or a higher state of being—the universe, or more precisely the subconscious forces of their social environment, instinctively works to restore equilibrium. In the movie, these forces are Kirk’s friends, family, and social circumstances—the agents of undercutting.

    Justice and the Balancing Principle

    The 8th archetype, Justice, governs balance between good and bad, light and shadow. When Kirk starts moving closer to Molly, who represents love and radiant light, he is literally exceeding the average level of his world. Justice, symbolically, cannot allow unbalanced ascension without challenge. The balancing principle manifests as social friction, testing the hero’s readiness for higher connection.

    This principle explains why, even as Molly shows interest, Kirk is met with skepticism, ridicule, and pressure from his friends and family. Their shocked, mocking, or incredulous reactions are not just comedic beats—they are the mechanisms of balance, pushing him to confront his own fears, insecurities, and social conditioning.

    The Devil Archetype: Agents of Undercutting

    These external pressures, combined with Kirk’s own internal doubts, can be seen as manifestations of the Devil archetype. Friends making jokes, family expressing disbelief, and even Kirk’s ex-girlfriend all operate as agents who tempt him to retreat, sabotage his ascent, or doubt his worth.

    In real life and in archetypal terms, these “Devil” forces serve an essential purpose: they test whether the hero’s rise toward light is genuine and sustainable. They force him to confront shadow aspects—fear, inadequacy, hesitation—so that when he finally moves toward love, his ascent is earned rather than accidental.

    Molly as Love and Light

    Molly functions symbolically as the beacon of what Kirk aspires to: radiant energy, self-assuredness, and the emotional clarity of love. Approaching her is not merely a romantic goal—it represents moving toward higher consciousness and alignment with life-affirming forces. This proximity to light automatically triggers the balancing principle.

    Her presence highlights Kirk’s vulnerabilities, and the universe, through the Devil archetype, orchestrates obstacles to ensure that any growth he achieves is self-initiated, not granted by luck. Only by facing these pressures can he stabilize his transformation.

    Earning the Ascent

    A key flaw in the original film is that Kirk does not fully internalize his challenge. When he retreats to his ex and allows Stainer to pull him back, his journey is temporarily resolved externally. The narrative shortcut weakens the archetypal logic: the Devil archetype’s challenge loses potency, and Justice’s balancing test is bypassed.

    A more satisfying, archetypally coherent story would show Kirk first finding his own determination, resisting external undercutting, and taking conscious action toward Molly. Only then can external help—or serendipitous circumstances—serve as reinforcement rather than a crutch. This ensures that his ascent toward love and light is earned and stable, fully satisfying the symbolic rules of the balancing principle.

    Conclusion

    Viewed through the lens of archetypes, She’s Out of My League is more than a rom-com about mismatched dating. It is a narrative of ascent and testing, where Justice maintains equilibrium and the Devil archetype challenges the hero to earn his right to love and light. Molly, as radiant light, naturally triggers subconscious resistance, both social and internal, forcing Kirk to grow.

    Understanding this framework enriches the story: the awkward comedy, the social undercutting, and even the meltdown moments are not just jokes—they are archetypal tests of character, courage, and self-realization. In a reimagined version, making Kirk’s journey internally driven would honor these principles, turning a funny rom-com into a story of genuine, earned transformation.

    Thanks,

    Ira

  • Mortal Engines (2018): Putting the Derailed Premise Back on the Mud Track

    Mortal Engines opens with one of the most imaginative concepts in modern steampunk cinema — cities on wheels, devouring each other in a post-apocalyptic ecosystem of predator and prey. The idea is visual dynamite. You can almost taste the diesel fumes, hear the creak of steel teeth as one city swallows another.

    And yet, after this thunderous opening, the movie veers into strange, disconnected territory. The predator-city concept fades into the background as we follow a revenge arc that could have been set in any generic dystopia, a sentimental undead assassin with confusing motivations, and a conveniently introduced fortress city that arrives without setup. By the time the climax rolls around, we’ve gone from grinding gears and political maneuvering to a quantum-powered doomsday weapon — a tonal leap so jarring it snaps the dieselpunk fantasy in half.

    The heart of the premise — the politics, survival, and ruthlessness of predator cities — gets lost under a heap of side plots. Which is a shame, because with the right focus, Mortal Engines could have been something unforgettable.

    A Love Story That Devours

    Instead of scattering the audience’s attention, the story could have anchored itself to a single, driving throughline: a classic love story, tangled in the politics of predator cities.

    The film could open much like the original — a medium-sized predator city hunting down a smaller one. The protagonist, a young captain’s apprentice, makes the decisive move that captures the prey (the magician archetype). After the victory, he convinces the crew to pull ashore for a much-needed rest, docking against a beautiful, stationary shore city. He signals peace with white lights… but positions the city so its treads crush the first shoreline house — a symbolic reminder that even diplomacy in this world begins with a bite.

    Tensions are high as diplomats are sent in. Here, the apprentice meets a woman who will upend his world (the high priestess) — radiant, sharp, and belonging to a city too beautiful to devour. To impress her, he later captures a third city, basking in his own bravado. But she soon tires of his arrogance and returns to her former lover. Stung and furious, the apprentice engineers a false flag attack from her home city, giving him the excuse to devour it.

    His triumph turns sour. Diplomats resent him, and the great metropolis of London sends him cold warnings. With enemies closing in, he is eventually forced to seek asylum in a massive fortress city with walls like Shan Guo, enduring ridicule for his retreat. Cornered (the hanged man archetype), he begins to reckon with the destruction he has caused. When he meets his former love again — a survivor of the city he destroyed — he apologises (the death archetype). They share a quiet, sunlit moment of truth (the sun archetype). She offers a hint of warmth, but nothing more for now.

    Redemption on the Edge of Devouring

    With London’s forces advancing and all seemed lost, the protagonist does not surrender to despair. Instead, tempered by loss and humbled by the consequences of his pride, he devises a bold plan—not to fight with sheer force but to outthink the predator city system itself.

    Drawing on his knowledge of the cities’ mechanics and his hard-earned understanding of alliances and survival, he forges unexpected coalitions among smaller settlements, uniting prey cities that had long lived in fear and isolation. He transforms the landscape from a battlefield of consumption into a network of cooperation, a new kind of ecosystem where survival depends on mutual support rather than endless devouring.

    In a climactic maneuver, he leads this alliance to outwit London’s juggernaut—not by meeting steel with steel, but by exploiting vulnerabilities in the predator city’s overreach. Through clever strategy and a willingness to sacrifice personal glory for the greater good, he stops London’s advance and ignites the first flicker of a new order.

    His personal redemption is complete—not through revenge or conquest, but through wisdom, humility, and love that endures beyond the carnage.

    Why This Works

    By centering the story on a single, emotionally charged romance, every hunt, every diplomatic move, and every battle becomes tied to the protagonist’s personal arc. The love story doesn’t exist in the background — it is the story. The predator cities aren’t just set dressing; they are the means, the obstacle, and the weapon in a war of pride and longing.

    This version would keep the dieselpunk spectacle while giving the audience a reason to care about the outcome beyond “who wins the fight.” Pride and love would drive the plot, the politics would feel sharper, and the final tragedy would land with the force of steel jaws closing. Instead of destruction, this ending offers hope—a protagonist who learns and grows, forging a future that breaks the cycle of endless consumption.

    In short, it would give Mortal Engines what the original sorely lacked: a heartbeat that could be heard over the roar of the engines.

    Thanks,

    Ira

  • Barbie (2013): Beyond the Manipulation of Kens: A Better Ending for Barbie’s Final Chapter

    Greta Gerwig’s Barbie made a splash for all the right reasons—visually dazzling, subversively clever, and deeply ambitious. It wasn’t just a toy commercial; it was a bold attempt to reckon with modern identity, feminism, and meaning itself—all within a pink plastic dreamland. It had the potential to become a generational film.

    And for the first two-thirds, it very nearly did.

    The first hour of Barbie is magnetic. Barbie Land is lovingly crafted, absurd but immersive, and emotionally relevant despite its overt surrealism. Margot Robbie’s Barbie undergoes a startling transformation—flat feet, existential dread, cellulite—and we understand instinctively that this film wants to be more than a comedy. It’s about what it means to be real, in a world that keeps asking you to perform perfection.

    It also gives us Ken—Ryan Gosling’s comic powerhouse of insecurity, yearning, and identity confusion—who unexpectedly becomes just as vital to the story. The dynamic between Barbie and Ken begins as shallow, but the deeper the story goes, the clearer it becomes: they are both trapped by the roles they were assigned.

    But then… the final third happens. And it all starts to unravel.

    The movie, which had so far handled its themes with grace and satire, suddenly buckles under its own ideological weight. The story shifts from personal transformation to chaotic gender politics. The Barbies manipulate the Kens into surrendering their newly formed patriarchy, and in doing so, win back the Dream Capitol. The message seems to be: “Trick the boys and get your power back.”

    And that’s where it lost us.

    Because the manipulation is never truly reckoned with. Barbie’s personal arc, which began so vulnerably, is sidetracked in favor of an exposition-heavy conversation with the ghost of Ruth Handler. And Ken, who had undergone his own journey of self-discovery—however misguided—is left in the dust with nothing but a hoodie and a vague notion of figuring himself out.

    The film tries to fix everything in a flurry of monologues and symbolism, but the emotional rhythm collapses. The result is a final act that feels like a lecture—convoluted, uneven, and emotionally hollow.

    So we reimagined the ending. And like always, it’s based on major arcana archetypes. Not to oppose feminism—although we believe patriarchy is not evil, only circumstantial—but to restore grace, heart, and accountability to the characters we had come to care about.

    The Reimagined Outline

    In this alternate version, the turning point comes after the Barbies use manipulation to reclaim power (the Caesar archetype) from the Kens. It works—cleverly, theatrically. But manipulation (the Strength archetype) creates nothing but illusion (the Moon archetype), and illusion always brings with it karmic consequences.

    As the Barbies prepare to ratify a new Dreamland constitution that re-establishes their rule, the Kens return—not in violence, but with a loophole. They storm the Dream Capitol, not as invaders, but as citizens. One of them points to a clause in the Dream Constitution: there’s still time left to vote.

    It’s not a coup. It’s a reckoning.

    And it’s there, at the height of Barbie’s supposed triumph, that she breaks down (the Hanged man archetype). Not because she’s lost power—but because she sees how far she strayed from herself. Her manipulation, however clever, wasn’t leadership. It was fear. It did nothing.

    “I didn’t know what else to do,” she says, trembling. “I thought I was losing everything I thought made me matter.”

    And then something beautiful happens.

    Ken doesn’t lash out. He doesn’t gloat. He softens.

    “You don’t have to be perfect,” he tells her. “None of us do. We’re just trying to figure out who we are.” He’s deeply sincere (the Hierophant archetype).

    It’s not about dominance anymore. It’s about becoming human—together. They apologise to each other (the Death archetype).

    Barbie and Ken, for the first time, look past their programmed identities. They see one another not as rivals, or as roles, but as equals in transformation. The vote is scrapped. The constitution is rewritten—by everyone. Barbies and Kens alike. They stay overnight rewriting it (the Chariot archetype).

    No utopia. No clean win. Just honesty. As Barbieland found its balance, Ken’s soul-searching found its better place too—no longer lost or sidelined, but an essential part of the new, honest world they were building together. We could also honor the original idea of avoiding the cliché romantic ending and close with them as close friends—two individuals who share a bond forged in awakening (the Judgement archetype), while leaving some space to hint at something more later. Because nothing is ever defined.

    The return to the real world – Together

    Barbie still feels something pulling her. A longing not for the old Barbie Land, but for the imperfect, unpredictable mess of the real world. And just when we expect her to leave Ken behind like the original film did—she doesn’t.

    Because Ken is on the same journey.

    They’ve both grown. They’ve both tasted something real. And they both want to bring it into the world that’s still struggling.

    The final scene takes place not in a joke clinic, but in a quiet simple community space (the Temperance archetype). Barbie leads a discussion with a group of girls and women. She isn’t teaching. She’s just listening. Being present.

    Across the room, Ken is speaking with boys—openly, honestly. No bravado. No scripts.

    They lock eyes. Smile (the Sun archetype). Walk past each other. And for a moment—just one—they hold hands.

    Not as lovers. Not as symbols. But as two people who once were plastic, and now are real.

    And they chose to build something better.

    Together. (the World archetype).

    Thanks.

    Ira

  • I Am Legend (2007): Reimagining The Story Based on The Power Of the Words And Emotions

    When I Am Legend premiered in 2007, it promised a bold and haunting story: a man alone in a post-apocalyptic world, surviving among the ruins of civilization, haunted by monsters both literal and metaphorical. The setup was compelling. Will Smith delivered a strong, emotionally grounded performance. And the eerie silence of an abandoned New York City gave the film a uniquely haunting texture.

    But what followed was a story at war with itself.

    Instead of diving into its psychological or existential potential, the film retreated into clichés — culminating in one of the most absurd deus ex machina moments in modern sci-fi. As Robert Neville spirals toward despair, he is suddenly saved by a glowing, linen-draped woman and her mute child who appear out of nowhere and just happen to know about a magical survivor colony up north. It feels less like a dramatic turning point and more like a Disney+ crossover. Even the alternate ending — which attempts to reframe the infected as sentient beings and Neville as a monster in their mythos — feels pasted on, disconnected from the story that came before it.

    The problem wasn’t the ending. The problem was that the film never earned one.

    But what if it had?

    What if we rebuilt the arc from the ground up — not just with action and plot twists, but with emotional truth? What if the story of I Am Legend was really about how panic, fear, and belief shape the world we live in — and how one man, broken by loss, learns to see through it? In other words, lets base the story on major arcana archetypes, as much as possible.

    An Alternative Outline

    Imagine this version: In flashbacks, we see that Neville wasn’t calm when the outbreak began. He was panicked. Furious. Desperate to control the chaos around him (the Emperor archetype). His wife, gentle and composed, tries to reassure him: “Everything will be fine.” But he snaps: “Everything will NOT be fine!” The words come out with the full force of his fear, and they carry weight — not just emotionally, but thematically. That line becomes the invisible thread tying his past to his present.

    In the shattered silence of the future, Neville is a man living in the echo of that moment. His world is barren, hostile, and terrifying — not just because of the virus, but because his perception of the world has made it so. He clings to control through rigid routines, cold logic, and failed experiments (the Strength archetype). He is haunted not just by what he’s lost, but by his inability to surrender. It’s his downfall (the Wheel archetype).

    The tipping point comes when his dog — his final emotional anchor — dies. And Neville breaks (the Hanged man archetype). Not in a dramatic, explosive way, but in quiet devastation. He cries. He collapses. He mutters to no one, in exhaustion and grief, “Everything will be fine.” And in that moment — for the first time since the world ended — he means it (the Hierophant archetype).

    That line, once spoken in panic, now returns as surrender. Not denial. Not delusion. Just… trust. Faith (the Star archetype). The memory of someone who loved him even as he unraveled. In spirit, he apologises to his wife for panicking (the Death archetype).

    And something shifts.

    With his mind finally clear, Neville returns to his notes (the Resurrection arcetype). He sees what he was missing. The equations don’t change — he does. Where once he tried to force the virus into submission, he now sees a path to healing. Not a miracle. Not a grand salvation. Just a quiet, earned breakthrough. His mind is finally capable of moving through ideas to conclusions (the Chariot archetype).

    That’s where the divine intervention belongs — not in a glowing stranger arriving with plot coupons, but in the moment a man lets go of fear. When panic dissolves, clarity enters. Grace and optimism for the world (the World archetype) follows.

    This reimagined arc gives I Am Legend the emotional scaffolding it always needed. It aligns the internal journey with the external one. It makes the title resonate — not because Neville becomes a mythic slayer of monsters, but because on some level he learns that the world mirrors the words we speak. And only when he changes his truth does the world begin to heal.

    This isn’t just a better ending — it’s a better story. One that dares to believe that survival isn’t about dominance or sacrifice, but about surrender, humility, and transformation. Which is what major arcana teaches us all.

    The real legend isn’t the man who defeats the darkness —but the one who finally sees the light.

    Thank you,

    Ira

  • The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (2003): Fixing the Gentlemen’s Extraordinarily Flat Arcs

    When The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen hit theaters in 2003, it came with the seductive promise of something bold and mythic: a cinematic gathering of legendary literary heroes — Mina Harker, Allan Quatermain, Dr. Jekyll, Captain Nemo, and others — uniting to face a global threat in a fog-soaked, steampunk-tinged 19th century.

    The premise was extraordinary.
    The execution, however, was not.

    What unfolded was a chaotic mess of tropes, explosions, and empty declarations. A story built out of famous names and cool costumes but hollow at the core, as if someone had assembled an all-star cast of myths but forgotten to give them a soul. It wasn’t just a misfire — it was a film that forgot to tell a story.

    On the surface, League plays like a pulp-era Avengers assembled inside a gothic snow globe. But the more it progresses, the clearer it becomes that there is no emotional anchor, no protagonist with an actual arc, and no reason to care. These characters don’t grow, they don’t bleed, and they don’t truly connect. They just show up, survive impossible situations, and deliver exposition until the next overly choreographed gunfight or explosion.

    The villain, a masked figure known only as “M,” eventually reveals himself to be Moriarty — and somehow, he’s also the person who brought the League together in the first place. His plan? Fake a global crisis so he can exploit their abilities, steal their formulas and technologies, and sell them to fuel a world war. It’s a scheme so convoluted it collapses under the slightest scrutiny. He recruits the very people most capable of stopping him, gives them resources, weapons, and access to his operations, then seems shocked when they foil everything. It’s cartoon logic dressed in period clothing.

    Worse still, even individual character logic falters. Dorian Gray, whose very existence depends on hiding his cursed portrait, apparently carts the thing around with him in a suitcase so Mina Harker can conveniently discover it and kill him at the climax. The Invisible Man, with powers that should make him the most dangerous character in the film, does almost nothing useful and barely registers as more than an underwritten prankster. Every moment that could offer drama is instead flattened by coincidence, bad timing, or overconfidence in plot armor.

    Beneath all of this chaos, the biggest issue is simple: no one changes. When everyone begins extraordinary, there’s nowhere left to grow. These icons arrive fully formed, each one wrapped in their own mythology, but none of them carry any real emotional weight. There are no internal stakes, no transformative choices, and no earned redemption. They’re just tools, not people.

    But there is a story here. Buried under the rubble, there’s a better League — one made of broken relics trying to matter again.

    Take Allan Quatermain, the man the film loosely frames as its lead. He’s introduced as a jaded, aging hunter who once explored the heart of Africa and now drowns his pain in obscurity. But even here, the movie fails to explore his emotional depth. He begins the film gruff and capable, and he ends it gruff and capable. There’s no real arc.

    An Alternative Outline

    Now imagine a different version. A man whose greatest fear isn’t death, but irrelevance. He’s old, and he knows it. His hands shake. His aim is slower than it used to be. His instincts are off. But he plays the part of the unflinching hero because he doesn’t know how to be anything else — and because he’s too ashamed to admit that his legend is fading. That shame becomes dangerous. He insists (the strength archetype) on leading, on making the calls, on being the Quatermain everyone expects, even when those decisions start getting people hurt. He is creating an illusion (the moon archetype).

    When a mission goes wrong, and one of the League members nearly dies because of him and they are forced to stop and regroup (the Hanged man archetype), Quatermain’s mask finally slips. He admits it (the Hierophant archetype): he’s been bluffing. Pretending. Living on the fumes of reputation. And it’s not youth or strength that saves him — it’s the moment he steps aside, owns his fallibility, defeats his ego (the Death archetype), and begins to trust others. Especially Tom Sawyer, the brash young American he’s been doubting from the start. Their tension isn’t just generational — it’s deeply personal. Quatermain sees in Sawyer the ghost of his former self. The two have a heart to heart conversation (the Sun archetype) and by the end, he doesn’t pass him a rifle — he passes him the future (the World archetype).

    The League, finally freed from Quatermain’s fears of being forgotten, gathers momentum (the Chariot archetype) and defeats the foe. This is the emotional foundation based in the major arcana archetypes the film needed. And the rest of the League could’ve followed suit.

    Mina Harker isn’t just a vampire with lipstick and a corset. She’s a woman who was turned into a monster and has never stopped being seen as one. Her power is not just her curse — it’s the identity she wants to escape. What if her arc wasn’t about being deadly, but about choosing vulnerability? What if she craved mortality — not out of weakness, but out of a desperate desire to feel anything again?

    Dr. Jekyll, so often reduced to comic relief, could’ve embodied the pain of repression. He’s a man afraid of himself, afraid of the violence inside him. What if his arc was about confronting that split, not suppressing it?

    Even the Invisible Man could’ve been a tragic figure — someone who erased himself to escape accountability. A ghost who wants to remain unseen because being noticed means facing who he really is. His arc isn’t about stealth. It’s about finally choosing to be visible — not to the enemy, but to the people who count.

    The villain, instead of a convoluted arms dealer in a Halloween mask, could’ve been a forgotten legend — someone who used to be like them, but was abandoned by the world. A character who believes that if he can’t be remembered, then no one should. Not just a threat, but a warning: this is what happens when heroes cling to their legend but lose their humanity.

    In this version, the League isn’t formed to stop a fake threat, but ultimately because they’re the only ones who still remember what it means to be more than power.

    Suddenly, the submarines and guns and cloaks and monsters all fall into place. The worldbuilding serves the emotional truth. The League earns its title not by being extraordinary, but by being broken and still choosing to fight.

    The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen had everything it needed to become a modern gothic epic. Instead, it became a noisy parade of plot devices and shallow monologues. But its failure is revealing — because it reminds us what makes heroes truly legendary.

    Not invincibility. Not fame. But the ability to change, to let go, to pass the torch — and to stand, even when the story has forgotten your name.

    Maybe that’s the true League worth watching.

    Thanks,

    Ira

  • Gods of Egypt (2016): An Epic Missrepresentation of The Egyptian Lore And Nothing Else

    As a long-time admirer of Egyptian rendition of the Major Arcana, and indeed, all the profound mystery woven into ancient Egyptian culture and its monumental legacy, I approached Alex Proyas’s 2016 epic fantasy, Gods of Egypt, with a significant degree of excitement. The title alone promised a deep dive into the very mythology I cherished. What unfolded, however, was nothing short of a head-turning slap in the face. And I’m not even talking about what is undeniably one of the worst casting choices in modern cinema. Frankly, I felt like each and every element of the movie was a direct insult to my intelligence, beginning, of course, with that egregious opening exposition dump—a narrative crutch that critics such as myself literally can’t stand.

    Beyond its immediate visual and hearing offense, the film was infested with plot holes. To name the most jarring, for example: the gods were anthropomorphized to such an extent that they could be stabbed and killed, yet they still condescendingly referred to humans as “mortals.” Osiris, a mighty god and Ra’s own son, is quickly dispatched by Set early in the film, following the basic outline of the myth. But then, in the movie’s cheesy finale, Ra, who had previously been too busy dragging the sun around the Earth, casually takes time off to resurrect one human from death. This raises an obvious question: if such an act of resurrection was within his power, why didn’t Ra intervene earlier to save his own son Osiris, or prevent the excruciating removal of Horus’s eyes? The inconsistency wasn’t just illogical; it diminished any sense of genuine stakes the film desperately tried to establish.

    After some consideration, it became obvious that the very way they decided to frame this story was destined to flop all along. Stories, if they are crafted with any depth and insight, are never truly about gods in their ultimate, unchanging forms. True narratives are about flawed humans with free will who make dubious decisions, consequently fall from grace, and then gather themselves up again. They stumble after fall, attempt to manipulate their new reality to their will only to fail some more, and at some point, are forced to trust a higher power—their higher self, their soul, god, or love, if you will. This arc, characterized by ego transcendence and profound personal transformation, is what resonates with an audience. But how, one must ask, would such a character arc possibly play out for someone who is already at “god status,” inherently powerful and ostensibly flawless? The bottom line is, Horus’s character, despite his journey to reclaim the throne, was flat from beginning to end precisely because he was already a god, robbing him of any meaningful internal struggle.

    We are, then, left with Bek, the mortal, who did at least portray some recognizable human properties such as doubts and fears. This would have been the perfect character to work with, a relatable entry point into a fantastical world. But lo and behold, they portrayed him as inexplicably smart and agile from the very beginning, making his potential for development a moot point from there on. His primary motivation, to save his dead girlfriend from the underworld, was presented as a grand quest for which he realistically had no means to even attempt, let alone fail. And the ultimate betrayal of his potential arc? At the very end, it was not even he who contacted Ra and prayed to save Zaya, which would have been the obvious, powerful conclusion to his journey and an act of earned faith. Instead, the resurrection prayer was performed in his name by Horus, with Ra saving the girl in an act that completely destroyed any remaining logic or stakes in the script, as mentioned earlier.

    Because of such fundamental flaws, I firmly believe Gods of Egypt stands as one of the worst movies I’ve ever had the privilege to see. It was a squandered opportunity, and it would have been a million times better to approach the subject matter differently.

    Rather make it about Egyptian priesthood

    They should never have made a movie with gods routinely taking human form, or at least not in the leading, physically battling roles, which should be reserved for mortals. This would preserve the mystery and awe of the divine, with gods appearing as largely unseen forces whose interventions manifest as natural phenomena or through symbolic visions.

    Imagine an outline where the story follows a young Egyptian, perhaps a farmer named Khepri, initially steeped in the mundane routine and boredom of his daily life. His spirit stirs with inspiration as he observes Neserine, a priestess of Hathor, whose serene devotion and meticulous ritual observance infuse her movements with a profound, quiet grace.

    When his fields face an unprecedented drought, a cruel manifestation of Set’s chaos, Khepri’s pragmatic, “naive ways” to combat it fail, leading to significant loss – a profound falling from grace if you will. Desperate, he begins turning to the priesthood, observing their solemn prayers to Osiris for the Nile’s return, and to Ra for benevolent sun. The rain, when it finally comes, is a mysterious, awe-inspiring manifestation of divine favor channeled through their unwavering devotion, allowing Khepri a moment of atonement for his previous skepticism. Later, navigating the complexities of human connection, Khepri finds himself troubled by love, his overtures “corny” and clumsy. The priesthood, perhaps an elder priestess or a wise scribe, guides him to the subtle teachings of Hathor and Isis, emphasizing inner qualities and patience. This moment of suspension of action for his worldly desires forces Khepri to truly listen. The same way we could weave into the story other gods as well. Through these trials, he achieves transcendence, shedding his ego and finding a deeper understanding of the divine teachings and the gods’ presence, not as physical beings, but as the very fabric of existence. His ultimate “resurrection” is the rebirth into his higher self, a man now deeply aligned with his land and its spiritual rhythms, his own arc mirroring the enduring renewal of the Nile and the triumph of Horus over chaos. While receiving the kiss from the goddess Neserine ofcourse. This approach, where human experience mirrors divine myth without cheapening it through literalism, would allow the awe, the spiritual weight, and the profound human struggle within the context of Egyptian mythology to truly shine, leaving the audience with something far more meaningful than empty spectacle for the insatiable eyes.

    Thank you,

    Ira

  • The Invention of Lying (2009) – A Brilliant Premise That Forgot Its Archetypal Soul

    “The Invention of Lying” (2009) burst onto the screen with a premise that was nothing short of genius: a world where everyone can only tell the literal truth, and then one man, Mark Bellison (Ricky Gervais), discovers he can lie. This concept offered boundless opportunities for satire, social commentary, and a unique take on the hero’s journey. Deception, and consequently illusion, are crucial archetypes in storytelling, particularly for a character’s free will and their development towards a greater self, be it oneness, god, or love. In a world devoid of falsehoods, the emergence of illusion should have stuck out like a sore thumb, a blinding anomaly challenging the very fabric of existence and ushering in a reality utterly unlike anything witnessed before.

    However, despite its promising start, the film often felt like it didn’t quite stick the landing. While it had its comedic moments and a charming lead, many viewers, including myself, felt a sense of untapped potential. The execution of this brilliant premise felt, at times, a bit off.

    One key reason for this “off” feeling might be found in a fundamental principle of compelling storytelling: when a character undergoes significant change and development, the world they inhabit should, in some way, mirror or react to those internal shifts. In “The Invention of Lying,” Mark Bellison transforms from a struggling individual into the world’s first liar, a being capable of reshaping reality through fabricated words. Yet, for a significant portion of the plot, the world around him, despite being utterly vulnerable to his newfound power, seemed to remain curiously static. The profound, paradigm-shifting nature of his ability wasn’t consistently reflected in the reactions of those closest to him or the broader society.

    The Missing Ripple: Anna’s Awakening

    This is where the story missed a crucial beat. If Mark is truly the very first person to utter a falsehood, then the emotional and cognitive dissonance his lies create should be palpable, especially to someone in his intimate circle. Anna, his love interest, should have been the first to sense that something was fundamentally “off” with Mark’s statements.

    Instead of her initial disinterest being solely based on his physical appearance and perceived lack of status, a more compelling narrative would have seen her experience an unsettling feeling, a strange unease when Mark spoke. Her truth-attuned mind, having no concept of a lie, would struggle to process the subtle, inexplicable contradictions in his words. This internal struggle and her dawning suspicion would become the primary reason for their initial fallout and the central tension of their relationship. Their conflict wouldn’t be a conventional rom-com trope; it would be a clash between absolute truth and the nascent seed of deception.

    From Fallout to Forgiveness: The Path to a New Reality

    As the narrative progresses, Anna, despite her initial retreat due to Mark’s perceived “wrongness,” would begin to observe the benevolent effects of his lies. The “man in the sky” comfort he inadvertently creates for his dying mother, and the widespread hope it brings to a despairing populace, would challenge her rigid, truth-only worldview. She would witness the profound, positive impact of these compassionate fictions.

    Yet, for their bond to truly mend and evolve, Mark would need to complete a vital step in his own character arc: he would need to be the first person in the world to admit his lies and apologize for them. Not just for a factual inaccuracy, but for the inherent confusion and emotional discomfort his deceptions, particularly his early self-serving ones, might have caused. This act of unprecedented honesty about his own dishonesty would signify his genuine growth and responsibility.

    The World Mirrors Change: Anna Learns to Lie

    It is at this point of profound vulnerability, shared understanding, and genuine apology that the “World archetype” would truly kick in. Anna, witnessing Mark’s moral courage and the complex benefits of his benevolent deceptions, would also awaken to the ability to lie. Her lies, however, would likely manifest differently from Mark’s initial self-serving ones, being born from her own developed empathy and understanding of how truth can sometimes be less kind than a comforting fiction.

    This shared ability would forge an unbreakable bond between them, but it would also usher in a new, complex, and consequently more rich world – a world that is inherently bittersweet. We, the audience, wouldn’t be left thinking that lying is unequivocally “the right way” to live. Instead, the film would offer a nuanced perspective, showing that while absolute truth might be lost, a deeper, more compassionate understanding of human connection can emerge.

    Crucially, the film would end with a “way out,” a reassurance that this new world isn’t doomed to endless manipulation. Mark and Anna would develop an immediate intuition for when the other was lying. This unique, shared perception would form the bedrock of their trust, allowing them to navigate their newfound powers with mutual accountability. It would signify that even as humanity gains the capacity for deception, it can also evolve an internal compass for authenticity and shared understanding within its most intimate relationships.

    Conclusion: A Richer Tapestry of Truth and Fiction

    By incorporating these changes – Anna’s initial suspicion and fallout, her observation of benevolent lies, Mark’s groundbreaking apology, Anna’s own acquisition of the ability to lie, and their shared intuitive “truth detector” – “The Invention of Lying” would transform from a decent comedy with a brilliant premise into a profound and truly memorable film. It would offer more compelling character arcs, a dynamic world that truly reflects its protagonist’s evolution, and a richer, bittersweet philosophical exploration of truth, empathy, and the complex nature of human connection.

    Thank you!

    Ira

  • Morbius (2012): Underwhelming – It Lacked One Important Archetype

    Morbius (2022) arrived with a cool idea: a brilliant scientist, Michael Morbius, fights a rare blood disease, finds a radical cure, and turns into a creature of the night. Visually, it had some striking moments. But the movie quickly lost its way, leaving many viewers feeling like they’d wasted two hours. The main problem wasn’t the “living vampire” idea itself, but how the story was told. It rushed things, making the main character flat and wasting a lot of potential.

    One of the biggest head-scratchers was how fast Dr. Morbius became an all-powerful, bloodthirsty vampire. Right after his experiment, he wasn’t just strong; he seemed to master his new abilities instantly. He even walked in daylight, seemingly unfazed, in one confusing scene. This shortcut meant we missed out on any real struggle. We didn’t see the horror or the inner fight that should be central to such a transformation. It left a big empty space where a compelling anti-hero’s journey should have been.

    What Morbius really needed was a sense of determination. The movie skipped the hard, painful journey of a man battling the monster inside him. His strength should have come not from a lab accident, but from his own willpower. If the story had focused on this, Morbius would have been a much more engaging character.

    A Stronger Story: The Path of Determination

    So, let’s imagine Morbius’s origin differently. His experiment still goes wrong, turning him into a monster, but not an instantly powerful one. Instead, he’d be immediately hit with a fierce bloodlust, perhaps even accidentally killing someone in his desperation. This would leave him drowning in guilt. His early days would be a constant, losing battle against this urge. He might try to survive on blood packs, a temporary fix that just highlights his despair and his struggle to hold onto his humanity.

    Meanwhile, his close friend, Milo, would fully embrace the “cure.” He’d become stronger and more ruthless precisely because he gives in to his new desires without hesitation. Milo, free from guilt, would easily overpower Morbius, throwing him around like a rag doll. This physical difference would constantly remind Morbius of “the price to live” and how much his resistance was costing him.

    At his lowest point, exhausted from fighting himself, Morbius would briefly give in to his monstrous side, unleashing raw, terrifying power. The shame of this moment would drive him to a desperate act: turning himself in, ready to face jail or even death, rather than becoming the monster he fears. But in his cell, as he wastes away from lack of blood, a final, incredible surge of determination would push him forward. This powerful act of will, a fight to “defeat himself” and control his curse, would unlock his true, hard-earned strength, allowing him to escape.

    With this newfound control, Morbius would finally confront Milo. Their battle wouldn’t just be about who’s stronger, but about their opposite ways of dealing with the same curse. After the fight, Morbius would be changed, not just physically but morally. He’d find he can now control his urges, needing blood only occasionally. And in those moments, instead of hunting innocent people, he’d stalk the shadows, looking for outlaws, becoming a dark hero who delivers his own kind of justice—a true anti-hero shaped by his incredible determination.

    Why These Changes Matter

    This new story fixes the original movie’s biggest flaws. It turns a boring, overpowered character into a deeply sympathetic and complex figure. It raises the stakes by making Morbius’s real fight against his own nature, which makes us care much more about him. By clearly showing his struggle and ultimate self-mastery, we get a much more satisfying character journey. It gives meaning to his transformation and purpose to his existence. By setting clear rules for his powers and showing the real cost of his desperate cure, this version of Morbius wouldn’t just deliver on its anti-hero promise; it would leave viewers truly moved by a man tragically, yet heroically, driven by his extraordinary determination.

    The Title That Fits

    Finally, a stronger story deserves a title that reflects its true essence. Naming a film solely after a character’s given name, especially one not widely known, emphasizes a single ego, which literally has no value/substance. But in this reimagined narrative, what truly matters isn’t just Michael Morbius, the man, but the profound journey he undertakes. His destiny, shaped by his choices and struggles, is far more significant. That’s why a title like Morbius: The Price to Live perfectly captures the core of his tragic fight, highlighting the high cost of his desperate cure and the determination required to bear his new, monstrous existence.

    Thank you,

    Ira