lonno

TL;DR version: Looked good, plot changes sucked. Score: Six Wilhelm Screams out of Ten.

*******************************************************************

PLOT SPOILERS ABOUND. IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN IT AND WANT TO, STOP READING NOW.

*******************************************************************

True to form, Peter Jackson's take on Middle Earth looked beautiful. On the whole, he got a lot right. The correct pronunciation of "Smaug" got me excited, and the plate-breaking song made me cry; it was incredible that they kept it in, given that they glossed over all the Old English saga-style poetry in LoTR. The maps taken from Tolkien's originals, the attention to detail with the runes and the different languages, all perfect as usual.

The dwarfs were somewhat overdone and somewhat underdone. If you see the dwarfs in this tale as rock star dwarfs, which really is what Thorin and his family and friends were among regular dwarfs, then I suppose they were all right. I didn't like Balin's beard, though. That's what the Lord of Moria looked like? And why were all their accents different? Scots, North England, Yorkshire... was the Dwarf Diaspora that widespread?

Neil Finn's take on Far over the Misty Mountains, "Song of the Lonely Mountain" is spot on -- moody, grim and sonorous. It's reminiscent of the version in the 1977 cartoon version of the Hobbit, but that's to be expected as they both take their atmospheric cues from the book. The name Neil Finn may not be familiar, but if you were in school in the 80s, chances were you heard him singing "Hey, now, hey now, don't dream it's over..." on the radio with his band, Crowded House.

Gollum, too, was spot on. Andy Serkis is an acting genius who is already revolutionizing entertainment through his own motion capture business. It's true that what we see of Gollum on the screen is rendered by computers; but every muscle of those haunting eyes, the snarling screwed-up nose, the creeping and capering, is sent to the computers from markers on Andy's face and body. And considering Andy Serkis in motion capture markers, tights and trainers was what Martin Freeman had to look at and emote to as Bilbo, his acting was pretty impressive too.

It was interesting to see Radagast in action, as the book merely mentions him in passing. The Wizards, or Istari, appear to be an earthbound rank of the Valar. The what? Lesser gods. Angels, if you will. Powerful masters of the elements. And, as beings closer to perfection than humans, damned forever by a single choice (Q.E.D.: Saruman). So really, bird poop on Radagast's face? For shame.

Elves: why so serious? In Tolkien, the elves led the dwarfs on their ponies across the river. On foot. Singing and teasing the dwarfs. Gracious and magnanimous hosts. None of this ridiculous racial paranoia and Hollywood macho posturing.

Giants are giant humanoids, not stone monstrosities. The book just says the dwarfs huddled under ledges and were miserable in the rain and damp while giants threw boulders at each other for fun. And then they moved on.

Azog's manhunt... um... dwarfhunt for Thorin rang so many alarms I barely noticed the Wargs were slightly better, more wolfish than hyena this time around. Barry Humphries as the Great Goblin was too good, and by that I mean he took the role from a blinking goiter-ridden morbidly obese savage who sees the Elven swords and yells "Beater and Biter!!!" To a tragic diva whose death actually had some, well, weight. Was Dame Edna really that bad? But back to the alarms. Here's a major mistake. In PJ's Middle Earth, goblins are scrawny little gits who live in caves under mountains and can't come out in the sun, while orcs are warriors on steroids who can hunt dwarfs day and night. But pick up any reference guide to Tolkien (a good one is J.E.A. Tyler's The Complete Tolkien Companion), look up "Goblins" and it'll probably say "See Orcs." Tyler's tome recounts that while Azog's orcs were indeed responsible for the murder of Thror and the desecration of his corpse, Azog himself was killed by another kinsman of Thorin's to avenge Thror... a few years before Thorin and Co. meet Bilbo.

So with Azog dead, how does that final scene really play out? The goblins chase Thorin and Co. from the mountain caves into the woods, where, without a tactical retreat available, they climb up some trees. The goblins make fun of them and build bonfires under the trees; Gandalf leaps out of the tree, intent on taking as many Goblins as he can with him into the afterlife. The eagles happen to be nearby and snatch him, the dwarfs and Bilbo up and whisk them away to safety. Deus ex machina? Tolkien liked it so much he used it again twice after that, without a moth or butterfly go-between. But guess what? These eagles, the Eagles of the North, are sentient. They have names. They can converse with people. In fact they're indebted to Gandalf for healing their leader who was shot by an orc with a poisoned arrow. So it's actually no accident that they're attracted to the commotion of an army of goblins lighting fires under trees, on one of which perches a revered friend whom they're eager to save.

But that's all sentimental rot and we really preferred the Bilbo-Thorin bromance anyway, and we want to see Thorin kill Azog in the big battle in movie 3, not Azog's son Bolg getting killed by some were-bear named Beorn.... Right?

Actually, no.

TL;DR: Looked great again, more action this time, plot changes sucked some more. More entertaining overall than the first one.

Score: Seven Wilhelm Screams out of Ten.

*******************************************************************

PLOT SPOILERS ABOUND. IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN IT AND WANT TO, STOP READING NOW.

*******************************************************************

The Good: Clint Eastwood. No, that's not it. What was it? Oh yes, another feast for the senses, everything visually spot on. Elvish mixed hand-to-hand and ranged combat was delightful if slightly belief-straining, and Orlando's snowboarding skills were actually tolerable, perhaps even... dare I say it? *cool* this time around.

Bard has been transformed from a mysterious, strong, silent type hero into an intensely likable, quietly desperate Robin Hood-type smuggler who hides the secret to killing the dragon. Luke Evans is a pleasant surprise in a sure breakout role. Lorewise, Bard becomes King of Dale. Which could indicate he inspired Aragorn's back story when Tolkien wrote him into LoTR at Bree and had no idea who he was.

The Bad: Lee Van Cleef? No... Angel Eyes? No, not him either... Something about an eye... Oh yes, the eye of Sauron, nay, *Sauron himself* shows up to hand Gandalf his arse and clap him in irons! Of course, Sauron's been behind the rise of Orc activity all along, how could he not? Uh... No.

Sigh... What to say about this version of Beorn. Meeting Beorn was supposed to be another of Gandalf's master classes in diplomacy; once the niceties of introductions are over and decorum satisfied, his house becomes a haven where Bilbo actually feels safe. Beorn, like most bears, can be grumpy if not approached with care, but is cheery enough once he warms to you. In the morning when you rise, he speaks with tears of joy in his eyes of the goblins he hunted last night. Instead we get a couple of minutes of a freaky ex-slave who's supposed to be the last of his kind and only grudgingly helps the dwarfs because he hates their common enemy.

So what content replaces that, which is nowhere in the book? The amazingly extended interview with the titular dragon and the ensuing climactic chase under the mountain. More rumblings of a coming war, Kili's romance with a freshly-invented Elf who brings him back from death's door with Athelas. Amazing how she did it -- complete with magical Elf glow -- when, glow as she might, Arwen failed with Frodo; it took Elrond to save him. Maybe Morgul shafts aren't as lethal as Morgul blades. Oh, I know! It's because Kili is Mitchell the vampire from Being Human, eerily even younger-looking now than in that show. Well, if this brush with death plucked at heartstrings, what happens at the end of movie three will just be brutal. Or not, if they blow off the book for that part, too.

More hostile encounters between Dwarfs and Elves. The book contrasts Elrond, who sees the big picture of events taking place in Middle-Earth and gives the Dwarfs a festive welcome, with insular Thranduil, who is suspicious of all intruders and imprisons the Dwarfs indefinitely for not being open with him. These movies show both Elf Lords holding Dwarfs beneath contempt and only softens that with an apocryphal love story.

The Ugly: It's okay Tuco, you can go; this'll take a while. Orcs everywhere. Azog reporting directly to Sauron, summoned by Bolg, who seems here to be another lieutenant instead of Azog's son. Again, Azog is supposed to have died years before Bilbo meets Thorin and Co. Sauron must be behind him still being around, too! And, as Azog boasts, they are legion; so... Orcs in Dol Guldur, Orcs swarming the Wood Elves, Orcs in Esgaroth -- hey, Elves in Esgaroth too! Pew! Pew! Watch out Bolg, Legolas is tunnelling you like a boss. And Stephen Ure, amazing actor, but I can pick him out from among hordes of Orcs now.

And now... Smaug, or as he appears in this movie, *Deathwing the Destroyer 2.0.* Because, since World of Warcraft liberally plagiarized Howard Shore's Fellowship of the Ring Score, Smaug can use Deathwing's signature glowing molten belly, right? Speaking of bellies, wasn't Smaug's belly supposed to be encrusted with gems and jewelry from having plunked it down on his hoard for so many years? Yes, actually. That was what made him arrow-proof to begin with. And at first blush, his belly did appear to be somewhat glittery-golden... but that was just a trick of the light. His belly is bare and pasty but smolders and glows just like Deathwing's when he takes... wait for it... *Deep Breaths.* Those of us familiar with the story might wonder, "What, in the absence of a gem corset, is the chink in Smaug's scaly armour?" In the movie, it's the space left by a scale knocked off by a "Black Arrow". And what's that? Well, it's a giant, stubby, straightened iron fishhook, fired from a Dwarf-engineered, tower-mounted ballista. Uh huh. And to think the book has him dropped, felled, yea, *slain* with a single ordinary arrow. OKAY, SO IT WAS, ACTUALLY, BLACK. But still, a regular arrow shot from a hand-held bow at ground level. Town level. Water platform thingy. Whatever.

Finally, on a darker note (uh... well, not darker than a Black Arrow actually), that scene at the beginning looked suspiciously like _The Quest of Erebor._ Which could open up a whole 'nother can of worms.

I liked Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. I found it an adequate rendering of Ms. Rowling's novel. There were minor annoyances, yes. For cinema to be effective, certain exaggerations must be employed. To Daniel, Emma, Rupert and everyone else who participated: my heartiest congratulations on a job well done! And God rest you, Richard Harris, you'll be missed.

I am not surprised that some reviewers did not understand the great to-do about Hagrid's return from Azkaban at the end of the film. The reasons for this will be made clearer in the next one.

A word of warning to those following this series: the atmosphere of darkness and foreboding grows with each installment. Sadly, this is augmented in real life by the witch hunters who are still going around saying Harry Potter is about devil worship. Poppycock. He's far too busy fighting evil to waste any time worshipping it! In fact, it is his zeal for the good fight that so often leads him into danger.

Harry's bravery, his spunk, and the loyalty between him, Hermione and Ron, will see them through some difficult times ahead; and if the first two films are any indication of those that follow, I'll be watching every minute and cheering them on.

This is as good as one might hope for in a movie adaptation of a children's series of books. While I watched it, it brought back a flood of memories from my school days, both good and bad.

I thought it was a bit like Roald Dahl (Charlie and the Chocolate Factory) in places, and C.S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia in others. Also, I can't help but laugh at the witch hunters who use labels such as "pure evil" and "witchcraft repackaged". Here, as in all timeless stories, magic is incidental. What does shine through all the pretty images and special effects is the story of a boy who wins a struggle against great odds, who resists great temptation and makes real friends who love him enough to risk their lives for him.

I have been following Anne Rice's books for the better part of a decade, and if am disappointed with this adaptation of Queen of the Damned, I cannot begin to imagine the disappointment of the real purists who have been reading since the appearance of Interview With the Vampire in 1976.

One could forgive the executive decision to combine and condense the books The Vampire Lestat and Queen of the Damned if certain key plot elements had been retained. It certainly makes for a smoother plot to shift the credit for Lestat's creation onto Marius; after all, it gives the viewing audience a much more credible motive for Lestat's seeking him out, at least more credible than an insane vampire "turning" Lestat and immediately immolating himself. But what is completely irreconcilable in such a compaction of two novels is the altering of the protagonist's basic character. Lestat, in his own words, prefers to feed on evil low life types. It is just this predilection which sets into motion the events of Memnoch the Devil. And yet we see him preying on the innocent at least twice in this film.

And what have we lost in this foul and pestilent congregation of vapours? The story of Lestat. Allusions through wolfskin rugs just don't cut t. -- Marius and the making of Armand; the mystique of "Those Who Must be Kept" and Rice's take on the true origin of vampires, a good story in itself set in ancient Egypt. -- Lestat's friend Nikki and the origin of the Theatre des Vampires; and, integral to Lestat's character, his struggle with the concept of the world as a Savage Garden.

To me, it's a terrible tragedy that movies like this make it to perhaps a much wider audience than the books they're based on. The Vampire Chronicles have established Anne Rice as a crafter of stunning prose filled with sumptuous imagery, and horrors that are not so much visual as they are emotional and spiritual. Those of us who know her characters long for more of her stories about them, and to us, this movie is a rude insult.

This is a movie that will make you see that when things look their bleakest, as in midwinter, you have to push on. The characters undergo a long journey from strange actor-folk and emerge as people who are near and dear to us at the end. They are the light at the end of the tunnel. Anyone who's been involved with a difficult stage production will identify with this movie. I loved it! "Dear Hamlet, cast thy coloured nightie off..." -D