The Lord of The Rings: War in The North - a Review

I consider myself a Tolkien fan. Not a hardcore one - I couldn't recite a line of elvish poetry, or detail the history of the Fall of Numenor, or tell you Gimli's true name. But I've read the Lord of The Rings a few times, I've read The Hobbit a whole lot more, and I've read The Silmarillion and The Children of Hurin at least twice. And, like basically every person alive on the planet, I've watched the films. So I know my way around Tolkien's universe in a casual, not authoritarian, way. I know the basic cosmogeny, a few of the gods, the origins of the elves and the dwarves, etc. And I know that there was a lot more happening in Middle-Earth while Frodo was off hiking through Mordor than what both books and films showed us.

It's an interesting concept. Just from my own reading of the LotR Appendices, Gandalf was already planning for the War of the Ring when he sent Bilbo and co. off to the Lonely Mountain, to deny Sauron a strategic alliance with Smaug when he eventually came to power. I remember that the Lonely Mountain was also the site of a huge conflict, when Sauron's armies fought Erebor - where elves, dwarves and men lived, fought and died together. And I know that, despite what the film of The Return of The King showed,  Saruman's own agents were taking over the Shire. That is an interesting concept - what was going on elsewhere, while the Fellowship was going through their own hardships? Unfortunately, it's an idea wasted in The Lord of The Rings: War of The North.

I'm going to get the rest of the game out of the way before I get to the campaign. The combat is pretty standard fare. I played the Xbox 360 version, so X to swing the weapon, Y to deliver a heavy strike, B to dodge and A to interact. Holding the right bumper is run, and the left bumper blocks. Holding the left trigger allows the player to use a ranged weapon and use ranged combos, while the right trigger allows the player to use melee combos. You can play the game as one of three characters - the Dwarf Farin, the elf Andriel, and the ranger Eradan.

No, not Eridan!

The three follow the fairly typical tropes of fantasy games - Farin is the close-range Brawler, Andriel is the mid-range Healer, and Eradan (pfft, I still chuckle when I read that name) is a long-range Archer. I played my game pretty much the whole way through as the Dwarf, especially after I unlocked the explosive crossbow bolt, which has a decent area of effect and basically removes the need to close in on the enemy. It took a while to figure out what all the buttons did, since as usual I didn't read the instruction manual, but I got there eventually. I figured out most of the game's aspects - buying stuff, maintaining equipment, side quests, etc. I had a bit of an issue with levelling up my other two team mates, since they're meant for multiplayer co-op. It would have been better for single-player if you could access the stats of all three from the menu, but it was nothing I couldn't figure out. So all in all, it was a fairly good RPG.

Graphically, it also looks pretty good. Forests look lush and green (or dark and spidery), caverns feel organic and rocky, and the snow looks so good it makes you feel cold. Trees sway in the breeze, rocks tumble, and the skybox looks gorgeous. Character models are almost all based on the film depictions, which is an excellent choice since the WETA Workshop and WETA Digital teams did excellent jobs. The few new character models all look great too - although I have no idea why the game features Wargs if it's not going to let the player fight them. And Urgost gives off a very Slifer-esque vibe.

Holy Ra! Real monsters!

The campaign itself takes place along a fairly linear level design, with occasional digressions - a hidden cave or grotto, where you can find additional barrels to smash for coinage or treasure chests to rummage through. Each character also has a way to find the secrets of a level and gain more benefits - Farin can mine for gold in caverns or smash through loose walls; Andriel can gather herbs for potions, and open enchanted doorways; and Eradan can find hidden stashes of weapons and equipment, and find hidden areas through tracking. I did think there were too few enemy types - there's the small, Wretch-like goblins, the larger Orcs which either come with swords or with crossbows, a few scarce sorcerors, and the larger Uruks who are heavy berserkers who shrug off most close-in attacks. The largest of conventional enemies are the Trolls, who are pretty much like their movie depictions. There are a few unique enemies - a giant, and the spiders of Mirkwood - but for the most part, this will be the standard armada arrayed against you. It gets repetitive, and annoying as the Uruks get more common as the game progresses, but once I gained the explosive crossbow bolt they were easier to manage - get a clump of enemies together, and you can take a whole bunch out with one hit.

Interacting with the people of the game is also pretty standard - you get a few options, either for the basic facts or to delve into the lore somewhat. There's a Hobbit in Bree who tries to get you to gamble for a game of riddles, and all of the elves and dwarves are only too eager to explain the lore surrounding their history. If you've read The Lord of The Rings and its appendices, it's nothing you won't know already. If you haven't, then its just backstory - not necessary, but nice to have if you want it.

And then we come to the campaign.

Oh boy.

Firstly, my point about other things happening in Middle-Earth was well made. I would have loved to play as a defender of Erebor - you have the character selection options of the Silvan elves of Mirkwood, the Dwarves of the Lonely Mountain, or the Men of Laketown. Hell, you have the other two wizards, Alatar and Pallando, off raising a commotion in the east, an area which has barely been explored in lore at all. But instead, this potential was wasted in a pretty basic wish fulfilment story - you take the reigns of another Fellowship, the ones who got to the party late and couldn't go with Frodo, as they go on their own quest to bring down Sauron's sidekick Agandaur. They follow him through a variety of nice Middle-Earth locations, always one step behind him, and eventually defeat him conveniently just as Frodo tosses the ring into Mount Doom. To be perfectly honest, it's boring. I could come up with a better story. In fact, I think I just did! Please, somebody, go make a Save Erebor game. Every time Farin mentioned it, I wanted to go there and fight the forces attacking it, not deal with this Agandaur douchebag! The explanation for why these three are together in the first place also leaves much to imagination - Eradan is a Ranger guarding the Shire, okay. But Farin came all the way from Erebor just to guard this little part of the world that has no contact with the outside world? And Andriel is there because...um...we need an elf?

The dialogue is also wince-worthy sometimes, as American voice actors try their best to force British accents, or don't even try. And it's not just the delivery. Much is written in a pseudo-historical ye olde englishe style that's meant to sound grand and old, but just comes across as pretentious. If you can't get the accents it was meant for, it doesn't pay to highlight it further. It gets especially painful when I hear a stranger's voice coming from a canon character's mouth - Tom Kane was a brilliant Warden Sharp, but when I hear him as Gandalf I can't help but imagine Harley Quin breaking several fourth walls and clocking him over the head with his own staff. And I lost count of the number of times I heard a line that was straight from the novels - not just like the novels' dialogue, but literally ripped right out of the pages. I can only imagine that somebody went through a copy of The Lord of The Rings with a highlighter. And the same goes for the story - yes, it's grounded in the actual lore of the series, dragons and dwarves and elves and orcs etc etc, but at a certain point I decided that it was just pandering. Wander the paths of Mirkwood! Delve under the Misty Mountains! Storm the Dark Lord _(Agandaur)'s tower! Team up with the Eagles! Meet such beloved characters as Elronds twin children, Radagast the Brown, and Halbarad! (See! We read the books too!) It makes the quest the Fellowship went on look like a walk in the park, which utterly undermines both their story and this one. These three people, Elf, Dwarf and Man, take on vast armies, save cities, and defeat one of Sauron's top lieutenants single-handed. I can only imagine how short The Fellowship of The Ring would have been if they'd actually got to the meeting on time! It reads like a fanfiction - one that knows the lore and characters, and its audience, but a fanfiction nonetheless. That isn't necessarily a bad thing - it isn't a bad story, and it's not badly done. It's just unoriginal and unimaginative, and I find that disappointing.

War in The North is a fun play through as a game, is entertaining even if only to pick apart, and it's a fun solid entry into the Tolkien mythos for the uninitiated. In that regard, it's a success. For those of us who know their Silmarils from their Seven Stones, you can play the War in the North Drinking Game - take a drink every time you hear a line copied from the books. And as you get drunk, remember these words from a wise Hobbit:

All right. We'll put it away. We'll keep it hidden, we'll never speak of it again. No one knows it's here, do they? ~ Frodo Baggins

Undiscovered Countries Are No More

I envy the globe trotters of old. Men and women who took boats up and down the Nile, Congo, and Amazon; who rode great trains of camels across the Sahara or Gobi deserts; who cut through dense rainforest in South America, Africa, Australia and South-East Asia with machetes. To them, to travel was to step into the great unknown, to forge a path where none before existed. Every land was the Undiscovered Country, every person met along the way was a new culture, and every experience was something new.
Where did that go?

When I travel, and when I think of travelling, all those connotations are gone. Today, if one wants to go to an exotic place we just pave to pay a few hundred dollars for a plane ticket and a tour package. If we want to meet strange peoples, we go to tourist centres where performers play their digiridoos, or bagpipes, or carved flutes, or dance a rain dance for a bunch of apathetic white people. Every experience sounds like something from a tawdry romance novel - "go to Fiji, go swimming with your ideal partner!" "Come to Australia, tan yourself on our beaches!" "America, Land of the Free, Home of the Brave (and DIsneyland)" "Scotland! Come for the...rain, I guess? And hunt the wild Haggis!" Hotels! Tanning salons! Photo booths! Casinos!

We've romantacised travel for so long that all we have left of it is the romance. Where did we go wrong?

Upcoming Plans

I'll be the first to admit I'm not much of a blogger, especially lately. I have so much I want to talk about, and so much to think about - I have a review of Batman Forever in the works, still at an early stage; I'm thinking of blogging my opinion as I rewatch Battlestar Galactica, mini series through to "Whoops, It Was God All Along"; I'd love to give my opinions on each season of Doctor Who, what was excellent, what wasn't, what I loved and hated, and review some of the older serials; I'm sure I'd love to write opinion pieces of books I've read and will read; not to mention the hijinks, frustrations and glories that will come with university study. I really don't know what to do first, how often to do it, or how important I want to make these. I'm going to be in my third year, with a pretty substantial work load as well - will I have the time and energy to write up any of these? I have no idea.

More importantly, I don't know if anybody cares, or if I even want anybody to care about them. I started this as something personal, a way to get thoughts, ideas, opinions off my chest, an online diary of sorts. If I provide people with entertainment or insight, then that's an unexpected but pleasant bonus.

In conclusion:

Franchises Collide, And We Get To Watch!

I just finished watching The Incredible Hulk. And I have to say, despite my expectations, it was actually pretty okay. Not that that's a bad thing - on the contrary, what I was expecting was a steaming pile of manure. I saw the first Hulk film, the Ang Lee one, the one we don't talk about in theatres, and I not like that at all. This one actually has a lot of clever moments, most of them homaging the TV series. I never saw it, but from what I hear, it was pretty popular: the eyes glowing green before he transforms, Lou Ferrigno appearing as a security guard, the hilarious appearance of the purple pants. There's also a lot more humorous banter between Banner and Betty, though I wish they'd gone with ANYONE besides Liv Tyler. The Nostalgia Chick is right - all she can do is look sad in slo-mo.

It was no Captain America or Iron Man, but it was okay. And it really makes me a little bit more excited to see what Marvel can do with the Avengers movie. Hulk, the Cap, Stark, Thor, Black Widow and Hawkeye, headed by Nick "sick and tired of these motherfucking snakes" Fury himself. From what I've gathered, the enemies will be Loki wielding the tesseract, and the Skrulls, though not necessarily a united enemy. There's also rumours of a "Leviathan", whatever that is - it's either a really cool production codename for Jormungandr, the World Serpent of Norse myth meant to face Thor at Ragnarok, or it's going to be the name of the SHIELD Helicarrier. And, you know, I'd be okay with the latter - it's a badass name, and it should belong to a badass flying battleship. There's a lot to look forward to - Rogers and Stark facing off, Hulk and a Norse god reacting to the existence of the other, the sheer badass-ness of Black Widow, and Samuel Jackson. But it also makes me wonder what else Marvel will be bringing to screens in the future - they've already started on another Iron Man movie, there are plans for Thor 2 and Captain America 2/Winter Soldier, a SHIELD movie, and either a successor to X-Men First Class or an X-Men 4. Hopefully they keep Brett Ratner away from either/both of them with a repulsor field. That seems to exhaust all the series I know Marvel for, besides the Fantastic Four, but really, I'm not holding any torch for them. Two was enough. But do you want to know who I really want to see a movie about?

 

Agent Phil Coulson.

Yes, Nick Fury's probably getting a movie, and yes it will probably be the closest America has ever come to having a 007 of their own (ignore Vinh Diesel or Ice-T, they really don't count), but making a Coulsen movie would be awesome in entirely different ways. Rather than a straight super-spy movie, you could do a parody/homage movie to the genre. Like Johnny English, if he wasn't incompetent. Like Iron Man, create a badass movie, but inject it with a lot of humour, clever references and twists, and give Coulson a personality that is simultaneously badass and hilarious. He's experienced, a little jaded by now with what he's had to deal with - an egocentric billionaire playboy, a Norse god, an angsty scientist with anger-management issues, and a blond-haired blue-eyed poster child for the American Dream who's confused and bewildered by the world around him. You could play with his jadedness, make it funny. You could also emphasise the fact that he's a grunt, a guy who gets sent to places his bosses consider "beneath" them, that he has to deal with the worst assignments while his coworkers get plump pickings - add a bit of resentment. And, of course, give him a pair of desert eagles, a black suit, and a pair of shades - because he can still be a badass. Surround him with a team that complements but doesn't upstage him, sick him on a modern equivalent of HYDRA, and watch him work. Hell, if there's a bigger movie happening around the same time, have some clever nods! Cap and Iron Man beating Skrull butt? We cut to Coulson and co. slinking through the sewers after their prey, complaining about the noise above. Hulk smashing up downtown Manhattan? Coulson complains about New York traffic. Nick Fury at a United Nations summit that gets attacked by HYDRA? Coulson mutters something under his breath about REMFs.

PHIL COULSON - AGENT OF SHIELD!

It will win all of the awards! All of them!!!!!!!!

I also have to wonder, just why have Marvel had so much theatrical success? Let's count off all the well known Marvel/DC superhero movies, shall we?

Marvel:

X-Men
X-2
X-3: The Last Stand
X-Men: First Class
Hulk
The Incredible Hulk
Spider Man
Spider Man 2
Spider Man 3
Fantastic Four
Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
Iron Man
Iron Man 2
Thor
Captain America

DC:
Superman
Superman II
Superman III
Superman IV
Superman Returns
Batman
Batman Returns
Batman Forever
Batman and Robin
Batman Begins
The Dark Knight
Green Lantern
Watchmen (I guess???)

I'm not going to count things like Ghost Rider or Catwoman, because when you think of Marvel or DC, you don't think of them. Yeah, the companies own them, but they aren't symbolic. They were also really bad. I'm sure there are some excellent movies out there that Marvel and DC have brought us that I don't list, but the fact that I don't even remember them is telling enough. We see that the Marvel list runs the gammut of quality, from the awful X-3: The Last Stand, to the excellent First Class, Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, etc. Likewise, there are the first two Superman movies, the Tim Burton Batman movies, Singer's Superman Returns, Watchmen, and Nolan's Batman movies, all excellent, alongside films like Superman IV and Green Lantern. Both companies have had hits and misses, and yet it seems like Marvel are winning the film war - after all, they're getting an Avengers out, and looking to be awesome, while DC's plans for a Justice League movie have repeatedly fallen flat. there's also an apparent lack of diversity - let's face it, at the moment all DC have are Batman and Superman, the World's Finest, and though they've produced some excellent and iconic movies, all anyone pays attention to these days is Batman. Or at least, that's all I care about on their side of the aisle. Marvel has so many quality franchises it literally doesn't know what to do with them, and I am excited for a lot of them. I know that DC have The Dark Knight Rises in post-production, and are starting work on Man of Steel. But really, that's all I've heard of coming down DC's pipeline.

I'm not a film critic. I really don't know why DC doesn't seem to be having quite the same success as Marvel with as many franchises. Is it a question of quality over quantity? It is a matter of luck? Is it the notion that Marvel heroes, by appealing to a sense of pathos and marginalisation in society, manages to strike a chord that DC's iconic but uncomplicated (except for Batman) do not? I don't know.

I've talked about what I'd like and am excited about from Marvel, but for DC, the major franchises have all had attempts to produce movies that fell through. Wonder Woman. Flash. Fucking Aquaman! If Aquaman isn't a character demanding an intense and intelligent film treatment, I don't know who is. Pretty much the whole Justice League roster. I guess they could do another Green Lantern movie, and I think they are planning one, and all I can say is I hope it's better than the first.

Funny story. I went and rented a DVD yesterday. In fact, that DVD was Incredible Hulk. And in the shop, I saw that they had placed Green Lantern next to Captain America. Yeah, guess which one was doing better?

I know one thing for sure. I have two movie ticket vouchers. The first will earn me the viewing of the Avengers. The second will take by to The Dark Knight Rises. Totally no conflict of interest. :P

She is Vengeance. She is the Night.

"Barbara Gordon leads a completely normal life, except for one factor. She's teen crimefighting sensation Batgirl! She lives with her fun dad Commisioner Gordon and dorky brother James and has fun with her two best friends Robin and The Goddamn Batman. She goes through average teen problems including rapists, bank robbers, and the occasional wicked supervillain trying to reveal your secret."

I just read this rumour that Miley Cyrus auditioned for the part of Batgirl in The Dark Knight Rises.

There is a very good reason why The Dark Knight is my favourite movie. Every single character is perfect - Alfred is fantastic, Gordon is fantastic, Bruce/Batman is great (though he could do with a  strepsil) and the Joker is obviously the second most brilliant portrayal after Mark Hammill. Part of that is due to the actors - Michael Cane? Gary Oldman? Christian Bale? Heath "Why So Serious" Ledger? EVERYONE pulls it off spectacularly. And another part of that is due to the characters themselves - the conception and, in some specific cases, reinvention of them, makes them all fantastic. The Dark Knight Rises is the movie I most look forward to, with the Avengers taking second place - so DC and Marvel have both topped my must-see lists.

And the reason for my rage is not the idea of including Batgirl. Far from it, in fact - I think it makes more sense to start the Bat Family with Batgirl than it does to bring Robin into the frame. Let me explain.

I have some major problems with the idea of Robin. As Frank Miller has demonstrated all too clearly, adopting a kid whose parents were murdered in front of him and then dressing him up in bright colours and teaching him to fight crime is child abuse. There's no metaphor or simile or analogue or comparison there - it is child abuse! I can therefore more than understand why Dick Grayson left Batman to make a life of his own elsewhere. I also can't understand why Batman, rebounding from dumping/being dumped by Robin, picks a kid trying to jack the fucking batmobile as his replacement. Why? I mean, okay, the kid has issues and could use a father figure in his life, but The Goddamn Batman is not that figure! His eventual death at the hands of the Joker is almost a given! It does lead to Batman's reevaluation of the entire concept of a Robin (no duh!), but he lets Tim Drake take up the mantle. Yes, Drake is a far better Robin - he's a lot smarter, and doesn't come with the whole "MY PARENTS ARE DEEEAAAAAAD!" schtick. Until suddenly he does. He's more interesting - he doesn't start out with special abilities, and he doesn't do it because his parents were killed, like Grayson. And he certainly doesn't do it just because Batman decided to get over his last ex-Robin. He decides himself he wants to do it. His parents die when he's already Robin. When he leaves, he creates his own identity, Red Robin, like Nightwing did. And then we get the most recent Robin, Damian Wayne, son of The Goddamn Batman and the daughter of a centuries-old terrorist/cult leader with an apocalyptic goal for the world, who beats Tim Drake and becomes Robin because he's jealous that the adopted son gets more attention than the "real" son. If that doesn't come loaded with family issues, then my name is Rainbow Dash and I hate flying. When Batman lets Grayson assume the mantle of Batman, Dick chooses Damian to be Robin - and in a twist, it's not because Drake wasn't good enough, it was because he was too good, and Damian needed a mentor figure so he didn't go out and murder the population of Blackgate. Damian is a trained assassin, and he's killed - he's also a resentful brat. When Bruce returned, Damian stayed - and now the circle is complete, and Father and Son patrol Gotham as Batman and Robin. There have only been two female Robins - the non-canon Carrie Kelly, and Stephanie Brown who promptly got killed off.

This is a psychologists field day, and it should make Gordon put his hands in his face and cry. As any cop will tell you, involving kids and violence in any way is never a good idea. You can argue to me that he trusted them to do the job, that they were mature for their age, or super-smart, or skilled enough, but Jason Todd is the number one example of why Robin is a terrible idea - he's tortured and murdered by the Joker to get to Batman.

On the other hand, Batgirl is the antithesis of this idea. And not just because she is a woman.

Bruce Wayne doesn't adopt her, or become a mentor at all, at least initially. He tries to discourage her, because he doubts she's up to it. It doesn't stop him kitting out ten year olds in hot pants and a domino mask, but hey, no gender double standard here or anything. She does what she does on her own, with only indirect help from Batman and Robin. And she does it well. She's old enough that she can make the choice herself - and she does make the choice. It's not forced on her. She's the daughter of the Police Commissioner for Gotham, James Gordon. Obviously she must have some desire to see justice done to the people who elude the law. And she's good at it - despite all expectations, I've realised that I really like the idea of Batgirl.

Even when she's shot by the Joker and becomes Oracle, she still escapes the distaste I hold for the idea of Robin. She's in a wheelchair. Okay. So she gives up fighting crime with her fists. What does she do instead? The creates entire teams of superheroes to do the job, creates a vast intelligence network that would give the NSA a collective heart attack, and becomes an information broker. When Gotham's destroyed by an earthquake, her building is left standing - not to mention packed with enough food to feed a battalion, which she barters for information and goods. And she still keeps up a relationship with Dick, now Nightwing.

Wheelchair or not, this is a badass character!

Helena Bertinelli briefly takes over, but find's she just doesn't fit the role. Because, of course, Batman tells her she isn't good enough. And he kind of has a point - she fails to stop HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE attacking and taking over MANY CITY BLOCKS. Obviously one person should be able to take this in their stride. Poor Huntress. She's succeeded by the equally badass Cassandra Cain. I've only read her No Man's Land appearances, but I really liked her. She's a precursor of a sort to Damian Wayne - raised as a weapon, and now operating as a superhero. Except she's less of a brat. Also, she doesn't speak. She already seems like a better character already! But despite her handicap, she still gets plenty of characterisation - the fact that she really does love the man who trained her to kill, and he loves her, the horror she feels at what she was raised to do, and her rejection of it. Damian still doesn't see why he can't just outright murder the motherfuckers. Cassandra knows that killing is the easy option, and makes you no better than the criminals you fight.

I haven't read any of Stephanie Brown's tenure as Batgirl, but I'm disappointed they made Cassandra hand in her cowl. A mute Batgirl who rises above her disability and is probably one of the best fighters in the world? How is that not awesome? But I guess she's up to it - she's the daughter of villain Cluemaster who took him down as Spoiler to protect her mum, and she was Robin for a while. Until she died. Don't worry, she got better. And it's an even worse copout when the writers decide to simply retcon Oracle's disability as a temporary thing - NO! No, no, no! This is a character who's agonised over the fact that she can never walk or run again, never swing from rooftop to gargoyle, who has some pathos! WEAK!

The fact that I care enough about the concept of Batgirl to feel angry at this surprised me. I am a heterosexual male, and proud of the fact. Shouldn't I sympathise with one of the Robins? Or Batman? Hell, even Alfred? Aren't characters like Batgirl just there to show comic book fans that there isn't just one gender? Yes, I love the character of Batman - a man who embraces to the darkness in men's hearts to fight it. He's aided by his faithful butler/adoptive father Alfred, who stoically watches his foster son descend into this dark place, but tries to support him. But then he basically fields child soldiers - kind of a dick move, Batman. But the concept of Batgirl arises by itself, and, yes, it started as the need to introduce a token female equivalent - but it's developed a life of it's own.

And now my feeling on introducing Batgirl into the Nolanverse - I would be okay with it!

There's this image that adds fuel to the fire of speculation. There's already plenty of rumours out there - that the Riddler will still appear. That Talia al Ghul will team up with Bane. That Dick Grayson will appear. That Bane kills Batman, who passes the torch to Batgirl. Of all the rumours that could turn out to be true at this point, I would pick the appearance of Batgirl as the one I want - Talia is pretty much a given at this point. I think they'd probably save someone like the Riddler for the next movie, since a character with some public presence would better counter the absence of Nolan. I'd love to see someone like Freeze done well, to reverse the damage Joel Schumacher's film did to him, but it's probably not going to happen any time soon, or in a better way than Batman: The Animated Series did the idea. And Robin...see above. But Batgirl, I can see happening, and in a way similar to her comics history - that she starts out on her own, Batman tries to get her out of his niche, and earns his reluctant acceptance. It could be done truly great. Robin is a more troublesome character to introduce, but Batgirl can work!

And here is why I raged when I read the rumour of Cyrus' audition: I really don't like her.

I don't mean that I hate Miley Cyrus with a rage that burns with the heat of a thousand suns. I'm sure she's an okay person. What I hate is her public persona as a celebrity - I do not like modern pop, and she symbolises it for me. She even has her own show - Hannah Montana, where she basically plays herself as a celebrity. Again, I don't like pop music in general, and I'm sure she's got fans who feel she deserves the attention. But the very idea of casting a pop star Disney actress as BATGIRL just galls me. Forget pulling Oracle back into action, this would just be a cop-out of unimaginable proportions! Treat the character with dignity, please! What we don't need:

It's been done before - casting a celebrity with a big name to draw attention. When was the last time it produced a good film? And, for that matter, The Dark Knight Rises doesn't need the attention - before it was announced it's prologue would be attacked to the new Mission Impossible, the latter film's ticket sales were 4% of the total. Afterward? 15%.

Also: Party in the USA. Need I say more?

A Moment of Clarity

I've been keeping a secret from my friends and family. A deep, dark secret. It involves rainbows and tea parties and fabulous dresses. I've been worried about how anyone might react, so I've stayed silent, not raising anything related to the subject. Until today.

Today, my brother comes out, a confused look on his face, and says, "I cannot believe how good My Little Pony is."

I'm not a HUGE fan of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic - I don't know every background pony, I don't know the terms and phrases bronies use, and I am sometimes creeped out by the new meaning of the word "clop". I know and like the Mane-Six, and I love a couple of the background ponies - especially the fan creation of Doctor Whooves, a time-travelling pony incarnation of the Doctor, who seems to have taken Derpy Hooves as his companion. Really, it was Doctor Whooves that got me into ponies in the first place. I don't know that much about ponies, but I know what I like. I like it's sense of humour, I like that it manages to get a moral across without preaching down to its audience, and I like the characterisation of the characters on it.

This is a show for little girls. I am a grown man. And there are much older, much nerdier fans out there. What is wrong with the world?

In fact, this was my initial reaction to hearing about the "brony" phenomenon. Grown men fawning over a kids show? The last example I heard of was Lazy Town, for reasons that would make Chris Hansen sit up and pay attention. So, understandably, I was more than hesitant in reading up on them. It was only when I heard about just what a meme generator they were becoming that I became curious, but even then I still dismissed it as a fad - understandably so, given past history with the internet and its obsessions. But eventually, I discovered a character called Doctor Whooves - appalled, I clicked the fanfiction, fully expecting to be reduced to an indecipherable rage by poor writing, mixing my favourite series with a kids show, and the juxtaposition of the Last of the Time Lords with ponies. Friggin' ponies!

Needless to say, I was surprised. The writer did a great job - I won't say it was the best fanfiction I've ever read, because it wasn't. But it was good, very good, and it got across a sense of both of the shows in the most surprising way possible - it felt simultaneously like an episode of Who, and one of the better ones, while also feeling like My Little Pony. The interactions of the Mane-Six were surprisingly intricate, and everyone felt unique and complex enough.

Fascinated, I looked up some more Whooves stories. I liked what I saw. And, finally, innoculated against it, I delved into the world of ponies.

I won't admit to understanding the community, because any community will be varied, with both its shining upper crust and the black depths. We have that in Halo, and Who, and every other community worth its salt - people there to discuss the show, suggest improvements and ideas, and realise that there are people out there who share the same interests; and the people who just want to rip it to shreds in an angry hate-fuelled flow. And then there are the people between those two spectrums - the people who like the show but don't know much and want to find out more; the trolls who find it funny; the fans who also find it funny; the people just there to talk; the dictators who try to control the conversation, and the people who erode that authority, for good or ill. This is as any community should be - variety is the spice of life. The spice IS life. And it must flow. The fact that one has cropped up around what started out as a childrens cartoon is what has surprised me the most, but after watching some episodes, I can see why.

Firstly, there's the sense of humour that the developers inject into it. In my first episode (don't know title or number), the first visual was of Pinky Pie leaping across the screen in an obvious and hilarious homage to Peppy le Pew, the classic Looney Tunes character, as she chased Rainbow Dash. The fact that someone had the idea of homaging Looney Tunes was a stroke of brilliance, and it was what finally convinced me that this was no mere fad. I watched a couple more episodes, and really liked the characters - I dare you to watch this without laughing. The quality of the writing is far and above what I've seen of modern kids TV - maybe being a child of the 90s, the most awesome time to be a kid, has coloured that vision, but it seems like it's all been downhill - I was a fan of the original Thomas the Tank Engine, and the modern incarnation just feels alien and wrong in all kinds of ways. What happened to Ringo? Who are all these new characters? Why do they have actual voices? And what, oh why, did they abandon models for 3d animation? And there are other shows that have gone the same way - dumbing themselves down because uninformed parents complained it was violent or not educational enough or encouraged blah blah blah. Transformers went from an epic tale of good vs evil, of the heroic Autobots vs the evil Decepticons, with the Earth as their battleground. Briefly, it GOT BETTER with Beast Wars, but then the Japanese got their hands on it, and then MICHAEL BAY got his hands on it. Explosions: The Movie. Bluh.

But FIM manages to be educational, hilarious, and complex, all at the same time. And I like that.

There's also the main cast - the aforementioned pun of the Mane Six. Apple Jack, a "southern" apple farmer; Pinky Pie, a manic force of chaos whose exultations of "Okey Dokie Loki" make me wonder if she's related to the Norse trickster god; Rainbow Dash, the tomboy obsessed with speed; Fluttershy, the shy animal lover; Rarity, the fashionista; and Twilight Sparkle, the nerd who serves as the series' protagonist. Every character is developed and differentiated enough from each other that the cast never feels too big, or wasted. Fans have their favourites - I don't understand the love for Rarity myself, but eh, whatever floats your boat (Oh god that sounds like a euphemism). As for me, well...

 Heh, I guess I just have a thing for nerdy girls...

And there has been a reason why I kept this, if not a secret, then not exactly at the forefront. Because there is a stigma attached to being a fan of a "girls show". And I have to wonder why that is? Plenty of women can be fans of "male" shows, yet we're not allowed to return the favour? I have a horrible feeling that it is a knee-jerk reaction to anything feminine, the automatic assumption that anything designed for girls must automatically be inferior to products meant for males. In modern society, girls seem to have a fascination with childhood, and bear it proudly, wearing bright colours, kids-show characters on their clothing, etc. But boys are supposed to "rise above" this. With the acceptance of gender equality, I also have to wonder if this is just one of many signs that the boundaries between accepted male and female  gender roles is blurring. We've been seeing the signs of a one-way transfer for years, with the empowerment of women in a world formerly dominated by men. Is the transfer starting to reverse? We already have the popular androgynous look, and males have suddenly started taking a keener interest in maintaining their bodies and getting rid of all that lovely facial hair that we spent millions of years perfecting. Now ponies?

I prefer to see this as a sign that people, no matter what gender, know what they like when they see it.

School's Out.

Besides the fact that I'm on study "break" before exams, and currently have no lectures (but DO have a lot of problems such as what papers to take, which hall of residence to apply for, how I'll afford stuff, etc.) the title is in reference to an excellent movie I just saw recently. Well, I say recently - I mean not ten minutes ago. X-Men: First Class. And when I say it is excellent, I mean it is epic, breathtaking, awe-inspiring, and other adverbs with highly positive connotations. I think, just possibly, it's the best film I've seen all year.


That's not saying much, I'll admit. The number of films I've seen this year in theatres can be counted on one hand, with enough left over to pick up a teacup. I watched "Thor", which I liked. It was a little slow, and the love interest was so shoehorned into the story that it felt a little weak at the end when Thor starts pining over her, but it worked. This is a universe that I can imagine, and that was the movie's biggest task - an introduction to a world of Aesir and Jotunn and Yigdrassil and Einherjar, the staples of Norse mythology, as real, flesh-and-blood, breathing characters. It plays fast and loose with some aspects - Odin's a terrible father, but that's an improvement outright villain of some tales; the Bifrost is a magic portal now, rather than a rainbow (or even a double rainbow); and Thor seems to see Sif as more of a friend than the wife she was in myth. It's okay. I think it sets up a nice triangle for Thor 2 - does he choose the normal girl who adores the hell out of this weird guy who's "cut", or does he choose the Asgardian shieldmaiden who knows exactly who and what he is, and can reign him in a little. And Loki? For a "summer blockbuster", the definition of which I imagine to have a picture of Michael Bay standing in front of the Eiffel Tower exploding, "Thor" does brilliant things with Loki. He's defending his brash and arrogant brother. Now he's setting him up! Now he's letting the Giants kill Odin! Now he's turning on the Giants to become King of Asgard! Now he's KILLING the Giants, and fighting his brother! You don't get a character that has so many irons in the fire (he has all of the plans, all of them! ::::D) in most "blockbusters". It's a disappointment that Kenneth Branagh isn't directing Thor 2 - I hope whoever is does as good a job or better.

Natalie Portman, why are you on the poster? It's not like you were a main...oh. Bugger.

I also watched "Rise of the Planet of the Apes". Honestly, they could have just cut out three syllables and left it as "Rise of the Apes." And that, too, was a brilliant movie. At first glance, it looks like a pretty generic sci-fi movie, what I like to think of as a Big Dumb Blockbuster. Gorillas charging police on horseback, Chimpanzees using fenceposts as spears, and Orangutans sitting at the back, looking smug like they always do. But there is subtlety there. Almost all of the characters are pretty stock. Will, the man who cares for and raises Caesar is the Naive Scientist holding the Idiot Ball who to save the world from Alzheimers, and accidentally kills humanity. Nice Job Breaking It, Hero. His dad suffers from Flowers for Algernon Syndrome, and illustrates the Naive Science Guy's motivation. His boss is a Corrupt Corporate Executive more interested in profit than safety. The ape handlers in what amounts to Ape Prison are typical members of the Henchman Race who get their comeuppance. And the girl who becomes the Naive Scientist's girlfriend is a typical Love Interest. So, yes, the humans become the sideshow in this attraction - but we're here for the main event. The Apes. And boy, they are one hell of a show!

Caesar is a chimpanzee born intelligent because his mother was pregnant when she was injected with a virus that improves her intelligence. Because the scientists are too stupid to check her cage and see she's given birth, she gets angry, goes on a rampage, and is killed in front of executives who were about to greenlight the project. Needless to say, Will feels he's a little to blame for this, and decides that when the rest of the Apes are terminated that he can't bring himself to kill the baby chimp, and decides to keep it. We see Caesar grow up, with a human-like childhood, swinging through the house and having the whole of the attic to himself. But he's not allowed to set foot outside of the house. Eventually, Will and his new girlfriend take him to the Californian redwoods *cough*New Zealand Kauri *cough* where he has a ball of a time, but begins to question whether all he is to them is a pet. He's told no, but the question crops up. Others, understandably, treat him as just an animal. When he rushes to his adoptive grandfather's defence, he injures a man, and is sent to a "sanctuary", what amounts to Ape Prison. We see Caesar at first enthusiastic to be among others of his kind, but he realises that they aren't his kind at all - he's not human, but he's no longer just a chimp either - he's something new. And he despairs. His abuse at the hands of the "wardens", the sanctuary owner's sons, doesn't help matters. Eventually, he hatches a plan, deciding to change the status quo - he rejects Will's attempt to free him, and then escapes on his own, stealing canisters of a new formula, and returns and uses them on the other apes in the sanctuary, mostly chimps but also an Orangutan and a Gorilla. He befriends the Gorilla, and uses him as an enforced to beat the old tribe leader into submission and take over - and thus we begin the Slave Uprising.

It sounds a little silly calling apes slaves - and yet that's what they are here. And it's entirely plausible. If we discovered that whales could calculate pi to the fourteenth digit and compose sonnets, we'd be shocked and appalled that Scandinavian and Japanese sailors are harpooning them for unethical "research", and selling the "leftovers" to restaurants. If we discovered dogs could dream of a democratic government, we'd declare war on China and the Koreas. But we know that Apes are intelligent, that when taught sign language they can understand complex concepts, and yet the bushmeat industry in Africa goes largely ignored, even though species of Gorilla are on the verge of extinction. We just don't care. Perhaps it's because they're too close to ourselves? If we granted apes "sentient" status, would we see them as competitors to this planet? And that's the idea behind this movie.

Long story short, Caesar becomes Spartacus, and leads his newly intelligent Ape Army to break out of prison, liberating their less intelligent brethren from the zoos and laboratories of San Francisco, and illuminating them. They march across the Golden Gate bridge, attacking cops on horseback, and the original Gorilla bringing down a helicopter. Implausible, yes. Badass? HELL YES. They break through the blockade, and make it to the forest, where they hope to set up a new Ape Society, while stupid humanity is dying off due to the same virus that gave the Apes their intelligence. Hoisted by our own petard, indeed. In a movie about Apes, the humans seem like cardboard cutouts, and that's because they need to be. The real Humanity of the movie is invested in the Apes. These are the characters we like, we care for, we root for. Their ending is a good one for the real heroes of the story - the impending obliteration of the Apes' oppressors, and a chance to begin anew.

I come not to praise Caesar, but to bury him.

Which brings me into the us-and-them theme of X-Men: First Class.

Like Rise of the Apes (I refuse to use the full name), First Class features a new "race" discovering themselves, defined by their relationship to humanity. If you've seen any of the X-Men movies before this one, you know the story - Good Mutants vs Bad Mutants, with humanity wavering between acceptance and intolerance. The intolerance here is a lot more pronounced - even while working for the CIA, CIA employees still mock them. They discover that a scientist already working there has been hiding his mutation - "you didn't ask, so I didn't tell." Raven, the future Mystique, even says "Mutant and Proud." Also, she grows up with Xavier while they're kids as a sort of adopted sister/love interest figure, hidden from his mum by his telepathy and later, when they're both grown up and living together in his huge mansion, her own shapeshifting powers. Hiding in plain sight. The gay allegory is right out and in the open, pardon the metaphor. And we see that "regular" humans are willing to annihilate the fledgling mutants to save the status quo. But we also see a somewhat sympathetic side to the debate - the mutants prove that they are genuinely disastrous - Eric Lensherr goes on regular killing sprees, and the Hellfire Club bring the world to the point of nuclear armageddon, stopped only by the newly-formed X-Men. We also see what motivates Magneto, clearer than ever - he survived one Holocaust, and has no intention of enduring another one, in the process becoming the very thing he hates most - a racial supremacist fanatic. We also see the evolution, pardon the second metaphor, of Charles Xavier - from a cocky rich kid to a more serious, determined, and altruistic teacher who takes the young mutants he finds under his wing. I love the new lineup - Havoc, Banshee, Mystique and Beast. I know, Kelsey Grammer, X3, etc, but we can retcon that away - this is a far better Beast story. The only disappointment is that Xavier and Lensherr end the film parting ways - theirs is meant to be a long relationship soured by differing philosophies. Theirs is more than a short but powerful bromance. They're meant to be warped versions of each other - both genuises, both devoted to helping mutant kind, Magneto taking the easier militant path to impose acceptance through force, and Xavier taking the harder path of forcing humanity to accept them for who they are, not who the are not. He says he helped build Cerebro. We see the two interviewing Jean Grey. At the end, he takes over the Hellfire Club, breaks Emma Frost out of prison, and assumed the mantle of Magneto - a little early, I think. Don't get me wrong, it does it very well. It's just the event itself.

There's also Mystique, if all that cerebral stuff doesn't appeal to you. A LOT of Mystique.

I really wish I'd seen it in cinemas. Not in 3D though - I watched Thor in 3D, but I didn't find it really enhanced anything. It was just there in the background. It was nice, but not worth the higher ticket price.

You know what? Maybe I've found this blog's purpose - reviewing films and DVDs I've seen or own? I know nobody's reading this, yet, but I like to think that you'll be entertained. And who knows? It may mutate into other things along the way?

That joke was absolutely intentional. It was also very bad.