A pile of disappointment.
Hoping for a dragon's hoard,
Finding instead a mess of dusty bones.
Yet a few gems glisten in the moonlight.
The shadows were darker than they should have been.
Biblical reference that could only mean demons.
You don't know what you're digging into.
The evil that it opens up to.
There was enough dirt to build on,
Without this added evil.
Dare I watch it again?
The first I watched a thousand times and one.
Yet like femur and tibia wrenched, they are
Disjointed.
It's like being tossed far,
From the fireside to an icy river,
In the dead of night. Frigorific.
It left me with fear and distrust.
Can they take it back and remake it?
Hoping for the return of light and clarity,
Hoping for so much more for part three.
~ I am disappointed with The Desolation of Smaug. But I like The Unexpected Journey. I really hope part three is back on par with part one. DoS was really different from The Lord of the Rings, and The Unexpected Journey; I was faced with references and innuendos I never thought I would have to face in a movie in this series. It is one thing to portray darkness, but it goes to a whole new and inappropriate level when an orc starts saying that he is "Legion." Yes, the necromancer is demonic in a sense, but to mix the spiritual realm of Middle Earth with the real spiritual world is beyond disturbing.
Showing posts with label 2013. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2013. Show all posts
Monday, December 23, 2013
Sunday, December 15, 2013
My thoughts on "The Hobbit: the Desolation of Smaug"
*Spoilers*
The film was decidedly darker than the first. There are very few warm moments. The fact that the story takes place in winter or in gray cavernous places added to the mood.
For being 161 minutes long, the movie sure condensed most of the events of the book. The parts based on the book were greatly abridged and the extended story lines filled the movie.
The biggest disappointment was the fact that the film really didn't give much time to the events that actually took place in the book. Mirkwood, the spiders, the journey to The Lonely Mountain, and Bilbo's encounters with the dragon where very condensed and abridged. I was looking forward to seeing the Elves' woodland feasts and watching the spider scene unfold in a nice, methodical moment by moment approach, watching Bilbo gather his courage and use his wits to free the dwarves. In the film he just falls right into the middle of it.
In the book, this is where Bilbo draws first blood. In the first movie, he has already done that by slaying a warg and fighting goblins and orcs. Now, I really liked the part where he tackled the orc and saved Thorin. It was a wonderful act of heroism. But, since Bilbo had already done this, the need for him to be the hero and rescue the dwarves is not as high. All the same, I wish this part had been closer to the book.
However, just because the movie didn't follow the book doesn't mean I didn't like it. There were parts I loved, and parts I did not.
The introduction of Smaug was well done.
Tauriel is not a part of the original Middle Earth, by J. R. R. Tolkien. However, she is a wonderful character in the movie! The warmest person in the film, a fantastic fighter, and a lover of stars, she is poetry in motion.
My favorite part was the escape from the elves and the barrel-riding scene, a fact which really surprised me. It was different from the book and over the top, but I enjoyed seeing Legolas, Tauriel, and the dwarves all fighting orcs. When Bombour and his barrel took out a number of orcs, it was hilarious though unrealistic. Thorin saved
Legolas by killing the orc that was about to strike him. This sequence was filled with many astounding feats that required precision, and hearkened back to the dish washing scene in An Unexpected Journey, (a scene I also loved). The location was beautiful too: green sunlit tree-clad banks, and a twisting, rushing river. Sunlight and spray create joy and excitement.
The moments where the ring is affecting Bilbo, I did not like. Of course, I don't like them in the book either, and you're not supposed too, that is kind of the point! But, in The Hobbit (book), there are very few signs of the ring's evil power, Bilbo had to have it for a long time before it's effects began to show. They are made clear in The Lord of the Rings.
Another disappointment was Kili's crude innuendo. I don't have a problem with Kili being attracted to Tauriel, just that one remark. From what I gathered, it is unclear whether Tauriel returns Kili's affections although she clearly does care about his safety. Nice, keep us guessing!
Problem: Kili is shot with a Morgul arrow. Now, a friend pointed out to me that it is unlikely the orcs would have a Morgul weapon, even though they are in the service of Sauron. The fact that kingsfoil was needed and that the characters knew this was needed, detracts from Aragorn's skill as a healer, which is a part of his kingly heritage. It would have been better for Kili to be shot with a poisoned arrow and then for Tauriel to use her Elvish healing knowledge and a different herb to heal him. It was too much of a repeat of The Lord of the Rings, and there are a enough similar things that happen already (giant spiders and eagles, for example).
And the ending... ah well, it's a middle film, what can you say? That actually doesn't bother me.
All in all, it's not a movie I plan on owning.
The photos are from The Hobbit Offical Site, downloads section.
The film was decidedly darker than the first. There are very few warm moments. The fact that the story takes place in winter or in gray cavernous places added to the mood.
For being 161 minutes long, the movie sure condensed most of the events of the book. The parts based on the book were greatly abridged and the extended story lines filled the movie.
The biggest disappointment was the fact that the film really didn't give much time to the events that actually took place in the book. Mirkwood, the spiders, the journey to The Lonely Mountain, and Bilbo's encounters with the dragon where very condensed and abridged. I was looking forward to seeing the Elves' woodland feasts and watching the spider scene unfold in a nice, methodical moment by moment approach, watching Bilbo gather his courage and use his wits to free the dwarves. In the film he just falls right into the middle of it.
In the book, this is where Bilbo draws first blood. In the first movie, he has already done that by slaying a warg and fighting goblins and orcs. Now, I really liked the part where he tackled the orc and saved Thorin. It was a wonderful act of heroism. But, since Bilbo had already done this, the need for him to be the hero and rescue the dwarves is not as high. All the same, I wish this part had been closer to the book.
However, just because the movie didn't follow the book doesn't mean I didn't like it. There were parts I loved, and parts I did not.
The introduction of Smaug was well done.
Tauriel is not a part of the original Middle Earth, by J. R. R. Tolkien. However, she is a wonderful character in the movie! The warmest person in the film, a fantastic fighter, and a lover of stars, she is poetry in motion.
 |
| Tauriel |
 |
| Tauriel and Legolas |
The moments where the ring is affecting Bilbo, I did not like. Of course, I don't like them in the book either, and you're not supposed too, that is kind of the point! But, in The Hobbit (book), there are very few signs of the ring's evil power, Bilbo had to have it for a long time before it's effects began to show. They are made clear in The Lord of the Rings.
Another disappointment was Kili's crude innuendo. I don't have a problem with Kili being attracted to Tauriel, just that one remark. From what I gathered, it is unclear whether Tauriel returns Kili's affections although she clearly does care about his safety. Nice, keep us guessing!
Problem: Kili is shot with a Morgul arrow. Now, a friend pointed out to me that it is unlikely the orcs would have a Morgul weapon, even though they are in the service of Sauron. The fact that kingsfoil was needed and that the characters knew this was needed, detracts from Aragorn's skill as a healer, which is a part of his kingly heritage. It would have been better for Kili to be shot with a poisoned arrow and then for Tauriel to use her Elvish healing knowledge and a different herb to heal him. It was too much of a repeat of The Lord of the Rings, and there are a enough similar things that happen already (giant spiders and eagles, for example).
And the ending... ah well, it's a middle film, what can you say? That actually doesn't bother me.
All in all, it's not a movie I plan on owning.
The photos are from The Hobbit Offical Site, downloads section.
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
Scotty is my favorite Star Trek character
I grew up watching Star Trek, but I didn't have much choice. It was my dad's favorite TV show. As a teen, I became a bit anti-Star Trek. I didn't like Captain Kirk all that much. He was supposed to be the handsome one in the show, and I didn't think he was handsome, plus I didn't like his character. He was selfish at times, and always having relationships that only lasted the length of one episode. So I didn't like him. I didn't like Bones either. He always had a frown on, and he didn't like Spock.
My favorite characters were Mr. Spock and Mr. Scott. Now, everybody likes Spock, except Bones, so I'm not going to go into why he's a cool character.
Mr. Montgomery Scott (Scotty), on the other hand, is rather under-appreciated. So here is a list of reasons why he is my favorite character:
1. He has a Scottish accent.
2. He is the ship's engineer. Nothing screams manly to me quite like "mechanical engineer," except for "soldier."
3. Always ready for a fight, but yet not entirely without self-control.
4. He doesn't fall in love with every pretty girl. And when he does, it's cute puppy love, yet he's ready to stand by her no matter what.
5. He's brave. One time they needed to test a certain drug that would put a person to sleep, but it was dangerous because there was no surety that the person would wake up --ever. Scotty agreed to be the guinea pig and be put to sleep, while saying that he wanted to wake up in time for the fighting.
Now in the new movie, Star Trek, Into Darkness (2013), the characters were pretty much the same as the originals. Kirk is an egotistical flirt. Bones still has the propensity to swear. Spock is still logic "man." And Scotty is still my favorite character.
What I really like about Scotty in Into Darkness, is that he stood by his principles, yet is loyal to his Enterprise friends.
Kirk was having questionable explosives loaded on the Enterprise for a questionable mission. Everyone questioned the mission, but Scotty acted. When asked to sign the papers approving these explosives and thus putting the ship in danger, Scotty refused. A refusal could not be brooked by the captain, so Scotty resigned. He left the ship and the ship left without him. He stood alone and acted on his principles.
However, despite this, he didn't bear any hard feelings towards Kirk deep down. Kirk called him and asked him to check out a clue for him, and despite calling him "James Tiberius perfect hair" and giving a solid verbal refusal, as soon as the call was over he got up and did what was requested of him. Such a funny scene!
In the original series, Scotty is played by James Doohan. In the 2009 and 2013 films, he is played by Simon Pegg.
My favorite characters were Mr. Spock and Mr. Scott. Now, everybody likes Spock, except Bones, so I'm not going to go into why he's a cool character.
Mr. Montgomery Scott (Scotty), on the other hand, is rather under-appreciated. So here is a list of reasons why he is my favorite character:
1. He has a Scottish accent.
2. He is the ship's engineer. Nothing screams manly to me quite like "mechanical engineer," except for "soldier."
3. Always ready for a fight, but yet not entirely without self-control.
4. He doesn't fall in love with every pretty girl. And when he does, it's cute puppy love, yet he's ready to stand by her no matter what.
5. He's brave. One time they needed to test a certain drug that would put a person to sleep, but it was dangerous because there was no surety that the person would wake up --ever. Scotty agreed to be the guinea pig and be put to sleep, while saying that he wanted to wake up in time for the fighting.
Now in the new movie, Star Trek, Into Darkness (2013), the characters were pretty much the same as the originals. Kirk is an egotistical flirt. Bones still has the propensity to swear. Spock is still logic "man." And Scotty is still my favorite character.
What I really like about Scotty in Into Darkness, is that he stood by his principles, yet is loyal to his Enterprise friends.
Kirk was having questionable explosives loaded on the Enterprise for a questionable mission. Everyone questioned the mission, but Scotty acted. When asked to sign the papers approving these explosives and thus putting the ship in danger, Scotty refused. A refusal could not be brooked by the captain, so Scotty resigned. He left the ship and the ship left without him. He stood alone and acted on his principles.
However, despite this, he didn't bear any hard feelings towards Kirk deep down. Kirk called him and asked him to check out a clue for him, and despite calling him "James Tiberius perfect hair" and giving a solid verbal refusal, as soon as the call was over he got up and did what was requested of him. Such a funny scene!
In the original series, Scotty is played by James Doohan. In the 2009 and 2013 films, he is played by Simon Pegg.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)