It’s a great time to be a sci-fi fan. It seems to be the only genre that still produces smart, creative movies on a semi-regular basis–and they just keep on getting better. This year’s model is Arrival.

Image result for arrival movie

It starts by introducing us to Louise, the linguistics professor who will be the movie’s protagonist. But before we get to know her language skills, she’s shown as a mother, welcoming her brand new daughter to the world. In about five minutes, we see the daughter play in the backyard with her mom, struggle with school, grow into a rebellious teenager, get diagnosed with a rare disease, and die in a hospital bed, leaving Louise alone and grieving. This will all become incredibly important later.

But the story proper kicks off when 12 strange extraterrestrial objects land in 12 different countries around planet Earth. The world’s scientists, military leaders, and politicians are naturally very eager to find out why the aliens inside have come (and whether they’ve got any death rays), but there’s a problem: the alien creatures, dubbed “heptapods” because of their seven octopus-like limbs, don’t speak anything resembling any of our languages. As fear of the unearthly visitors spreads, Louise is recruited, along with physicist Ian, to figure out how to communicate with the heptapods who’ve landed in America before the government assumes the worst and starts shooting. But she soon finds that learning the alien language comes with…unexpected side effects.

“What’s that? I feel like we’re talking in circles here.”

I feel like the issue of language doesn’t come up often enough in alien movies. Most of the time, humans are too busy either blasting the aliens, smooching them or getting melted by them to really struggle with the quite realistic problems of deciphering a non-terrestrial language. If aliens ever did land on Earth, I expect we’d have to spend a few months learning how to say “hello” before we could decide whether or not to be friends. Always assuming neither the aliens nor humans subscribed to the “shoot first, ask questions later” mentality. Well, if you’ve always wanted a movie that meets the communication problem head-on, in a scientific manner, it has arrived. (Heh.) The movie also explores the various ways humans would respond to a first contact—from curiosity to outright worship to panic and fear. And of course there are parallels to the current rise in xenophobia in certain countries, complete with the obligatory jab at Fox News.

But despite its relevance to current events, this is, at bottom, entirely Louise’s story. I’ve always thought of Amy Adams as a good actress who gets stuck with a lot of bad roles, but this is one that really allows her to shine (Jeremy Renner is also in his element as the smart, sarcastic Ian). Her excitement and awe as a scientist confronted with the ultimate challenge is both believable and contagious. But as she begins to understand the two heptapods she’s talking to (dubbed “Abbott and Costello” due to their real names being unpronounceable) and their purpose in coming to Earth, her task becomes a lot more personal than she expected, resulting in a surprisingly emotional climax.

“Man, these aliens are so much more talkative and interesting than the last one I met.”

There’s a pretty huge twist near the end of this movie, and like most self-respecting sci-fi twists, it’s to do with time. I won’t say any more, except that it’s pulled off quite well and adds a whole new dimension to the story. And it left me with a lot to think about, including the numerous plot-related questions it left unresolved.

Arrival doesn’t have as much action or CGI as some of the bigger sci-fi blockbusters, but it’s still quite visually impressive. The scene where Louise and Ian first enter the alien ship and discover that gravity works a little differently inside is pretty jaw-dropping. The ship’s weird appearance and the unearthly noises its passengers make, combined with the eerie minimalist soundtrack, really drive home just how alien these visitors are. Which just makes it even more effective when the characters—and the audience—finally start to understand them. A bit.

But again, the visuals aren’t the star of this show. It’s a quiet, introspective, and ultimately quite idealistic movie with a message: that humans can accomplish great things by putting aside our differences and working together. And that it’s worthwhile to do so even when it involves pain. Oh, and also that you can totally breathe an alien atmosphere without any long-term health issues.

Maybe don’t take that last one to heart.

I have some quibbles with Arrival, as you can see, but overall I’d recommend it to anyone who enjoys smart sci-fi. It’s a slow burn that pays off nicely in the end.

Grade: A


Monthly Movie Rant: The end is nigh

I am an American, due to circumstances beyond my control. So, for reasons that will probably be clear to anyone who’s glanced at the news recently, I’ve had a rather trying week. Anyway, since I didn’t post a Monthly Movie Rant for October, and since the real world appears to be headed towards an apocalypse of one kind or another, I thought this might be a good time to take a look at apocalypses in film.

Image result for apocalypse movies
Perhaps the Mayans were just a few years off, after all…

The end of the world has been a popular subject in movies–and all media, really–for a long time. It works its way into all sorts of genres: zombie movies, disaster movies, religious horror movies, post-apocalyptic punk car racing movies…there have even been romantic comedies set during or after the apocalypse. Not all of them are good, but they usually make decent money. Which is really friggin’ weird, if you think about it. Why are we, as a species, so entertained by imagining our own extinction?

Essays, dissertations–nay, full textbooks–have been written in an attempt to answer that question. And I’m not going to say that any one answer is more valid than another. But I know why I, personally, like end-of-the-world movies.

First, it’s because they’re so darn pretty. This only applies to good post-apocalyptic movies, of course. Some of them look really boring and washed-out. But that’s just poor cinematography. Picturing a world without humans–a world after humans–gives the judicious filmmaker a ton of great aesthetic options that a normal movie doesn’t have. There’s something starkly beautiful about an empty, overgrown city, or a barren desert, that you don’t get in your typical present-day movie. It’s the same attraction that drives people to travel hundreds of miles to look at ruins.

Then there are the outfits. Whether out of tradition or necessity, post-apocalyptic characters always seem to wear the coolest fashions. Which makes them both fun to watch and fun to cosplay.

Image result for mad max fury road charlize theron costume
So shiny. So chrome.

But there’s a deeper reason, too. As crazy as it sounds, I think a lot of end-of-the-world scenarios are wish-fulfilment fantasies. Bear with me.

Real life in the modern world is very complicated. We’ve got societal pressures coming at us from all sides. We’ve got to make money, pay bills, get educated, look good, get the right number of followers on social media, build a family, take care of the family, travel, vote, and on and on. It can get overwhelming. But if you take away the infrastructure of society and all its little “luxuries,” like the Internet and money, life becomes very simple. Most protagonists in apocalypse movies have only one real goal: survival. It’s a simple goal–easy to wrap one’s head around. And for those of us who have never actually had to fight for survival in the real world, the simplicity of it can sound weirdly attractive. Especially if it involves katanas.

Image result for michonne

But the wishful thinking goes beyond that. In the present, there are a lot more teeming, inhabited cities on Earth than overgrown, abandoned ones. And every single person in those teeming cities wants to believe they’re somehow special and unique. But in a world full of people, where everyone has a platform to voice their thoughts and opinions (thanks to the Internet), how can one person stand out in the crowd? (They can make cat videos, of course. But even those start to all look the same after a while.) In most post-apocalyptic movies, there are at most a couple million people scattered all over the globe, instead of the billions that pack the surface today. Our hero usually trudges through miles of abandoned farmland and cities before finding a settlement of a few dozen survivors. And when your society consists of a few dozen survivors, everyone is special. Everyone’s important. And, for me, that’s where the wish fulfilment really kicks in.

Take, for example, Will Smith in I Am Legend. His backstory is that he’s a scientist, one of many who were working on a cure for cancer before it went horribly wrong. By the time the movie starts, he’s the last man on Earth (or in New York City, at any rate), and now he’s working on a cure for crazed vampirism. Which makes him…wait for it…legendary. Because he’s the only hope for the human race, by default. However lonely and depressing his life was, who didn’t want to be Robert Neville while watching that movie? (Yes, I know, everyone wants to be Will Smith no matter what. But the point still stands.)

Image result for i am legend
I mean, he owns New York City, sans traffic. What more do you want?


When I imagine an end-of-the-world scenario, I am, of course, imagining one where I survive the apocalypse. And the idea of being able to start over, create a new identity in a world where nothing matters–not the circumstances of my birth, not my online following, not my education or job skills–except my ability to survive, is rather appealing.

Of course, in any remotely realistic apocalypse, I would die quickly. I have more flab than muscle, and I don’t know how to build a fire without a lighter. But that’s why we have movies, isn’t it? To escape from reality. And, occasionally, to remind us exactly why we find reality so escape-worthy.

Image result for the matrix
“Why didn’t I take the blue pill?”

Anywho, that’s how my diseased brain responds to end-of-the-world movies. Perhaps I’m alone. But I doubt it. Because in real, present life, I’m not special, and I’m certainly not the last blogger on Earth (thank Heaven).

So what are your thoughts? Why do you like apocalypse movies? (I’m assuming you do.) And what are some of your favourites?

Doctor Strange

Apologies for disappearing for the last few weeks. My life is a bit chaotic right now. But not as chaotic as this Marvel movie I’m about to review!

Image result for doctor strange

Stephen Strange is a brilliant neurosurgeon with a pile of money,  a library of awards, and an ego the size of Texas. All that starts to change after he gets into a horrific car accident (texting while driving is BAD, kids!) that mangles his hands so badly he can’t even shave, let alone perform surgery. Desperate to try anything that could give him his old life back, he goes to Nepal to visit a mystical organisation called the Kamar-Taj, whose adherents are rumoured to have amazing healing abilities. Strange quickly finds out they do a heck of a lot more than heal injuries. Under the guidance of their leader, The Ancient One, he learns how to use magic to enter other dimensions, conjure powerful weapons, and do various other cool things, all of which he’ll soon need to use. Turns out the Kamar-Taj is at war with a rogue sorcerer who wants to unleash a malicious cosmic entity on the world, and Doctor Strange is getting swept into the conflict whether he likes it or not.

On the surface, this is way weirder than your average superhero movie, even considering some of the lesser-known heroes Marvel has brought to the screen recently. It’s got cities that fold themselves into kaleidoscopes, a dimension made entirely of hands, a sentient floating cape, and Benedict Cumberbatch trying to sound American. But despite the trippy visuals and out-of-the-box concept, it’s still a Marvel movie, which means there are certain rules it must follow. It’s got to have product placement (because even sorcerers need their iPads!), it’s got to have a Stan Lee cameo (no matter how jarring and out-of-place it feels), and it’s got to have characters who constantly make funny little quips at each other, even in serious life-or-death situations. And, sadly, it’s gotta have a bland, generic villain whose motives don’t make much sense.

Image result for doctor strange kaecilius
He also has a serious dry skin problem.

Then there are the more meta problems with this movie–particularly the fact that, even though about half of it takes place in Asia, there’s only one Asian character with any importance to the plot. And it’s not The Ancient One. Although I imagine it’s very hard to adapt a comic book from racist times in a way that doesn’t offend anyone, the people complaining about whitewashing in this movie do have something of a point.

But darn it, none of that is enough to keep me from loving Doctor Strange. It’s just too much fun. Did I mention there’s a scene where a city folds itself into a kaleidoscope? Well, there are also people fighting in that kaleidoscope and weaponising the shifting landscape against each other. It’s like Inception multiplied by 11. I usually avoid 3D when going to the movies, but I made an exception for this one, and did not regret it.

Image result for doctor strange mirror dimension
Who needs drugs when you’ve got this?

Apart from the dodgy accent, Benedict Cumberbatch is perfectly cast as a superhero who fights with his mind as much as his fists. All the actors do a good job–yay for Chiwetel Ejiofor and his swordfighting!–but Cumberbatch is the one who really drives the movie. And man, can he pull off that cape and goatee combo.

As for the story itself–okay, so it’s a pretty typical origin story without a lot of big surprises. But it continues and expands upon a pleasing trend I’ve noticed in Marvel origin stories–the importance of humility in a hero’s journey. Tony Stark started out with all the resources he needed to be a hero, but he had to get knocked down a peg, via missile, before becoming Iron Man. Thor went through the same thing–only more dramatically, because he’s Thor. Steve Rogers already was a humble, selfless guy, which is the whole reason he was picked to become Captain America.

In Doctor Strange, the theme of humility is front and center from beginning to end. Strange, being a super smart scientist, starts out believing he knows everything there is to know about how the world works. Then The Ancient One literally punches that arrogance out of him in a mind-bending, dimension-hopping scene that forces him to recognise that reality is a lot bigger than he thought. But it still takes him most of the movie to truly let go of his pride and put others ahead of himself. And that ends up being exactly what he needs to save the day. (By the way, I won’t reveal just how he saves the day in the end, but it is arguably the coolest and cleverest way a Marvel hero has ever defeated a villain.)

Image result for doctor strange
Of course, Sherlock looks cool and clever no matter what he’s doing.

In a time when much of our culture is about encouraging self-promotion and self-centredness,  it’s nice to see a big blockbuster where a hero has to learn that “it’s not about [him].” Let’s just hope that, unlike Iron Man, Doctor Strange remembers his lesson in the next movie.

If I were of a mind to over-analyse,  this movie also lends itself to a few symbolic interpretations. After all, the cosmic being the bad guys are trying to release is basically the Devil, and the scene where the good doctor is first introduced to magic could almost be seen as a jab at atheism. But…again, it’s a Marvel movie. Reading too much into a superhero story can lead to the dark side, as Batman vs. Superman showed us.

Anyhow, Doctor Strange is an excellent film that, in my opinion, beats Civil War for the title of Best 2016 Superhero Movie, even with all its faults. And it’s the rare 3D movie that is actually worth the price of 3D. Just be warned–the effects may cause eye watering and/or headaches. Watch responsibly.

Image result for doctor strange astral projection
Ask your doctor if astral projection is right for you.


Grade: A

Luke Cage

Another show has been spawned from the marriage of Netflix and Marvel. Let the geeks rejoice!

Image result for luke cage

Those who are up-to-date on the growing family of heroes who will one day make up the Defenders will recognize the title character from his role as kinda-sorta-love-interest on Jessica Jones. After all the unfortunate things that went down on that show, he has moved back to his old neighborhood in Harlem and is laying low, working in a barbershop by day and a nightclub by…well, night. But he quickly learns that it’s hard to lie low when you have superpowers, an urge to help others, and a bunch of gangsters terrorising your hometown. It takes some prodding–and some especially evil actions by said gangsters–but Luke gradually comes to embrace his unwanted super strength and become the hero Harlem needs.

I can’t talk about this show without comparing it to Daredevil and Jessica Jones. As someone who is in love with the former and was disappointed by the latter, I rank Luke Cage somewhere between them.

Let’s start by looking on the bright side. This show has two big advantages over both its predecessors. One is the music. A good chunk of the action takes place in and around a nightclub, which gives the writers an excuse to bring in lots of great jazz, soul and hip-hop performances. DD and JJ don’t have super memorable soundtracks apart from their theme songs, but here the soundtrack is one of the best parts of the whole show.

Secondly, this show has SO MUCH CLAIRE TEMPLE. I have loved Claire from the moment she arrived in Daredevil, but she never got enough screen time on that show, and she only showed up for one episode of Jessica Jones. Here she finally gets the spotlight she deserves, as she joins Luke on his quest to clean up the city and embraces her own destiny as a superhero medic. The only down side is that she’s also presented as a love interest here, and as a die-hard Clairedevil shipper, I can’t condone that. Luke’s a nice guy and all, but Claire belongs with Matt Murdock. Why must you keep knocking holes in my ships, writers??

Image result for luke cage claire temple
Her superpower is talking sense into guys with superpowers. 



The show introduces lots of fun new characters as well. My favourites were Misty Knight, a super-smart detective who helps Luke uncover the injustice in his town, and Shades, a smug yet effective villain who I loved to hate.

Speaking of villains, though, they’re not one of this show’s greatest strengths. Instead of one Big Bad, like DD and JJ faced in their first seasons, Luke has a whole posse of them, with varying degrees of effectiveness. Cottonmouth, the first crime boss introduced on the show, indulges in his evil laugh a few too many times, but is otherwise a convincing threat with nicely complicated motives. His cousin/accomplice, Mariah Dillard, is pretty much your basic corrupt politician, and she gets increasingly annoying as the season goes on. The show’s other major crime boss, Diamondback, is just…utterly ridiculous. What with the random Bible verses and pop culture references he spouts at every turn, his stupid outfits, and his weird backstory with Luke that pops up out of nowhere, I couldn’t take him very seriously.

Image result for luke cage diamondback netflix
Dude. What are you doing. Stop.

The biggest problem I had with this show, though, was the pacing. I think this first season would have been better if it were a couple episodes shorter, or if each episode was cut down to 30 minutes. The story is a lot simpler and more straightforward than JJ’s or (especially) DD’s, so it doesn’t quite fill out the 13-hour run time. As a result, everything moves veeerrryyyy slooowwwlly. Especially by superhero standards. There are relatively few action scenes and lots of boring speeches and conversations that seem only to serve as filler. And I think it’s these filler conversations that give rise to the second biggest problem with this show.

Let me preface this criticism by saying I applaud Luke Cage’s writers for being willing to take on some difficult issues surrounding race in America. And, you know, just for making a superhero show with an almost entirely non-white cast in the first place. I think this might be the first time that’s been done, and I sincerely hope it won’t be the last. With the current U.S. political climate being what it is, the arrival of a black street-level superhero feels incredibly timely.

Image result for luke cage netflix
[rap music plays]
The thing is…I could have figured all that out on my own. But this show insists on spelling out for me, repeatedly, in every episode, just how awesomely symbolic it is to have a bulletproof black man in a hoodie fighting crime. There are so many speeches to that effect (one even comes in song form!) that it starts to feel like major overkill by the end of the season. And it’s a shame, because this is one superhero show that actually has a lot of important things to say. I just think it would be more effective if it tried to say them with a  bit of subtlety.

I don’t want to end on a negative note, because I did enjoy a lot of things about Luke Cage. So let’s talk about Luke himself. Unlike DD and JJ (I’m really liking those nicknames, can you tell?), he doesn’t have a lot of emotional and ethical baggage to carry around. Sure, he’s a little angsty about his powers, which is kind of understandable since he got them by way of an evil science experiment, but for the most part he’s a nice guy who genuinely wants to help his neighbors out. For that reason, this is easily the most light-hearted of the Defenders shows so far, even though it comes with its fair share of violence and gore. When Luke does get around to fighting crime (which doesn’t happen nearly often enough), it’s a lot of fun to watch. If he didn’t have those moments of self-doubt that seem to be built into every superhero’s contract these days, I almost think he could be Marvel’s version of the Flash–an upbeat, optimistic good guy to act as a foil to all the dark anti-heroes. It’ll be interesting to see how he works with Daredevil, that’s for sure.

Overall, Luke Cage is a good introduction to a likable character. It doesn’t come close to reaching the standard set by Daredevil, but at least it’s more fun than the despair-fest that was Jessica Jones. And I have hopes that Luke may still rise to his full potential in future instalments. I’m also hoping for even more Claire, because she is seriously the best.

Image result for luke cage netflix claire temple
Isn’t it her turn to get her own show?


As everyone with a Netflix account should know by now, this is not the kind of Marvel show you watch with kids. There’s quite a bit of violence and swearing (including copious use of the n-word), and a couple NSFW scenes at the beginning. But for any adults who are interested in following the Defenders to their inevitable team-up, it’s a must-see.

Grade: B

Saving Private Ryan

So, yeah. I finally watched Saving Private Ryan.

Image result for saving private ryan

I can only watch about one war movie a year. I like them for their historical content, but they depress me. As they should–I mean, war is depressing. If a war movie doesn’t leave you thinking, “Man, war sucks,” then it hasn’t really done its job.

Saving Private Ryan does its job well. For anybody out there who doesn’t know the story (c’mon, there must a few), it’s about a squad of American soldiers in World War II, led by Tom Hanks, who make it through the invasion of Normandy only to be tasked with a dangerous mission to find one private who’s gone missing behind enemy lines. Ryan’s three brothers have all been killed in battle, and for PR reasons, the army wants to make sure at least one member of his family makes it home alive–even if a few more men have to die in the process.

A big part of what makes this movie so famous is the opening sequence, which shows D-Day in all its bloody, awful glory. As far as my knowledge goes, it’s quite historically accurate for Hollywood, but more importantly, it’s filmed so that it feels real. Some of the shots are taken from the protagonist’s point of view, and all of them have a gritty, news footage-style look that makes the viewers feel like we’re right there on Omaha Beach with the soldiers (and their severed limbs). Shaky cam and slow motion are usually my biggest pet peeves in action scenes, but this movie uses both to devastating effect. It’s truly a masterpiece of filmmaking. So…thanks for burning those images into my brain, Spielberg.

Image result for saving private ryan
“Gentlemen, this is gonna suck.”

But that scene isn’t even really an important part of the story. It’s just there to get the plot going. Afterwards, we’re introduced to a gang of battle-hardened misfits (and one very un-battle-hardened misfit) who have to deal with the ridiculousness of their mission: to risk their lives searching through Nazi-infested territory just so one guy can go home early. Naturally, there’s a lot of resentment. But as their search goes on, some of the soldiers start to view the mission as redemptive, a way to make something good–even a small thing–out of their horrible war experiences.

I think it’s okay to include spoilers in this review, since the movie’s been around a long time, and it’s famous enough that even if you haven’t seen it, you probably know how it ends. Having said that, if you don’t know how this movie ends and would like it to be a surprise, you might want to stop reading…

Image result for nathan fillionsaving private ryan
I leave you with…Surprise Nathan Fillion! In a brown coat, no less!

Yes, it’s very sad that most of Tom Hanks’ crew dies at the end, although I’ve almost come to expect that sort of thing in war movies. But the person I felt most sorry for at the end was Private Ryan himself. It’s one thing to watch a bunch of good men give their lives for you (while the slightly more cowardly one gets to live), but then Captain Miller has to top it off by telling Ryan to “earn this.” I can’t imagine living with that kind of guilt trip hanging over me. How could anyone ever “earn” a sacrifice like that? It’s clear at the end of the movie that Ryan doesn’t feel he has–even though his large, loving and respectful family seems to speak well of his character. Even at the end of his life, he’s still wondering if he’s a good enough man to justify his survival. Poor guy.

But in a way, the ending was sort of fitting, because by then I was starting to see this movie as a sort of allegory for World War II as a whole. Private Ryan is us–the American people (and, by extension, any other countries that would have been Nazi-fied if the Allies hadn’t won, but this movie’s focus is on the U.S.). Thousands upon thousands of soldiers died to secure our freedom, and what have we done with it in the decades since? Have we “earned it”? Have we made the world a better place?

Well, we’re nearing the end of a horrible, horrible election year, so right now the easy answer seems to be, “Nope!” But on a deeper level, that question kind of misses the point. There is no way to “earn” someone else’s sacrifice. That’s the whole point of a sacrifice–it’s voluntary, it’s undeserved, and it’s not fair. Life and freedom, however we received them, are gifts. Not debts to be repaid, but opportunities to pass on a little more light to the world. Private Ryan may not have cured cancer or invented a better light bulb, but by the glimpse we see of him at the end, it looks like he made a few people happy. And that’s not nothing.

Image result for saving private ryan
Plus he goes on to become Jason Bourne, so there’s that.

Anywho, I find Saving Private Ryan far less depressing if I discount Miller’s last words. Even with all the bad that’s gone on in the world since the ’40s, and continues to go on, there are good people out there who might not be around today if it weren’t for guys like this movie’s soldier crew. If they could see that, I hope they’d think their mission was at least somewhat worthwhile.

To find out more about those real-life heroes, I’d highly recommend another Spielberg-influenced, documentary-style WWII project: HBO’s Band of Brothers series. It’s a lot like this movie, only with less fiction. I also highly recommend Saving Private Ryan, obviously–to those with strong stomachs and an interest in history, anyway.  I think I chose my annual war movie wisely. But there is another year coming up in just a couple months, and I seem to be running out of Spielberg flicks. Any suggestions for my next war movie?

Grade: A

Monthly Movie Rant: A letter to J.R.R. Tolkien

Dear Professor Tolkien,

First of all, you are amazing and brilliant and I love you. I just feel I should preface my comments with that.

Image result for jrr tolkien
Pictured: genius.

Anyhow, I’m writing to let you know that since you’ve been gone, a man named Peter Jackson has made some live-action movies based on your Lord of the Rings. I know that, although you willingly sold the film rights to your book not long after publication (who wouldn’t want some extra money after decades of hard work?), the first script you saw, for a cartoon adaptation, was…less than satisfactory. I’m happy to say that the Lord of the Rings trilogy of my time is much better, and is in fact one of the most popular movie franchises ever. Whether the author would approve of it is another matter.

Based on what I know of you from your writings, your biography, your letters and your friends’ writings about you, I think you would probably like many things about Peter Jackson’s movie trilogy.  The look of everything, for example. There are no “fairy castles” like the ones you disliked in that (as far as I know, never produced) cartoon script. The fortresses of Men are properly medieval, at least aesthetically, while every Elven city is appropriately ethereal, while seeming very much to belong to Middle Earth. The special effects bring your battles, monsters and mountain landscapes to life in ways you could never have imagined in the 1950s era of film technology. They’re amazing even to the people of my generation. All your names of people and places are kept intact, your languages are spoken correctly and frequently (though probably not as frequently as you would like) and the music is as majestic as your story deserves.

Image result for the battle of the pelennor fields
I’ll tell you one thing: you couldn’t put 6,000 horsemen on a movie screen in the ’50s.

But I’m afraid you would not like some of the changes the movies made to your story. They’re not as drastic as the ones in the cartoon version, but I still fear they might have made you hate the movies as much as your son Christopher does, were you alive to see them. For example, “The Scouring of the Shire,” your favourite chapter and the true climax of the book, is removed entirely. So is Tom Bombadil (although personally, given Hollywood’s habit of ruining subtlety and symbolism, I think that’s probably for the best.) Aragorn and Arwen’s romance is brought into the main story, but the movie’s version of Arwen is just a pale (literally and figuratively) imitation of her ancestor, Luthien. The battles are drawn out and added to, while quieter moments of character development are shortened.

And some of the characters are very different from how you wrote them. Frodo’s feats of bravery are downplayed while his corruption by the Ring is exaggerated (and his bulging blue eyes don’t help). Aragorn doesn’t want his throne at first and only claims his destiny because Arwen’s life supposedly depends on it, a weak and unnecessary addition to his character. Worst of all, Faramir, the powerful character who surprised you in the middle of the book and, out of all the cast, reminded you most of yourself, is not the wise and noble foil to Boromir that you wrote him to be. Instead, he’s a more passive version of Boromir who tries to claim the Ring for Gondor as soon as he finds out about it, a move that seems to exist only to extend the second movie’s run-time.

Image result for faramir
AND he makes this face most of the time.

Christopher dislikes the movies, like I said, and since you refer to him as a true kindred spirit in your letters, I suppose I can assume you wouldn’t like them either. But consider this, Mr. Tolkien: thousands of people around the world might never have heard of The Lord of the Rings if the movies hadn’t been made. Nowadays, books don’t get as much publicity as movies do, period. And, sadly, people don’t read them as much as they used to. Most people I know say that your books (yes, even The Hobbit) are “too long” to read. But for some reason, they’re happy to sit through more than nine hours of extended movie trilogy. So, thanks to Peter Jackson, many people have heard at least a version of your story who might never have picked up your book.

And, when all is said and done, I think the movies stick pretty close to the spirit of your work, if not the letter. Almost everyone who worked on it knows and loves your books. Some of them even seem to share your love of trees. You may remember Christopher Lee? Well, he ended up playing Saruman. He read The Lord of the Rings once a year from the time it was published, and he fulfilled a lifelong dream by being in the movie. So many of the themes that were most dear to you are still present in the movies, in a faint way. Death, immortality and the preservation of memory still loom large whenever we take a break from the battle scenes. Even though “The Scouring of the Shire” was omitted, the movies are still very much about the ennobling of the small and ordinary. And personally, considering the way movies have gone since your time, I think it’s important that your “eucatastrophe” ending, in which Frodo fails but the Ring is still destroyed in spite of every character’s intentions, is left intact.

Image result for the one ring in mount doom
Braving the horrors of Mordor is one thing; giving up an addiction is another. There’s a reason they called this quest “a fool’s hope.”

Here in my time, we have lots of stories about heroism but not many about grace. Heroes who go on quests generally defeat the villain and return home triumphant. We don’t have too many quest stories where the hero is truly brave and noble, and truly gives the quest his all, and still fails–only to be saved by something beyond his power or understanding. It’s difficult to convincingly end a story that way, but you did it. And I cannot thank you enough. Because to me, the “happy catastrophe,” which no one could predict because it comes from outside of human effort, is the only kind of happy ending that rings true to reality.

But I’m glad, for your sake, that you are not alive to see what Peter Jackson did to The Hobbit later on. There is no “eu” in that catastrophe.

Your Devoted Admirer,
The Resident Wizard

P.S. Tell Bilbo and Frodo “Happy Birthday” from me.

Image result for hobbit day cake
Happy Hobbit Day!

Batman vs. Superman and The Dark Knight Returns

Happy Batman day, folks!

I’ve decided to celebrate this, the 77th anniversary of my favourite hero’s first appearance in print, by giving you two movie reviews for the price of one! And after this, I promise I’ll calm down with the Batman posts.

As it happens, both of the Batman movies I saw most recently draw inspiration from the same comic, Frank Miller’s “The Dark Knight Returns,” which…I have not read. But I think it’s fairly obvious which one is more faithful to it.

The Dark Knight Returns, Parts 1 and 2

Image result for the dark knight returns

This two-part animated movie starts out with Bruce Wayne in his 50s, having been retired from crimefighting for several years. When a violent gang called the Mutants threatens to take over Gotham, he decides it’s time to put on the cowl again. He even picks up a new Robin and puts the Batmobile back into action. But while his return ends up inspiring the people of Gotham to fight back against crime (again), it also inspires a few old enemies to get back into it.

There are many things I like about this movie, a few things I don’t like, and some things that are just plain odd. (Like, what’s the deal with Batman dressing up like an old lady at the beginning of Part 2? Not to mention the entire existence of “Bruno”…I mean, just…what was that?) I enjoyed the first part quite a bit more than the second part, but I won’t deny that the latter did have a pretty epic finale. The soundtrack is amazing, Peter Weller does a great job voicing Batman, and the fight scenes are on par with the very best live-action superhero movies I’ve seen. The movie also does a pretty good job of making an older Batman seem convincing (he’s a lot less agile than he used to be, he has to rely on his tech a little more, etc.) while still allowing him to be his usual intimidating, unstoppable self. No small feat. Oh, and I rather like the girl Robin.

Image result for the dark knight returns
Especially compared to every other female in this movie…

One thing I didn’t like was that the plot requires pretty much everyone not wearing a costume to do very, very stupid things. The mayor allows himself to be alone in a cell with a huge, crazy gang leader who has already threatened to kill him. A psychiatrist and an entire talk show studio decide it’s a good idea to invite the Joker to appear on live television (because when has that ever gone wrong before?). Then there’s the whole subplot of the U.S. government using Superman as a weapon in a Cold War-like conflict…realistic on the government’s part, perhaps, but somewhat dumb and out-of-character for Supes.

Like many a superhero tale, this movie spends quite a bit of time discussing whether Gotham’s better off with or without its costumed vigilante. Is he the only one who can stop the colourful psychos that constantly terrorise the streets, or is he the only reason the colourful psychos exist in the first place? Although there’s some ambiguity around the issue, in the end, the movie seems to decide that the world needs Batman–someone not under the authority of the law or the government, but who still refuses to cross certain lines–in order to keep people safe. Of course, if the authorities in charge of upholding the law didn’t act brain-dead most of the time, one wonders if that point would still hold water. But to Batman’s credit, he doesn’t see himself as Gotham’s only hope–he works to teach other people to fight crime the non-lethal way, and to carry on the Bat-legacy after he’s gone.

Image result for the dark knight returns horse
Can’t stop the signal.

Anyway, that fight with the Mutant leader at the end of Part 1? That was awesome. Also, Batman totally beats Superman in a fight in this movie. A good fight, not the kind that will be described in my next review. Sorry, but that’s not a spoiler. That’s how every fight between those two is destined to end.

Image result for the dark knight returns horse
Batman on a horse. Your argument is invalid.

Grade: A-

Speaking of Batman fighting Superman…

Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice

Image result for batman vs superman

It’s probably only fair to say that I did not set myself up to like this movie. I didn’t see it in theatres, because I was still bitter about having wasted money on Man of Steel. Instead, I read every review I could find online, including the spoiler-y ones, rented it when it came out on DVD, and watched it on my laptop at midnight, alcohol in hand, right after marathoning the Dark Knight trilogy. If I’d watched it under better circumstances, maybe I would have liked it a little better…but I kinda doubt it.

The plot is so convoluted it almost defies description. In a nutshell, Batman wants to murder Superman for causing tons of civilian deaths in Man of Steel and for being too powerful in general. Lex Luthor wants to murder him for more or less the same reasons, plus something about daddy issues. So he decides the best way to do this is to pit the two superheroes against each other, via an overly complicated plan that takes more than an hour to come to fruition.

Image result for batman vs superman
Laser his brain! Laser his brain, now! 

What can I say about this movie that hasn’t already been said by every critic ever? No, Luthor’s motives did not make any sense. Yes, the “Martha” scene (WHY DID YOU SAY THAT NAME?!) was unintentionally hilarious. No, none of this was Ben Affleck’s fault. I could talk about how spectacularly everyone at the Daily Planet sucks at their job, or how Jesse Eisenberg’s performance destroys everything I ever loved about Lex Luthor as a villain, or how utterly confusing and pointless Batman’s visions/dreams/whatever are. But I think my main problems with this movie can be boiled down to two.

First of all…*deep, cleansing breath*…BATMAN DOES NOT KILL PEOPLE!  Yes, I know previous live-action takes on him have bumped up against the line a few times, but this movie has him intentionally mow down an army of low-level criminals in one of his first action scenes, stab dudes in the chest, and turn to murder as his first solution in dealing with Superman (instead of, I dunno, talking to him, or even doing detective work to find out what his intentions are towards humanity). This take on Batman would kind of make sense if it was the third or fourth movie in the franchise, if his reputation as a principled hero had already been established, and if he was given a compelling motive for temporarily abandoning his principles. (In fact, BvS does attempt to explain it a little by establishing, in one easy-to-miss shot, that this story takes place after the death of Jason Todd. Not that any casual fans will get that.) But this is Batman’s first appearance in the Snyder-verse. Anyone who somehow came into this movie without any prior knowledge of Batman would get their first impression of him as a callous killer. And that makes me very sad inside.

Image result for sadfleck
Even sadder than Sadfleck.

The worst thing about BvS, though, is that it takes itself so darn seriously. There’s hardly a moment of (intentional) humour in the entire three-hour runtime, while there are plenty of speeches about God and man, the Problem of Evil, what it means to be a hero, etc. I thought Man of Steel went a little bit overboard with the Superman-is-Jesus symbolism, but this movie takes it waaaayyy further. Which is vaguely offensive, considering this Superman’s main personality traits are sulking, self-doubt, and monumental stupidity. Not exactly the things Jesus is known for. But all of the grand philosophical talk amounts to nothing anyway. For one thing, I was unable to understand or care about any of the people doing the talking, and for another, the movie tends to answer complex questions like, “What does a being with god-like power truly owe to mankind?” with, “Time to punch a cave troll!” A lot of dialogue is there to make the characters sound “deep,” but it doesn’t really mean anything or have anything to do with the plot.

One day, I have hope that the DC cinematic universe will finally get its act together and make a good movie. It’s possible. Ben Affleck does a fine job as Batman in this movie, on the rare occasions when his script makes sense, and Wonder Woman is pretty cool during her five minutes of screen time. And a lot of it looks really nice. Money and special effects technology is clearly not the issue when it comes to DC. They just need to start spending a little more of that money on screenwriters and directors who actually know how to tell a story. And won’t make Batman kill people.

Image result for batman vs superman
I would like to point out, though, that Batman still beat Superman in this movie.

In the meantime, I prefer to celebrate Batman Day by watching something with “Dark Knight” in its title.

Grade: D