Maleficent, The Winged Fairy

          Since I had been greatly disappointed in Disney's retelling of classics, such as Oz, The Great and Powerful, I did not experience Maleficent's world when it first arrived in theaters. I had received mixed reviews from friends and family. Most disliked it and were disappointed, although my older sister passionately loved its contents so I gave it a try. My first impression was wonder. (Mostly because winged people have fascinated me of late). It had the classic strange looking creatures, with fairies and tree people, separated from the humans with constant war between them. 

      Over all it was rather enjoyable I did not very much appreciate the ending of the story. It made no sense to me, and so rather dampened my view of the movie to something of unsatisfied. Of course there were little visual and story line mistakes I saw, like every movie has if you look hard enough. The scene where maleficent has a sudden and unexplained wardrobe change  really threw me off, personally.
     Then there is the actress Angelina Jolie, I do have my distaste for her personal character and acting, however with her role of Maleficent she did a wonderful job and portrayed the hate and love very well.
      Fantasy always has me enthralled, especially when there are dragons, knights, wars, and developing and funny characters (Like Maleficent's faithful companion, the crow, Diaval).
     There are many things I enjoyed about this movie and many things I thought over used for such things, or completely wrong. I don't wish to make a list but encourage you to find out for yourself. It might be a interesting one time movie for you.

Thanks for reading, Beasty. 

The Giver

“The worst part of holding the memories is not the pain. It's the loneliness of it. Memories need to be shared.”  - Lois Lowry, The Giver

  "Jonas's world is perfect. Everything is under control. There is no war or fear or pain. There are no choices. Every person is assigned a role in the community. When Jonas turns twelve, he is singled out to receive special training from The Giver. The Giver alone holds the memories of the true pain and pleasure of life. Now it's time for Jonas to receive the truth. There is no turning back."

  The Giver by Lois Lowry is an incredibly provocative and pervasive novel that delves into your mind with a special keenness, leaving you quiet and reflective and deep in thought long after you close the final pages.

  A movie, based on the novel, was recently released in theaters and I must admit, I watched it without having read the novel. However, my only regret is that I hadn't been introduced to the story sooner, in any media. 

  The themes of freedom and choice resonate with me deeply, as well as the struggle of the main character, Jonas, who, after becoming the Receiver of Memory, finds himself strangely isolated, seeing the world in new ways that he cannot share with those he loves. Living a colorless, cold, hollow existence all his life and being suddenly thrust into the beauty and pain of the true reality beyond has left him estranged from his companions. Different in a society that values and protects sameness above all else.

  Though the book was short I enjoyed it immensely for the hour or so I was buried in its pages. I can honestly say that when I glanced up and looked at the setting sun I saw the colors so much more vividly and appreciated them like never before. I sat in the sunshine and felt the warmth, I stood outside and felt the wind, listened to music and marveled at its loveliness. And I considered the world in all its great glory and great tragedy and compared it to Jonas's existence. 

  Yes, they had control, and order, and safety and some measure of diluted happiness but where was the piercing beauty of singing, or instruments? Where was the deep desire of two beings in love? Where was the diversity of cultures and races? Lost was excitement and fear, love and hate, joy and despair. There were no highs to reach for and no lows to climb from. There was nothing but an empty, lifeless, orderly routine for people alive on the outside and dying on the inside.

  We may have great suffering in this world, but we have great joy as well. And great hope. We should never forget our good fortune, no matter the circumstance. There is beauty and light, even in pain. And there is pure, limitless hope, as inconceivable and vast as the heavens. Great beauty in great darkness.

  The Giver is a little book with big thoughts. It is a great example of the difference that simple things make in life and shows very vividly the chasm that their absence leaves in a person's life, in humanity.

  If you're looking for a short read, I can promise The Giver won't take too much of your time. If you're looking for a simple read, best not pick up this book. 

  It will be reverberating in your mind and heart long after you've read the final words.

  “For the first time, he heard something that he knew to be music. He heard people singing. Behind him, across vast distances of space and time, from the place he had left, he thought he heard music too. But perhaps, it was only an echo.” 

Howl's Moving Castle, the book

          Most anime fans will know the Studio Ghibli movie, Howl's Moving Castle. However, not many know about the original creator of Howl's world. Writer Diana Wynne Jones was a British children and adult fantasy writer. Sadly, this talented woman died the year 2011, unable to finish many more stories she had hoped to write. I read the book years ago along with my cousin (both of us anime and book fans) after watching the movie. I instantly fell in love with the world, the characters and the author's writing skills. I have read this "children's fictional" literature three times since and enjoy its contents every time.
     For those who are unfamiliar with movie or book, Howl's Moving Castle is filled with wonderful magic, living scarecrows, transforming dogs, evil witches, vain wizards, demons, and of course a moving castle. It has its comedy, its clumsiness, its bit of romance and its elusive curse.
      The enjoyment Miss Diana had while creating this world is clearly seen within the pages. Her humor is also very clear, as well as her British origins which adds flavor to the written word.
     I do question her use of the word 'demon' since our friend Calcifer is anything but a demon. I suppose an appropriate word for a fire creature would be hard to classify.
     Miss Diana has written two other books following Howl, Calcifer and Sophie in their adventures. Castle in the Air, and House of Many Ways. Both oozing with magic and strange creatures.

"How about making a bargain with me?" said the demon. "I'll break your spell if you agree to break this contract I'm under." 

P.S Doing a quick Google search on Miss Diana--thank you Wikipedia--I discovered when studying at Oxford two of her professors were none other than J.R.R Tolkien and C.S Lewis. How lucky was she? 

Here's another curse, may all your bacon burn.
Thanks for reading. 

How To Train Your Dragon 2 - A Rambling

"How do you become someone that great, that brave, that selfless? I guess you can only try. A chief protects his own."

In the realm of storytelling, sequels are always an incredibly difficult business. Oftentimes, the financial success of the initial work can be more of a motivating factor in a follow-up’s production than respecting the nature of the story.

So I thought when I heard that Dreamworks had greenlit How to Train Your Dragon 2. The first remains one of my favourite films that Dreamworks animation has produced since their inception (still behind Prince of Egypt, which I doubt they’ll ever top) and it told a very well-written, very heartwarming, and very complete story. An excellent movie in every respect, and if Tangled hadn’t come out that same year, it may well have won my personal best picture award for 2010.

I kept my expectations low for How to Train Your Dragon 2 (especially after a disastrously made trailer was released which basically spoiled every major plot point) but remained ever hopeful that it would overcome my worries.

Having now seen it twice, I can say with certainty that it absolutely surpassed and destroyed all my expectations and is not only a worthy sequel, I would offer an argument that it is superior to the first. 

It begins by doing something that I really love in good sequels. Much like Toy Story 2 and 3, it acknowledges the passage of time between the movies. Characters have grown older, their lives have progressed, and the story deals heavily in the themes of change and growing up; finding your place in a changing world, responsibility, and the importance of family. 

I was around Hiccup’s age when the first movie came out, and to see him unmask and reveal himself to have joined me in his early twenties and dealing with many of the same questions and fears I grapple with today was an amazing personal bonus, and definitely enhanced my enjoyment of the film.

These ideas are not only reflected in the theme and conversations, but also in the events of the story. How to Train Your Dragon 2 does NOT play it safe at all and makes points to progress the story, its characters, and to shake up the status quo. It doesn’t set itself up for a sequel, it doesn’t rest on the character development the first film offered. Instead, it feels like a new natural new chapter in a grand epic. Everything changes very naturally, and feels like a new, genuine chapter in Toothless and Hiccup’s lives rather than a cash-grab story that lands with them back where they started in order to churn out more cheaply written sequels.

I apologize for rambling on the same topic. Long story short, it does everything a good sequel should, and does it maturely.

It is also exceptional from an animation and cinematography standpoint. The flying scenes and environmental designs are stunning. One thing that surely sticks out in my mind is a sequence in a dark cave wherein a character uses several dragons as makeshift lanterns. Extremely visually impressive and creative. The sense of scale is also well-done, with massive dragons clashing in the background of battle scenes as the camera focuses on smaller humans and dragons in the foreground.

As far as music goes, many of the brilliant leitmotifs from the first movie return. Combined with lyrics this time! The opening flying sequence set to “Where No One Goes” singlehandedly alleviated all my worries about the film, as I sat back relaxed and ready to be further impressed.

The standout musical moment in the film however, definitely goes to the lovely and extremely catchy folk song “For the Dancing and the Dreaming” sung midway through the film. A great song that will touch your heart from a storytelling standpoint, and that you shall be singing for months afterwards.

If I were to criticize the movie, (and I do have to be very nitpicky to find flaws) I would say that the villain was probably the least interesting character. He was built up VERY well through a story Stoick the Vast tells, and had a really good design and concept behind him, but his backstory receives next to no development. He has a brief speech, and a really contextually weak excuse as to why he does what he does. He comes across as just being evil because the movie needed a villain. Not a bad character, just not a very interesting one.

I do love the way Hiccup interacts with him and treats him, though. Seeing Hiccup constantly look for a peaceful way to stop him up until the very end was very cool, and an excellent thing for the young children watching to learn. Even after horrible things have been done that most would deem unforgivable, Hiccup continues to live by Matthew 5:44: “But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you”. Brilliant to see.

Also, there is one major plothole concerning a certain character’s survival, and the whole subplot about Ruffnut being attracted to Eret made me feel uncomfortable a lot more than I found it funny.

All in all, though, I was completely blown away by this movie, and am very optimistic for a potential third film. 

It was dramatic, funny, touching, and very, very epic. I am waiting on bated breath for the blu-ray to be released, and shall be working on my Hiccup 2.0 cosplay in preparation for the next movie.

"You came early into this world. You were such a wee thing. So frail and so fragile. I feared that you wouldn't make it. But your father, he never doubted. He always said you would become the strongest of them all."

The Amazing Spiderman 2 - spoilers

  We've always known that Spiderman's most important conflict has been with himself. The struggle between the ordinary obligations of Peter Parker and the extraordinary responsibilities of Spiderman. It is the personal difficulties of this split personality that lies at the heart of every Spiderman film, and it is these personal difficulties that made me fall in love with Spidey in the beginning. Peter Parker is an underdog in the purest sense of the word, and it seems that it is all the more clear in both this film and the previous Spiderman sequel. And if there is one thing I love, it's the underdog.

  I enjoyed the first Amazing Spiderman film from 2012, I had low expectations going into the theater, because I loved the original trilogy so much, but I was pleasantly surprised, if not blown away. Some people may think me odd for saying this, but Tobey Maguire's portrayal of Spiderman will always be the true hero for me. His innocence, his unselfishness, his decency is exemplary of the hero, and it is the honesty and sincerity of the old films that urges me to favor them over the new ones.

  That does not mean I dislike the new films. Not at all! Andrew Garfield's portrayal, while not as honest as Maguire's, is a genuine one, and his nervous energy, half-smile and sense of humor are definitely heartwarming. The Amazing Spiderman 2 gives us a clear picture of all that.

  Anyway, I won't go into a comparison of the two different series here. I enjoy them both for different reasons, and since this is a review for TASM 2, we'll talk about that instead.

  Peter Parker/Spiderman: One of my favorite things about TASM's Peter is his smart-aleck personality and his wry sense of humor. In that area, the film did not disappoint. Further, both actors, director and writers did an excellent job of showing Peter's human struggles, his desire for normal relationships and life situations, his obligation to the hero calling, and the way his burden grew over the course of the film. It is the way Peter's heart is so painfully divided that makes him interesting and endearing as a character, what makes you sympathetic to his struggles. But even more so, it is the way he time and time again rises above his circumstances to do what is right. By the film's end, we see a man changed and shaped by the trials of life, who, despite tragedy and heartache, gets to his feet again. This is the reason Spiderman is my favorite superhero. A personal hero.

  Gwen Stacy: Well, I can't say that I'm surprised at the direction Gwen's story took. The hints were all over both this and the last movie. I knew Peter breaking his promise to Captain Stacy would come back to haunt him at some point. That aside, I think it's still safe to say I was pretty heartbroken by her death. I liked how they played it out, she falls but he catches her, she falls again and he catches her again, but the third time, he's just a second too late...
  Aside from the obvious, I think Gwen's character development was well done. In some instances she reminded me of Mary Jane from the previous trilogy, complaining about Peter's desire to keep her safe, but I can understand where she's coming from. It's such a shame that Gwen was killed off in this film, she is a great character played by a fantastic actress and her chemistry with Peter is so beautiful. I might just cry now...

  Harry Osbourne/Green Goblin: I was skeptical of this aspect of the films, wondering why Harry's character hadn't been introduced in the first installment and balking at the idea of someone other than James Franco playing one of my favorite anti-heroes. I am pleased to say, I was FAR from disappointed. I love this Harry almost as much as the old one in many ways and I can't wait to see how he'll be going after Peter in future films. His descent into evil was portrayed very vividly although made less poignant by the fact that he desires Peter's blood in vengeance for himself and not his dead father. The one thing off-putting about this version of the character was the fact that he, not his father Norman, took up the role of Green Goblin and Gwen's murderer. I am curious to see how this will play out in the future.

  Max Dillon/Electro: Despite his slightly eccentric qualities, I felt incredibly sympathetic to the character of Max Dillon/Electro. His story is very good homage to what can result when we tear people down, ignore them and push them aside. Peter's friendliness was, unfortunately, too little too late. I can't help but wonder what might have resulted had someone stepped up and befriended the poor guy. He seemed like a genuinely nice person who was more victim than perpetrator, though that doesn't excuse his behaviour. I was quite saddened by his death, but those feelings were quickly made null and void by Gwen's demise and Peter's grief. However, now that I'm thinking back on it, I can definitely feel bad for poor Max, if only....

  May Parker: Both the Sally Field and Rosemary Harris versions of Aunt May are close to my heart for various reasons, but one in particular that especially stuck out in this film is the love and protection she desires to give a troubled and often distant Peter, a boy she took in and raised, a boy she loves like her own. Their relationship is one of the sweetest in the entire franchise and it makes me smile and tear up every time. One thing I am curious about is when (or if) they will have Peter confess about Uncle Ben's death. In the original films, Peter confesses in the second film, but that was notably absent here. Although it will probably break my heart all over again I would love to see it in this series at some point. Hopefully the writers can work that in there.

  Oscorp: One of the things I am really enjoying about the reboot is how Oscorp seems to be at the center of this big conspiracy. I very much enjoy intrigue and mystery so it will be interesting to see the Oscorp situation unfold over the course of the films. It's very cool to see all the layers peeling back, revealing more and more of the company's secrets. Excited for more!

  Mary Jane Watson: Actress Shailene Woodley was cast as Peter's red-haired love interest and even filmed a few scenes, but was ultimately removed from the final cut due to the already large group of characters. For my part, I would have loved to have seen her and Gwen interacting, and I am interested in seeing Shailene's portrayal of the character I loved from the original trilogy. I hope she will be in the next film, the new take on the character will be fresh and fun I think.

  Felicia Hardy: Harry Osbourne's pretty young assistant, who, in the comics, is also a villain named Black Cat, and is one of Peter's love interests, was intended to have more screentime, but again, was cut for the flow. I was interested in this girl from the get-go and disappointed to find her scenes so few. She had a mysterious, knowing quality about her and whatever she wants with Harry, it can't be good. I think they have the potential to be a really great team of Spidey antagonists if they should ever work together.

  All in all, I definitely, hands down, loved this film and I am now 100% confident in the future of the Spiderman franchise. This would easily take the third spot on my top Spidey films and I am very excited and optimistic to see what lies ahead in the films.

  Before I go, I (being a die-hard Spidey fan) would like to leave you with my favorite quote from all five of the films. I hope it will inspire you as it inspires me.

Henry Jackson: Hi, Peter!
Peter Parker: Hey, Henry! You've grown tall.
May Parker: You'll never guess who he wants to be... Spider-Man!
Peter Parker: Why?
May Parker: He knows a hero when he sees one. Too few characters out there, flying around like that, saving old girls like me. And Lord knows, kids like Henry need a hero. Courageous, self-sacrificing people. Setting examples for all of us. Everybody loves a hero. People line up for them, cheer them, scream their names. And years later, they'll tell how they stood in the rain for hours just to get a glimpse of the one who taught them how to hold on a second longer. I believe there's a hero in all of us, that keeps us honest, gives us strength, makes us noble, and finally allows us to die with pride, even though sometimes we have to be steady, and give up the thing we want the most. Even our dreams.

Dracula (Very Minor Spoilers)

After re-watching the movie Hotel Transylvania recently, I decided to read Dracula for the first time. Never having seen any adaption of the story, or read much into the vampire franchise, I started into it with a blank slate on what I expected to find. I was pleasantly surprised.
Up until now, the only other books I have read in the Gothic horror genre have been Frankenstein and The Hound of the Baskervilles (both of which I thoroughly enjoyed, by the way). This book was nothing like either of them. The pacing and style was perfect for the story. By having the scenes and plots slowly revealed through the individual characters journals and letters, the reader seems to understand things only just before the characters themselves do. Later on though, this style adds again by showing us whole plots tying together, while the characters still only know bits and pieces. It was enough to make me want to yell at them as if I were watching it on a screen. (“Don't you realize that while you're busy investigating his mansion with your new vampire-hunting buddies, the Count is back at the house sucking blood from your wife?! Stupid man!”)

As to the content; all of the main characters (vampires aside, obviously) seem to be Christians, as was more commonly expected back then, and despite some of the more archaic customs and traditionalism, it was nice to read, and added to the appeal. The presence of the mythological beings obviously changed some of the religious beliefs as well (eg. Once someone becomes a vampire, their soul cannot enter heaven until the vampire is killed.). With these things in mind, as well as accounting for the more violent and bloody descriptions, I would not advise anyone too young to read this.

Surprisingly enough, one of the things I liked most about this book was the excellent portrayal of chivalry. The lead female character was a clever, resourceful person who could easily have done a decent job of taking care of herself, but she chose to accept the care and devotion of her husband and the other gentleman friends in her life. In turn, the men treated her as an equal when it came to discussions and planning, respecting the fact that she had just as much to offer in that way, but still treated her with the utmost care and concern; valuing her health, safety, and comfort above their own.

The book as a whole was well written (as is to be expected of a classic) and enjoyable to read. I now understand the appeal of a job as a vampire hunter, but as a friend quoting a friend once said “reality takes away the coolest job opportunities”. However, were it possible, I still don't think I'd want a job like that as a career. Maybe a few trips here and there with my vampire-hunting friends...

Anyways, I hope I've sparked your interest... and I sincerely wish that every girl (or guy) who read/watched the Twilight series and liked it, would read this book and see what real (figuratively speaking) vampires are like.

A Wrinkle in Time by Madeline L'Engle: A Passionate Prattle

“In your language you have a form of poetry called the sonnet…There are fourteen lines, I believe, all in iambic pentameter. That’s a very strict rhythm or meter…And each line has to end with a rigid pattern. And if the poet does not do it exactly this way, it is not a sonnet…But within this strict form the poet has complete freedom to say whatever he wants…You’re given the form, but you have to write the sonnet yourself. What you say is completely up to you."

“You mean you're comparing our lives to a sonnet? A strict form, but freedom within it?" 

"Yes." Mrs. Whatsit said. "You're given the form, but you have to write the sonnet yourself. What you say is completely up to you.”

While I seemingly absorbed a love for science fiction and fantasy in the womb, we all must begin our personal journey into that world somewhere. Alongside my parents I ventured into the worlds of Star Trek, Narnia, King Arthur, and many others. I've known these names for so long, in fact, that I regret to say that I have no fond memories of my first experience with them.  But one thing I shall always hold dear is the memory of the first time I read A Wrinkle in Time.

I was a wee lad, on a shopping excursion to an Edmontonian Chapters with my (much smaller then) family. I recall I was poking through a section filled with Great Illustrated Classics, a line of adapted classic novels I was quite engaged in at the time, when my Mother (or was it my Father? Memories are fickle) approached me with a book they had found.

It had a most surreal cover depicting an angelic being emerging from a giant egg which was itself emblazoned with an image of three children. Obviously it gave me no real indication of what kind of story I was about to experience. 

The author was Madeline L'Engle, and the title was A Wrinkle in Time. 

I happily accepted the recommendation as soon as I was able to discern that the genre was science fiction, and that night, I began reading. To this day, it remains one of my favourite novels of all time. 

(A side note worth noting so I think I'll note it: I remember that my love for Peanuts made me smile quite broadly at the opening line "It was a dark and stormy night").

A Wrinkle in Time, on a basic level, deals in the plight of fourteen-year-old Margaret "Meg" Murry, her friend Calvin 'O Keefe, and her genius five-year-old brother Charles Wallace as they travel through time and space in search of her father, who went missing after working on the theoretical concept of the Tesseract. The Tesseract here being the fifth dimension, and the titular Wrinkle in Time. 

Along the way they travel through many strange, beautiful, endlessly creative and terrifying places and planets, meet many eccentric and engaging characters, uncover many conspiracies and truths about said places and characters, as well as the very universe they live in.

I'm honestly having a hard time writing about this particular book. There's so much I want to say about it at once. I want to talk about how much I was amused by, as well as related to the character who found it easier to express herself through quoting Shakespeare's The Tempest rather than using her own words, the fascinating philosophy and insight of a planet whose creatures have no concept of vision, the horror of Camazotz, the beauty and music of Uriel, the touching closeness and self-sacrificing love that the Murry family demonstrates, but, alas, I am too close to this novel to offer much coherency when discussing it.

What I can do, is say this, if you have any interest in fantasy or science fiction, or just want to read something astoundingly creative and (I only use this word when I really mean it) unique. this is an absolute must-read.

One thing I will comment on, and I really love this, is that the book has a constant Christian perspective on things. I regret to say that Madeline L'Engle had many personal views that conflicted with biblical truths despite her professed Christian faith, but as far as A Wrinkle in Time is concerned, that perspective and the many nuggets of wisdom it provides did nothing but enhance the enjoyment of the novel and its story.

Hymns and praises to the same God I know being sung on another planet is something that you rarely see in these kinds of stories, and when a character pep talks the others using Romans 8:28, I thought it was just awesome.

These things also tie directly into the well-expressed, if common, themes of the story. Love, friendship, good vs evil, redemption, all that good stuff. 

The book is certainly no Narnia in that department, to be sure, but they definitely give its philosophy a nice edge, and provides its readers with brilliant conversation potential.

A Wrinkle in Time was followed by many sequels, of which I'm afraid I only read one. The second book, A Wind in the Door, had many interesting ideas such as other worlds existing in human mitochondria, and possibly the most unique cherubim I've ever read about, but it certainly didn't stick with me like the original… Perhaps I should reread it and catch up on the other sequels as well. Chalk those up as potential future reviews. 

I do apologize for this being more of a prolonged raving session rather than a coherent review, but it truly does boil down to this: A Wrinkle in Time is one of the greatest science fiction stories I have ever read, let alone children's novel; I don't think there's much you could want out of such a tale that it does not provide. Philosophy, mystery, friendship, humour, suspense, a hint of tragedy and OH, MY GOODNESS THE CREATIVITY. (Sorry).  I cannot recommend it enough.

I thank you very much for swimming through my wee-morning hour ramblings, and I bid you cheerio, pip pip and all that!

"It seemed to travel with her, to sweep her aloft in the power of song, so that she was moving in glory among the stars, and for a moment she, too, felt that the words Darkness and Light had no meaning, and only this melody was real."

Captain America: The Winter Soldier review (MAJOR spoiler warning)

  Steve Rogers, aka the super-soldier from WWII, Captain America, is back in this latest installment of the Marvel Comic Universe and is still struggling to adapt to the fast-paced 21st century. He has become an agent of S.H.I.E.L.D. and is using his war skills to help stomp out the big crimes and threats to national security. In his downtime, he is catching up on all he's missed during his seventy-year slumber, from Thai food to Star Wars (imagine watching The Empire Strikes Back with Steve, hmm?). Now that the shock has worn off, now that the world is no longer endangered from aliens led by power-hungry Norse-gods, he has time to grieve for what he's lost. Maybe not in crying actual tears, but the pain is still there.

  Peggy, his dear friend and battlefield sweetheart, wiles away her days alone in a nursing home, gray-haired, wrinkled, and lost to him. Not merely because of her alzeimer's, but also because of that seventy-year gap where she went on with her life and he was sleeping. All those lost days and years lie between them like a chasm, and nothing will ever truly bridge it again.

  And Bucky. Good, old Bucky. A true friend. A best friend. Childhood companion and fellow troublemaker, always good in a scrape, a soldier to the end. A man who's life was worthy to be celebrated, to be honored, whether in Steve's own heart, or in a museum display. Bucky's sacrifice will never be forgotten.

  Despite these unique and tragic losses, Steve Rogers does have a few bright sides to his difficult existence. His time at S.H.I.E.L.D is going well, the missions keep him occupied, help him forget the culture shift. Natasha, the Black Widow, has been good to him, if not a little rough around the edges. And he's found a new companion in Sam Wilson, a war veteran from the modern day.

  Yes, life is going alright, at least, from Steve's surface perspective.

  But in reality, this new modern life as he knows it may be about to self-destruct.

  S.H.I.E.L.D has been compromised, it's leader is on the run, it's agents are turning traitor left and right, and a brand new threat has surfaced, one that even Captain America may not be able to stop.

  The enemies were obvious when Steve Rogers first became Captain America, back in the good old days, it was easier to be a good guy. Staring down Hitler or tangling with Hydra has a way of perfecting a person's sense of right and wrong.

  But those were the good old days, and those days are long gone, as Steve has come to understand so well. The clear cut, black and white of his youth has turned gray, the line between friend and enemy has been blurred, the country that he risked his life for, the organization that has employed him to continue, slinks and spies, cheats and lies, perhaps for good reasons, as argued by Nicky Fury (head of S.H.I.E.L.D), or perhaps not. And as the days grow increasingly darker, Stever Rogers is left to wonder;

  Who am I really fighting for? Who are the good guys in this mess? Or does it even matter anymore?


  I very much enjoyed the first Captain America film, borrowing it from the library after being exposed to The Avengers. Despite the rather interesting plothole at the end of the film, it was a thoroughly enjoyable movie, with a nice, clean-cut, honest hero, not-so-nice, clean-cut villains, and a cool sci-fi take on WWII (an era of history I find fascinating). Not to mention all the cameos  of some of my favorite characters (Elrond, Thorin, Grace Van Pelt, etc).

  That being said, the sequel absolutely blew my mind. Despite the much darker tone of this film than anything Marvel has done before, I was absolutely hooked from start to finish. Captain America is one of my favorite superheroes and in this film, his internal struggles come more to the surface. One of the most interesting things about him is the fact he came directly from the past into the 21st century future. Trying to fathom the shock that someone would suffer through being thrown straight into this crazy millennium is difficult, but the consequences are interesting, and the way they play out in both subtle and non-subtle ways during the film is both interesting and tragic.

  Nick Fury and Natasha Romanov (Black Widow) are both characters that remained rather low in my list of favorite Marvel heroes, but this movie has definitely elevated them both. While neither of them begin or become as straightforward and honest as Cap, his influence on them is obvious by the film's conclusion. They may both be willing to cheat, lie, maim or sneak to get a job done, but Steve's simpler, upright approach does have its benefits, its positives, as they come to understand. When their world is crashing in around them, it is Captain America's sincerity, his virtue, his belief in the good of the world, that pulls them through, helps them go on.

  Despite how great Director Fury and Black Widow are, and how much I love Captain America, it was the Winter Soldier (aka, Bucky Barnes) that came out as my favorite character from this film. I am a sucker for the brothers-turned-enemies trope and this one was definitely one of my favorites (and one of the most tragic) I've had the pleasure of experiencing heartbreak with. Also, I do love a good anti-hero, especially one as fantastically skilled and awe-inspiring as brainwashed Bucky has become. A calm, cold, deadly assassin, the perfect foil for genuine, good-hearted Captain America.

  What surprised me most about this film however, was the incredibly relevant and somewhat shocking portrait that was painted of our world today. History repeating itself was never more clear than the moment in which Steve realizes that his sacrifice in the War was almost futile. He never stopped Hydra's plans at all, he only delayed them, gave them a new, darker goal to achieve. The Nazis and Hydra had tried to take the people's freedom in the War by force, but they clung to it, fighting back, perhaps more viciously than expected. So a new and subtler plan was introduced. Why go through all the trouble of taking their freedom, when they could simply encourage them to hand it over willingly out of fear, in the name of "security and peace." How true to the times is that idea? How blunt and obvious? How clear an image of our world? What makes it so frightening is just how plausible it is, so much so that walking out of the theatre, I could almost believe that there really was a Hydra out there, orchestrating the chaos that so plainly exists around our globe.

  It's these concepts of freedom and fear and the lines people are willing to cross and the things they are willing to sacrifice for security that made the film for me. Often, Hollywood blockbusters focus more on the action and the romance of their stories rather than relevant, timeless issues such as those presented in The Winter Soldier. And to me, that seems a tremendous waste. All the opportunities to present truth to audiences lost for the sake of "pleasing a demographic" or making more money. The Winter Soldier is at the top of the box office right now, so people obviously do care about these issues. My hope is that in seeing this idea so clearly shown for just a movie moment, they will be more apt to recognize similar themes in reality.
  Perhaps these examples of terror and freedom and the marring of black and white could be considered exaggerated here (it is still, after all, a Marvel movie) but that doesn't change the truth that lurks underneath.

    "We will neutralize threats before they happen."

    "I thought the punishment usually came after the crime....This isn't freedom - this is fear."



A POST-SCRIPT:
  Now that my more serious musings are out of the way, I'd like to take a minute just to make note of the little, awesome things that made gave me heart palpatations as I watched. A warning; I cannot guarantee just how much of my fangirl side will be released in this section, tread carefully.

  - Steve's List: The one which he pulls out in the presence of Sam Wilson (the Falcon). The camera gives us a nice little shot of Steve's pop culture list, and speculating about someone's first time experience with these things couldn't be more fun! I've already mentioned this above, but seriously, imagine watching the Star Wars trilogy with Steve! It would be so great!

  - The Suit Switch: For the first chunk of the film, Steve wears a more low-key, dark version of his Captain America costume while his original outfit sits gathering dust in the Smithsonian. Most people seemed to not like the original, more patriotic costume, but I'm glad that he donned it for the second half of the movie. I do love a little nostalgia.

  - Natasha's Necklace: For those of you interested in a little Avengers romance, you may be pleased to note that during parts of the film, Natasha can be seen wearing a small, silver arrow necklace. Apparently, the actress, Scarlett Johansson, requested this subtle hint herself. I'll let you guys draw your own conclusions...

  - Future Shield References: There have been a couple of instances in which Bucky/The Winter Soldier handles Steve's signature shield, perhaps a hint of things to come, since in the comic book universe, Bucky does take up Captain America's role for a time. And it is worth mentioning that Sebastian Stan (Bucky) has signed a contract for nine Marvel films while Chris Evans (Steve) has only signed on for six.

  - Stan Lee Cameo: Another solid Stan Lee cameo as he portrays a night-guard in the Smithsonian who fears being fired after Cap "borrows" his old costume. We all love Stan Lee, so let's just take a moment to appreciate him here.

  - The Maximoff Twins: And finally, two characters I am REALLY excited to see in The Age of Ultron film next year. Wanda and Pietro (Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver) have definitely grabbed my interest and I look forward to seeing them in future films. Their short cameo here (in the credits scene) was a very creepy yet cool glimpse of what's to come next year. Couldn't be more happy about these additions to the Avengers team!

The Fault in our Stars, in Two Days

         I thought I would read The Fault in our Stars because I wanted to see the movie. **Release date, in theaters June 6th.
    It follows the story of a young sixteen year old girl, named Hazel. She has a serious case of cancer and is just waiting to die pretty much. She meets the young man Augustus, who is a total gentleman, at a support group. He also had a form of cancer that started in his leg, so the doctors amputated it. To avoid spoilers I will say nothing else. (Although you could probably guess what happens next).
    Yes, it is such a super easy book, even I, a slow reader, finished it in two days. I will say with all bias intended, that I did not like it a jot.
    The very first chapter the author slams his opinion of God in the readers face, no need to worry if the author thinks there is a heaven. He doesn't. Now, that is his opinion he can have it, and I will disagree with him, but the constant use of the Lord's name in vain throughout the book made me grimace, and throw my hands up in despair. Everyone in the book likes to swear apparently.
    Do not even get me started on the grammar. I do not claim to be a grammar expert, which makes it even worse if I notice the misuse of the written word. I hate to think we let people get away with such crimes.

     This is apparently a popular and favorite book of a lot of people. I can not see why. Then again I do not follow modern days flow of popularity. So, you might like it, especially the romance. I will stick with my older books, with more in-depth stories, and proper use of commas, and periods.

Okay?
Thanks for reading.

Frozen Review (warning: some spoilers)

  There is a chill in the castle of Arendelle.

  Young princess Elsa, born with magical powers of ice and snow, has created a winter wonderland in the palace halls, at the request of her younger sister, Anna. It has become a sort of special sister time between them, late at night, when the castle sleeps, to entertain themselves with Elsa's powers. Eagerly, they build snowmen, make snow-angels, have snowball fights, sled, and leap from snowbank to snowbank.

  Unfortunately, roughhousing with magic is never a very wise idea, and Anna is struck in the head accidentally by Elsa's ice.

  The horrified king and queen gather both their children and take an emergency midnight trip to the wise trolls. The chief troll assures them that Anna can be cured, “the heart cannot be so easily changed, but the head can be persuaded” and advises them to let him remove Anna's memories of Elsa's magic and keep their elder daughters powers a secret. The king and queen are desperate and agree, causing the downward spiral that may eventually lead their kingdom to ruin.

  Elsa, terrified of her hurting her sister, or anyone else, and tortured by the constant threat of the harm of her magic, locks herself away as her parents and the trolls urge, distancing herself from everyone. Including her beloved sister. Confused and disheartened by her sister's sudden “iciness”, Anna tries vainly for years to get Elsa to come out and be close again, but Elsa, out of sacrificial love for her sister (albeit misguided love) stays far away, just beyond Anna's reach, hidden behind a locked door.

  So when the day comes, as it seems is inevitable in Disney films, when Elsa's parents are no longer around to watch out for her and lead her, a desperate and despairing Anna comes slowly to her sister's locked door. Looking for comfort, guidance, arms to hold her in this troubled time.

  Little does she know the depth of her older sister's fear and loneliness as she weeps alone in the icy shadows of her cold room.

  “We only have each other. ” Anna laments sadly. “It's just you and me. What are we gonna do?”

  But, just as before, no answer came from behind Elsa's door that day. Or any day since.


  A few years down the road, the two princesses are preparing (in utterly opposite ways) for Elsa's coronation as queen of Arendelle. Young and impetuous Anna is desperate for human companionship and thrilled to see the castle gates open wide for the flood of guests come to celebrate and witness her sister's coming of age. In true Disney fashion, she sings of all the thrilling things that she imagines coming to pass in the night ahead, including possibly finding her “true love”.

  Elsa, meanwhile, takes a very different approach to the impending social gathering. She covers every inch of her skin possible, slipping on the blue gloves her father gave her to shield the world from her icy blasts. Repeating the instructions of her parents, she reluctantly welcomes the inevitable with a sort of resigned dignity, determined to do her duty, determined not to let anyone know.

  “Conceal. Don't feel. Put on a show.” she tells herself repeatedly, clearly struggling, while Anna rushes out to greet the people. Finding herself face-to-face (or should I say, face-to-horse) with Prince Hans, a handsome and charming prince of the Southern Isles who immediately strikes Anna's fancy, and continues to do so well into the night. So smitten is the young (and slightly naïve) princess, that she actually agrees to Hans' marriage proposal, and promptly drags her new fiancée to meet her sister and receive the queen's blessing on their marriage.

  However, Elsa – dutiful, frigid Elsa – says no. Leading into an argument in which Anna rips off Elsa's glove, driving her to anger and greater stress, until she finally snaps. And the effect is both shocking, and devastating.

  “Sorcery! Monster!” the terrified guests whisper, and Elsa flees the ball, the castle, the city. Heading into the lonely wilds of the mountains beyond the lake, where she can be free to use her powers and not worry about hurting those she loves, where she, and everyone else can be safe.

  But Elsa never reckoned that her sudden release would bury her country in snow and ice, setting in a slowly deepening winter that grows only more frigid as time passes. Arendelle's citizens are left behind in the cold, afraid, outraged, and unable to do anything to fight the chill. Only princess Anna is willing to go after Elsa and speak to her, insisting her sister is not a monster, that she isn't dangerous.

  “She's my sister, she would never hurt me.” she asserts, leaving her new beau, prince Hans, in charge of the kingdom before riding off into the frosted forests in search of Elsa. Thus begins an adventure in which love, in its truest form, is realized, and the eternal bond between two sisters proves to outlast any ice or storm.


  Frozen came to my attention late last year, not too far from the film's release, and while it had caught my interest, as most Disney films will, I didn't have amazingly high expectations. At least, I certainly wasn't expecting what I got.

  I am a huge fan of Disney, it was such an integral part of my childhood, I grew up on films like The Lion King, Bambi, The Jungle Book, 101 Dalmatians, Mulan, and Robin Hood. When I was really young, before my siblings were born, we didn't have much TV, I had my Disney movies and my Veggie Tales collection. They shaped me at a young age, and I am so glad of it.

  As I've grown up, Disney movies have sorted of faded, in both quantity and quality. Studios like Pixar and Dreamworks have become more popular. Disney's classic 2D animation is all but dead. The company has invested so much time and effort into other unrelated franchises that they've forgotten everything that made them so special in the first place.

  Perhaps Frozen has come along just in time to save that.

  Grand, strikingly beautiful, and emotionally entrapping, Frozen has enthralled viewers of all ages and all walks of life, bringing back the old Disney magic in a almost indescribable way. There is just something distinctly “Disney-ish” about it that I haven't seen or experienced in the Disney films of this millennium. Maybe it's because Frozen has been in talks since Walt Disney himself was alive, or because it was adapted from a classic fairytale like most of the Disney Princess movies, maybe it's the music, or the characters. Maybe the world was just ready for something magical again.

  Out of all of Frozen's wonderful songs, it is the Oscar-winning 'Let It Go' (sung by the fabulously talented Idina Menzel) that has captured the world's heart. It has started a Youtube trend, it seems everyone is performing their own version of this popular hit.

  For myself, I really do like the song. The visuals of Elsa creating her ice palace was INCREDIBLE, the music was beautiful, Idina Menzel's voice is just unbelievable, and the lyrics a lovely. The only thing I disliked was the self-centered message behind it.

  “No right, no wrong, no rules for me.” Elsa sings out, shooting ice left and right. This was one of the problematic lines that caught my attention. Does the song deserve all the attention it is getting? I think so. It's definitely magnificent musically. However, I think we should enjoy it without soaking up too much of its philosophy, which may be hard to do, considering the generally young age of the Disney audience and the widespread popularity of a song that has been stuck in people's heads since the film premiered last year. However, as a lover of Disney music, I think it has earned its popularity and will continue to revel in that fame for a long time to come. We may as well just enjoy it as music, no matter how tired some of us may be of hearing it. ;)

  Besides the Frozen's soundtrack, which has wowed and enraptured the world, I think it is the theme of 'true love' that really stands out the most about this film. Going against its own past philosophy on the now cliched 'true love romance' between a prince and princess, Frozen seeks to show us a different and far more powerful form of true love, mainly through the bond between Anna and Elsa.

  You may have gathered from my intro that the relationship between the two sisters is frosty at best, but it wasn't always that way. Buried beneath years of hurt and rejection is a love for each other that grows and blossoms into something beautiful by the end of the film. Despite how Elsa has hurt her, Anna still sacrifices herself to save Elsa from the sword of the film's (surprise!) antagonist. And it is shown throughout the film that Anna is willing to put herself on the line for Elsa, even when the other characters suggest she isn't worth risking it for. That Disney would step away from its old ways to paint this lovely picture is truly surprising and the results are inspiring.

  That's not to say there aren't other characters who demonstrate acts of 'true love' to one another. Olaf, the walking, talking snowman Elsa brought to life is there for Anna when she most needs a friend. He stays with her, keeping her warm at his own (*ahem* wet) expense and when Anna sees what he is doing to himself he gently replies; "Some people are worth melting for." 

  Likewise, Anna's newfound traveling companion, Kristoff, a tall, blonde-haired, ice-harvester, helps Anna search for Elsa, keeps her safe, and goes back for her when it's clear she is in danger. Charging right into the heart of a fierce snowstorm to save her life. Before this however, he took her back to the castle, despite his feelings for her, knowing that her fiancee, prince Hans awaited her, and could save her "frozen heart" with "an act of true love", in essence, true love's kiss. In true gentlemen's spirit, Kristoff gave her up to save her, an act of sacrifice, of true love in itself.

  What the film strives to teach about love is that it comes in different forms. There is Anna and Hans' mushy-headed, lovey-dovey drivel, as echoed by their duet, 'Love is an Open Door'. Then there is the love of friends like Olaf, who are there for you no matter the personal cost. There is love like that between Kristoff and Anna, one of friendship, one of companionship, substance, and yes, some romance. And then there is the love between Anna and Elsa, pure and perfect, full of strength, of laughter, of hope and of sacrifice. The act of giving up everything for another person, no matter what.

  That is a rare love to find in our world today, as these days, when people hear the word "love" they automatically assume that which refers to Anna and Hans' romantic relationship. It is only after that first thought that other kinds of love, such as the love between friends or family enters their mind.

  Hopefully, it is Anna and Elsa's bond that audiences remember the most as they leave the theatre, or turn off the TV. Hopefully it is their relationship that resonates with viewers, old and young, and inspires them in their own life.

  After all;

      "Some people are worth melting for."

Divergent on the Big Screen

          Like some of you know I have read the Divergent trilogy, so was excited to see the movie the other day with my sister and our friend (you all know as Goldberry). Although, a little on the doubting side we plunged in with our hopes up.
     Now, in an entertaining sense the movie was enjoyable. It was fun to see the world we had been imagining in front of our eyes. The outfit design I thought was great, and accurate to how I imagined them, the scenery was well done, and in some cases beautiful, and the action was not disappointing.
     However, the people picked for the parts did not really fit to our liking, we had suspected that might be the case, and found it true. No one fit how I pictured them, or how they were described in Veronica Roth's books. The actors for Peter, Will, and Albert were hard to tell apart, and we struggled to figure out who was who.
     It also occurred to me that we would not have understood half of what was going on if we had not read the book before hand, a lot of important scenes or information was left out. So the movie was defiantly made for the book fans.
   
*****On a side note. The fighting style they used in the movie was something I had never seen before. The way they held their arms in defense seemed strange to me-and I was once in Karate and Kickboxing-I was instantly curious to know what style they were using.

     So over all I thought the movie entertaining, not the best adapted movie I have seen, but something I could enjoy since I had read the books.

          There was no cussing, vulgar language that I could recall, and only that one expected kissing scene (They all need ones of those, right). The only thing they had a lot of near the end especially was killing and deaths, not that they showed much of it, off the screen shots and things like that. Maybe not children friendly, but I do not personally know many children who would be interested any ways.

     Doing a quick Google search there is no doubt in any ones mind that the second book, Insurgent, will be turned into a motion picture adventure as well, being released in 2015. So fans do not have to wait long, and keep on enjoying the world of Divergent.

Be brave, be selfless, be peaceful, be intelligent, be honest.

Thanks for reading.

Catching Fire Movie Review

  “Remember who the real enemy is.”

Katniss Everdeen and Peeta Mellark both won. Or so they thought.

They were declared victors of the previous year's Hunger Games, making history as the only two people to both walk out of the arena alive at Games end. The have become Capitol celebrities, brought honor and food to their district and families, will be supported by the Capitol with money and food and housing for the rest of their lives. They have survived.

But more than that, they have made enemies. Enemies with the powerful aristocracy that simultaneously adores and abhors them, enemies with the single most powerful man in the country to whom their very lives belong.

There is rebellion brewing in the districts and heroine Katniss is coolly informed by President Snow, leader of Panem, that it is of her doing. Her stunt in the arena with the toxic nightlock berries has painted her as a hero and a rebel to the people of Panem, someone to put their faith in, someone to inspire a revolution. Katniss is both unaware and horrified by the prospect that her attempt to save both her and Peeta from each other is viewed as an act of defiance and rebellion. This simple moment that saved her before may become her undoing, and under threat from President Snow, Katniss is willing to do anything to fix the problem before it's too late.

However, Katniss soon realizes that it was too late before it even began. And she finds herself being sacrificed in the arenas again for the greater good of Panem. Reaped for a special 75^th Quarter Quell Games, she is put back in the arena with Peeta and the past victors from other districts. The only difference? This time she has accepted that she will not be coming back.

Being a fan of the books, I thought this film went above and beyond the previous installment in the franchise, it was very close to the source material and very true to the tone and spirit of the original story. In general, I was quite pleased with what the cast and crew had created.

Catching Fire was my favorite book, and so far, it has been my favorite film. The acting was superb, with a particularly raw and stirring performance from Jennifer Lawrence (Katniss), beautiful costumes and sets, stunning cinematography, script, etc. There is little worth complaining about as a fan or even a critical standpoint, however, there is plenty of subject material that may make some viewers wary or uncomfortable. In all honesty, the whole storyline is a bit uncomfortable when you are first introduced to it.

There is plenty of kissing, as Katniss is at the center of a complicated love triangle involving herself, fellow victor, Peeta, and friend, Gale. Johanna, another victor, undresses in front of Katniss, Peeta, and Haymitch in an elevator (we only see her bare back). There is a multitude of violence, unsurprisingly, although this time around, many people die of the arena's “natural” elements rather than by human hands. People are burned in acid fog, stabbed, shot with arrows, nailed with axes, whipped, attacked by genetically modified monkeys, throats are slit, people drown, etc. One particularly disturbing scene happens near the beginning of the film when one old man dares to take even the smallest of stands against the power of the Capitol and is dragged onto a podium and shot in the head. We do not see it happen, but the shock, combined with the horror and tears of the other characters, is enough to frighten the viewer.

There is some profanity, mild and not so mild, and it is much more present than in the previous film. Haymitch is often drunk and there are other instances were alcohol is present.

Overall, Panem is not a pleasant place, a fact that is all too clear from the tone of both books and films. But it is a dystopian country that serves as a background for a story of heroism and sacrifice. I know many people who are turned off by The Hunger Games because of the violence and the idea of children killing children. And I understand.

But I wonder if the truly scary thing is how much of our own society we are able to see within the book's pages (or on the screen).

Suzanne Collins (author of The Hunger Games trilogy) has said in the past that her story is a critique on violence and media, showing us what could be if we continue down our current path. I think there is definitely a hard lesson to be learned in Katniss' story. Walking out of the theater you may have some heavy thoughts wandering around your head. A story like this is sobering, it makes you think, which is one of the reasons it appeals to me.

What I fear has happened is exactly the opposite of what Suzanne Collins intended, the world-wide success of her books (and the films inspired by them) has turned her “critique” of violence into a glamorization, and her thoughtful take on a future world into a young adult trend. The irony couldn't be more complete, woven into the very fibers of the story's heart is the horror and tragedy of war and violence, and what effect it has on the world, and each individual. The Hunger Games is the story of a girl who is put on a pedestal for detestable acts and locked into a life similar to that of a caged animal. Made for a show, for a game. Glamorized for acting on her basest human instinct. Survival.

For me, the appeal of The Hunger Games trilogy is the haunting tale of a war, a raw and gritty story of relatable, realistic people doing their best to change their world for good, to do the right thing in a situation where that is nearly impossible, to give up everything in hopes of creating a better life for those after them.

At it's core, The Hunger Games is a tale of self-sacrifice and of ordinary people overcoming insurmountable odds. Beneath the violence and the darkness and the shadow of despair and doubt, there is a glimmer of strength, of faith, of hope.

Catching Fire captures this well as it's character put themselves on the line time and time again for one another, many of them making the ultimate sacrifice for the one hope they have in these troubled times.

Katniss Everdeen. The Girl on Fire. The Mockingjay. The Symbol of the Rebellion.

“Since the last Games, something is different. I can see it.”

“What can you see?”

“Hope.”

To be continued next year with Mockingjay: Part One

(Belated) Desolation of Smaug Review *SPOILERS*

This is a review written by a dear friend of mine. I thought it worth putting here since we love reviews. You can find the original on her Tumblr account here: Elen sila lumenn omentielvo
Also she is a new member of our blog here, she goes by the name, Goldberry. Hope to see more from her in the future. 

Enjoy.

*Before reading, know that this entire piece of writing is a spoiler. If you have seen the movie or simply don’t care, then proceed. For the rest of you however, this has been your official warning.
Another short disclaimer. I want to note that this movie tore me in two. I loved it on a cinematic entertainment type level; I was thrilled and thoroughly enjoyed it, even some of the deviations from the original text. However, some of these deviations bordered on the realm of ridiculous and so much of this movie’s content was not canon that I felt like a bad fan for liking it. It is hard wanting to defend the film to yourself and others, even when you know that there were some things that shouldn’t have happened. It is conflicting, and it may make this commentary seem conflicting. I apologize ahead of time for this. I hope you enjoy my comments.
I was really impressed with the film as a whole, however, minor issues presented themselves as I watched, particularly the love triangle between Legolas, Tauriel and Kili, and the attempt to kill the dragon at the film’s climax. Other than that, I found it very well done with lots of rip-roaring action, amazing acting, beautiful sets and special effects, and some of the most marvelous music I’ve yet heard in Middle Earth films. I was definitely satisfied with this film, but I felt I would have enjoyed it more had there been less focus or no focus at all on the Tauriel/Kili and Tauriel/Legolas subplots. I felt it took away from more than it added to the film. Despite all though, I am pleased with what PJ and co. have produced and look forward to next year’s third and final installment.
Bilbo Baggins: We received a marvellous performance from dear Mr. Freeman. As always, he brought his special charm and comedic skills into the role and made Bilbo totally loveable and admirable. Bilbo has also grown a little since the last film, in the eyes of his friends and in his own. He has become more and more courageous, and his dwarf friendships are strengthed, particularly with Thorin, as he moves into the greatest test of strength he will yet face, meeting Smaug, the dragon beneath the Lonely Mountain.
Bard the Bowman: Excellent character and I loved the fleshing out of his story, his children were beautiful and adorable, and their presence will certainly make the stakes higher for Bard personally in the third film. Luke Evans was amazing, and his character was very much like I’d imagined (except for his costume, it looked a little funny, like a bathrobe).
The Dwarves: Certain dwarves got a little more screen time, particularly Bombur, Bofur, Kili, Dwalin and Balin. While some of the fleshing out of their characters I was less than pleased with (think Kili flirting with Tauriel), I enjoyed the rest for the most part. Bombur’s barrel ride was entertaining, if not somewhat ridiculous, and Balin’s tears when returning to Erebor were beautiful. They are a wonderful group to watch on screen, and they really make you smile and laugh and cry with them.
Smaug: What can I say? Smaug was the absolutely only thing in this movie that was so amazing I was speechless, and I think the rest of the audience was in awe as well. In reading the book, I hardly imagined him to be so enormous and magnificent, but of course PJ and co. would pull out all the stops when given such promising material as a big, fire-breathing, gold-grabbing, dwarf-roasting dragon. You could see Weta Digital’s detail and careful attention down to the last scale, he was absolutely amazing and totally perfect. The only, and I mean, the ONLY thing about him that I wish was different was his color. In the film he seems kind of a dirty gold color but on all the covers of the books I’ve seen, he is pictured as a fiery red beast. If that small detail was in place, it would be utterly and completely perfect. I guarantee he was worth the wait.
Gandalf: Ian Mckellen, as always, you amaze me as Gandalf, you are just so right for the role and bring our dear old wizard to life in ways that I don’t expect anyone else could. Every gesture and mutter and huff and every twinkle of the eye is brought to glorious life and I couldn’t imagine anyone doing a better job. Gandalf’s character was spot on as always in this film, and I can’t wait to see how he gets out of his little situation in the next film.
Thranduil: I don’t know what I was expecting, but Thranduil was a diva to say the least. In the best of ways of course, there were some instances where the performance could have been toned down, but overall, I found Thranduil to be totally amusing and a very interesting personna. He is nothing like the wise, powerful and kind elf rulers we have seen thus far (Galadriel, Celeborn, Elrond), he is a bit darker and a bit more human. He had incredible costumes and interesting lines, and just a very arrogant and powerful demeanor that was played very well by Lee Pace. I can’t wait to see him in the next film, in the Battle of the Five Armies. When we got our first look at him on his throne, I couldn’t help but think of Gaston in Beauty and the Beast “I use antlers in all of my DECORAAATING!”
Legolas: Unlike most of my friends, and many other fans, I was perfectly fine with and even a little excited to see Legolas kicking butt again. The obligatory over-the-top Legolas action has never been a favorite of mine, but I do appreciate the character and it was very interesting to see him at home, in his element, interacting with his father and friend Tauriel. And, since this is Legolas in the past, it is quite fun to see a bit of his arrogant, jerk side (which I’m sure he inherited from his father). I loved his brief interaction with Gloin, when he calls Gimli a goblin mutant (the whole theatre laughed knowingly at that point), and also, in Laketown, when Bolg gives him a bloody nose (No one makes me bleed my own blood!). Orlando did another fantastic job and I look forward to seeing Legolas’ growth and role in the next film.
Tauriel: I went in a skeptic, came out still a skeptic (but a softer one). Tauriel seems to have taken hold of even some of the most devoted of Tolkienites, which surprises me immensely. Of my peer group, none of us like her very much, but I think what we really hate most is the love triangle. However, putting that aside for a moment, Tauriel is a decent, likeable character who does interest me, despite her non-canonness. She is a very skilled warrior, as captain of the Mirkwood guard, and kind-hearted, and wiser than those she serves in some cases. Yet, I felt there were many aspects of her overdone and Mary-Sue-ified. Her warrior skills are at Legolas’ calibre, which makes sense as the captain of the guard, but as prince, and you know, someone who later surfs on shields, dances on dwarf heads, and takes down Oliphaunts single-handedly, shouldn’t he be the more skilled one? Also, being captain of the guard seems like an awfully high rank to give to a) a self-described “lowly silvan elf” b) a young elf and c) a girl elf (not trying to be sexist, just considering the Middle Earth world). I mean, what did she do to earn that position? We’ve seen she can fight yes, but what other credentials does she have? There is also the fact that she is both warrior and healer, which in Tolkien’s universe, was a choice elf-maidens made, either warrior or healer. Her red hair is another issue that I don’t know about personally, something about Feanor and his descendants being the only elven red-heads? To me, it just seems like another ploy to make her stand out among the other characters (not to mention, if she had black hair like actress Evie Lilly, she would be an Arwen clone). And of course, the love triangle, in which she (fulfilling the dreams of Leggie fangirls everywhere) is being crushed on by Legolas and is innocent to it, while befriending the handsome dwarf prisoner (and saving him a few times to boot). This, especially the first part, just seems like bad fanfiction to me. I was hoping the Legolas/Tauriel “romance” would simply be a strong friendship, but it turns out I was wrong about that. Anyway, Tauriel herself is fine with me, I just wish that elements of her had been ignored or downplayed in the film. Evangeline Lilly did a beautiful job and the character has been interested, I am certainly curious to see what will become of her in the next film. My personal theory is that she will die in the Battle of the Five Armies but we’ll see what comes next Christmas.
The Master of Lake town: Now this guy was certainly irksome, and disgusting, not quite as much as his lackey, Alfrid, but enough to get under my skin (in the best of ways of course). Stephen Fry gave a magnificent performance, one that very much mirrored my own vision of the Master from the books. It was humorous, and entertaining, and I’m eager to see more of him in the EE’s hopefully, and the next film. Alfrid as well, was played excellently, and he will be an interesting character to explore further in the next film. Perhaps he will regret tripping up Bard, the one who’s going to save him and the town.
Beorn: His scenes were so short that there was hardly anything to see, but I was certainly happy with him nonetheless. Though he did not much resemble the black-haired, buff Beorn in my head, I found his design to be well done. He has beautiful horses and a beautiful log house, and yard. It was amazing looking at the set and seeing how large all the items were. It must have been fantastic being on that set. His bear form (while not black like I’d imagined) was glorious and I am REALLY excited to see him clawing up the orcs in the next installment. And hopefully, get some more scenes on the EE’s.
The Spiders: Cleverly done dialogue and CGI and character and action. Bilbo really shone in this scene, and there was so much going on in his hobbit head that Martin Freeman portrayed beautifully. It was clever of PJ and co. to use the Ring to include the spider dialogue, it explained them out of a huge plothole with Shelob. Also, Bilbo’s scene with the little spider thing was excellent. A great foreshadowing of things to come.
The Necromancer: While this is one of the bigger deviations from the books, I wasn’t horrified by it. As part of the White Council arc and (hopefully) Battle at Dol Goldur arc, I think it does well to tie The Hobbit back into LotR. However, some concerns do present themselves. Mainly how Gandalf is not supposed to meeet Sauron in one-on-one battle. That was a bit of a mistake on the writers part. What I did like is how much better Sauron’s eyeball looks with new CGI. In LotR, it was often ridiculous looking, while much of the other CG was great, I guess it mostly had to do with the whole notion of a giant, all-seeing eye looking out across Middle Earth, which works well in the books, but not so much in the films. What was nice is that we get a visual of Sauron’s power and darkness and malice, we see what he can do, something missing from LotR. So this sequence wasn’t awful for me, and I’m very interested to see what happens to our dear wizard in the next film.
Laketown: I think the art department did fantastically with this set, it is a very thorough mixture of simplicity and poverty, yet beauty of neighbours and family. There is a certain element of danger, and the darkness of the mountain that overshadows them. But the struggled and hope of the people for better days and better things lives on. It is not at all a nice place in these days, but you can see remnants of a happier past.
Bree: It was definitely nice seeing Bree again, see Peter-carrot-chomping-Jackson, the Immortal carrot-eater. And revisting the Prancing Pony felt familiar, yet strange. Katie Jackson’s cameo was very cute, and the thugs sitting in Aragorn’s corner were frightening, I felt Thorin’s edginess as he ate. The discussion between Thorin and Gandalf and the cut to the Company was cleverly done.
The Ending: Having read the books, the ending was not disappointing to me. But I could hear the shock and disbelief and groans among the rest of the audience as ‘I See Fire’ began and the credits rolled. It is going to leave audiences on edge for a whole year, and I am super excited to see how it picks up after that cliffhanger. Can’t wait to see Smaug in action, and a whole bunch more things! What a way to end, Peter Jackson, very brave and very good work.
There and Back Again: I have many hopes and dreams and theories and speculations for the next film, everything in DoS was left at cliffhanger and I am super excited to see just exactly how PJ will play it all out. At the same time, I am fairly certain this will be our last trip to Middle Earth (at least with Peter Jackson) and while I am eager to see the last film, I almost wish it would never end, I am going to probably cry at the theatre next year, so those of you who are going with me, don’t laugh, just bring some kleenex.
This is our last year guys. While many of us weren’t completely impressed with how Peter has handled The Hobbit (particularly DoS), I think we will all be sad to see the Middle Earth films coming to an end next year. Here’s to an outstanding, world-wowing finale next winter.
And, as always, thank you to all the fantastic and talented people on the cast and crew who have dedicated literally years of their lives to make movies for pathetic little fangirls like me. Blessings to you all as you bring these films to their final close.

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug. What everyone is saying.

     Everyone was excited to see what would happen next in the second movie of The Hobbit. As December rolled in people had their tickets ready, and had their cosplay set for The Desolation of Smaug. Fans, and nerds, and geeks were on pins and needles, theories were created, spoilers posted. Everything was prepared.
      Since this review is so late in the making after the release of the movie I am not bothering about spoilers, and my post will mostly be about the likes and dislikes of the movie that everyone is talking about. Not just my likes/dislikes, but in general the arguments and opinions of what I have read, or some of what my friends and family have said or heard.

~Random female Elf! Personally, I did not like that Peter Jackson threw Tauriel in to ‘appeal to the female audience.’ I think the fact that he made the dwarves so handsome was enough for the drooling girls. That does not mean I dislike her altogether. I have heard said she was like a stereo-typical side female character; strong, good fighting, and of course falls in love.
   While other sources liked her as a character and thought she intertwined with the story very well. She was a very good warrior, and a rather fun character with a sassy sense of humor. Even though made up they had a history for her and even an age, (600 years).

 ~ Legolas Appears! At the beginning when we heard they were putting Legolas in the movie, there was a boom in the fandom. A lot of controversy about whether he should be there or not stretched long. I was one that thought he should not be put in. There was already too much drama around him for my liking.
    My friends argued with me that Legolas might have actually been there, if Mr. Tolkien had invented him beforehand. You see, Legolas did not exist until The Lord of the Rings, which was written after The Hobbit. We know from the book that he was Thranduil’s son. Since Thranduil is in the book, The Hobbit, they said naturally Legolas would be there. So logically Legolas could have been there.
    They did stretch his roll dramatically in the movie, considering he was not in the book, to the joy of his devoted girl fans.

~Tauriel + Kili = love. So that was awkward, where did that come from? The group of friends I saw the movie with was all in shock and wondering the same thing, as we watched Kili flirt and Tauriel apparently enjoying it, and then that moment when Kili is hurt and she is healing him and she starts to glow. Many of my friend’s heads were bowed and shaking with disbelief, or hiding their eyes in embarrassment. It was a big shock to us all.
   Also considering how hard it is for dwarves and elves to get along at all ever, I think the saying: that escalated quickly, applies.
   For the romantic type they found the love interest touching. Some romance needs to be in every movie right? I guess to appeal to a wider audience they decided to toss it in there.

~That was definitely CGI. In The Lord of the Rings it was usually hard to tell they had used CGI (Computer-generated imagery), and sometimes they did not, and the makers of the movie worked hard to make it look as real as they could. In The Hobbit however it was clearly visible that half of it was CGI, I could say it disappointed us nerds quite a bit. I certainly was a bit upset, until my brother brought up a good point to me. He said that The Hobbit was written for a younger audience, so it made sense that they would make the movie a bit less realistic--almost cartoon like if you would permit me to say--. Even if it does not look as real as The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, we can still enjoy the beautiful scenes and designs, and the world of Middle Earth.

~That was not in the book. I think everyone would agree that the first movie was closer to the book than the second. The producers added so much of their own creation to the second movie. Personally speaking, I did not mind the change. Of course we were already expecting and preparing ourselves for great changes –as movies always do-- so it was not really surprising. They added things with Gandalf and the White Council from the book Unfinished Tales, but the producers also added their own things, like Legolas’s importance, and Tauriel, and the fight with Smaug.
   I did not hear much complaining or gripping about the changes in the movie, as a matter of fact a lot of people liked it, thought it interesting.
   A friend of mine said while watching the movie it felt like they were using this movie as a build up for the third and last movie, as if it was going to get better for the last adventure.

     There is a lot more topics people are talking about with this movie –even about the colour of Tauriel’s hair?-- I just wrote about the most popular and most spoken of topics of this movie.
   We all have J.R.R Tolkien to thank for creating a world so many people and so many generations love, and enjoy, and can discuss over constantly.

   Now we wait for the extended edition of The Desolation of Smaug and then, and then here comes the last movie. Fans, nerds, and geeks alike are anticipating, predicting, and gathering their new costume for the next Hobbit Movie: There and Back Again. With the cliffhanger they gave us, I am on pins and needles to see the next movie, as I am sure so many people are.

Always at your service, and thanks for reading.