Saturday, December 27, 2014

Movie Review The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies

Movie: The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies
Directed by: Peter Jackson
Starring: Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen, Richard Armitage


Verdict:
The Battle of the Five Armies finally brings Peter Jackson’s grand Hobbit trilogy to a close, and while there’s more than enough fighting and orc cleaving to keep action aficionados on the edge of their seats,  the rest of us are left shaking our heads as the film (almost) collapses under the weight of weak characters, awkward pacing, and its own overinflated bombast.


In-depth:
The opening lands us right where we left off in The Desolation of Smaug, with the enraged dragon-in-question torching Laketown to the ground.  Unfortunately, we’re denied Cumberbacht’s deliciously hammy performance that made the last movie such a delight to watch;  this time around Smaug’s more interested in chewing buildings than chewing the scenery, all in preparation for his swan song at the hands of Bard the Bowman.  Our would-be dragonslayer had just escaped from prison and was mounting an admirable (and convincing) Last Stand atop the bell tower against the bellowing beast with help from his courageous son, Bain.  Meanwhile, Turiel, Kili, and the remaining Lakeside dwarves struggle to stay afloat amidst falling debris and panicked inhabitants, while  back at Erebor Bilbo Baggins and Company could only look on helplessly as the city burned.   I am sad to say that these first 15 or 20 minutes of the movie, right up to when Bard pierces the dragon’s heart with the infamous black arrow, were the single best stretch of film for the entire movie.  The action, while perfunctory and predictable, was still engrossing, and I was eager to see who would be left standing, despite knowing full well how it would end.  Luke Evans had a big part to play in this, for it was his rendition of Bard - a man both noble and pragmatic, a quintessential anti-hero played with depth and understatement - that held my attention throughout the entire first act of the movie.  


It’s just too bad that the rest of the cast couldn’t quite cut the same mustard.  Turiel and Kili have a “touching” farewell at the lake’s shore after Smaug’s demise, where the dashing young dwarf gives his hilariously dimorphic mate a keepsake for him to claim later.  The whole scene was stomach churning, and not simply because the attempt at romance came off as tacky and formulaic.  I suspect that Turiel was introduced in order to bring some “gender balance” to a largely male cast, but in truth she was little more than a vestigial appendage for Kili and Legolas, initiating a ridiculous semi-love triangle and saturating every moment of her screen time with the threat of becoming a plot tumor.  Thankfully, her appearances in this film were brief and Kili-centric; the title of “Most Extraneous Movie Irritant” is reserved for another character introduced  by Jackson and his writers: Alfird, the Master of Laketown’s parasitic Yes-Man.  No doubt intended for comic relief, Alfrid’s cowardice, greed, and general nastiness moves him well beyond “love to hate” territory and lands him squarely in the realm of “seething hate.” The pain of his presence is significantly compounded by his overexposure; for the first hour or so of the movie, he arguably has more screen time than Bilbo himself.  It didn’t help that otherwise sensible folk like Bard and Gandalf entrusted him with duties he was obviously unqualified to carry out.  Alfrid seemed to serve little purpose other than to further hammer home Jackson’s rather heavy-handed treatment of The Hobbit’s light fable against avarice and greed - which, quite frankly, could have been better served through a much less annoying avenue.


The rest of the movie’s first half was thoroughly unremarkable, with the resettlement of Dale by Laketown’s survivors, the arrival of Thranduil, and the retreat of Thorin into the ruin’s of Erebor so as to sharpen his insanity rendered rushed and incidental by Jackson.  A notable exception was the rescue of Gandalf, in which Elrond, Saruman, and Galadriel all flexed their fighting muscles and faced off against Sauron and his Ringwraiths.  Jackson is a master of battle scenes if nothing else, and watching the most powerful beings of Middle-Earth duke it out while keeping the light show to a merciful minimum was a refreshing reprieve from the general monotony of the pre-Battle build-up.  Thorin’s descent into “dragon sickness” also deserves special mention, though the results are a little more mixed.  The film does a fair job at incorporating symbolism and proximity in order to show the gravity of Thorin’s sanity slippage: bedecked in robes matching his grandfather’s, he roams the halls of his ruined kingdom in a similar wild-eyed fashion, in the process wrecking himself and his relationships with the rest of his Company by account of his greed for the Arkenstone.  Thorin’s moral decay bears a rather Shakespearean countenance, which is impressive considering Peter Jackson is hardly known for his literary subtlety.  Throughout Thorin’s breakdown, Bilbo remains a convincingly conflicted character; although our Hobbit hero is purposefully out-of-focus for the final film, his scenes, especially in the company of Thorin, showcase Martin Freeman’s aplomb for both pathos and bathos.  Bilbo, who had kept the Arkenstone hidden for fear that it would hasten his friend’s unraveling, wavers between guilt over lying to Thorin, and conviction that keeping the stone from him is for his own good, and the brief interactions between the characters are truer to Tolkien’s subtle tracks against covetousness than any of Alfrid’s inane acts of bastardry.  Still, at times Thorin’s sickness can feel a little too put on, often to the point of near parody; a particularly cringe-worthy example occurred when Bilbo, after yet another failed attempt to talk some sense into him, heard him repeat Smaug’s lines of “not parting with a single coin” - complete with dragon voice to boot.  Thorin’s sickness would have perhaps been more poignant had the film drawn closer analogies with the greed of his deceased grandfather King Thror, rather than the original sin of a giant reptilian war machine.  Likewise, his quick and complete recovery in very little  time made the whole episode feel like a plot contrivance, one to be shed when no longer needed.


Of course, Thorin’s sickness was a plot device in the strictest sense, a hurdle to surmount in order form him to participate in the titular Battle of the Five Armies.  As the principal draw of the movie, it’s hard to say anything negative about the fight itself, whose highlights include Thorin’s boisterous cousin Dain Ironfoot, smashing Orcs with a warhammer while astride a pig and bellowing in gleeful bloodlust the entire time, as well as the triumphant return of Azog the Defiler.  The Pale Orc’s inclusion in the film series was met with great  resistance from fans, especially as he proved inapposite to the flow of the first film and was mostly absent for the second.  Now, during the movie’s recognized climax, he was both a competent strategist and a brutal adversary, and his various ploys and misdirections were what kept the fights from becoming too wearisome.  Still, this was a 45-minute long fight scene, when all is said and done, longer than most television programs and largely bereft of anything resembling character development.  And here, in all honesty, lies the core problem with The Battle of the Five Armies: minus the few aforementioned gems, the entire movie feels like a rushed setup for the final fight, which, clocking in at nearly an hour, rode out for entirely too long.  Despite the film’s shorter length compared to its predecessors, the lack of proper pacing made its final act seem endless.  It was as if everything rose to a crescendo far too quickly, and then carried the wave - and the audience along with it - to the point of rot.  Was the action good? Yes, admittedly; and yet, for anyone not fully committed to the repeated chopping of flesh with sword, 45 minutes is entirely too much, and it’s likely even the action connoisseurs would shift uncomfortably in their seats had the scene extended 10 or 15 minutes further.  When the inevitable character deaths eventually happened, it was hard to truly feel anything at their passing - both for the lack of any character depth, and the fact that riding the war film wave for three-quarters of an hour drains one of even the capacity to mourn.


It’s hard to call the Battle of the Five Armies a bad movie; any who came into it expecting, well, a battle, and nothing more were likely not disappointed, and after two years of Jackson's bloated offerings, good character development was probably the last thing on anyone’s mind.  Still, this bookend to the Hobbit Trilogy highlights to a greater degree than the others the problems inherent to transforming a short children’s book into an extended film series. 

Grade: C

Tuesday, December 23, 2014

New Beginnings

A greeting to all, and welcome.  The name’s SpiderG, and I’m here to commemorate the long-overdue resurrection of this blog.  You see,  I carved out this little corner of the Internet five years back as a storehouse for my writings.  Poetry, short stories, philosophical diatribes...I was hellbent on painting the world with prose and letters.

As the date on the last post painfully shows, that didn’t go over so well.

School, work, and writing for other avenues soon took up my time, and unfortunately the blog fell into disuse.  But I never really forgot about it, so after some serious thinking (and a swift but loving kick in the pants from a good friend) I’ve decided to completely restructure it in accordance to one of my favorite hobbies - critiquing mass media.

So now that my sorry tale of neglect is out of the way, here’s what you can expect:

Entertainment News & Reviews

The blog’s bread and butter.  I do everything: big budget new releases, pilots, notable episodes of hit TV series, and important documentaries, as well as indie and foreign films I think you REALLY need to see.  I’m a bit of a media omnivore, though, so don’t be surprised if the occasional video game, theater piece, or novel passes under my scrutiny.  I try to catch the movies “fresh” whenever possible, so be sure to visit my tumblr for pictures, audience interviews, and the general shakedown on life as a theater hopper.

Media Analysis

If you’ve ever been moved by a gorgeous slice of cinema, intrigued by a game’s symbolism, or even just had the good fortune to come across a “very special episode” done right, then you probably understand the need to lay your mind out onto a page and really peg down what is was that made it click.  Thus, every once in a while I’ll write an in-depth article focused on a well-done, galvanizing, or otherwise insanely popular work of art and try to tease out the root of its power.  The goal, basically, is to understand what worked (or didn’t work), why it worked, and (I hope) how to make it work better.  

So there you have it.  I’ll make more posts as the days pass, but until then, take care, and I’ll see you at the movies

Sunday, June 20, 2010

GOOOOOOL!!!!!!

The World Cup's here and in full swing, and I'm mighty proud that it's held in South Africa. I'm a big soccer fan, and even though I'm pretty busy and miss most of the live matches, I still save every match I can to watch later (God bless whoever invented DVR).
If you got any favorites, please share; as much as I'd like South Africa to win - or anyone from Africa, really - I'll settle for a more realistic choice in Mexico and the Netherlands; they're both really good teams, and both deserve at least one win. I'd like the US to get high, if only so that soccer might become more popular here.

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

Math and Beauty - Part 2: Brevity

Many many moons ago, I had the idea of writing a series of blogs documenting how I defined beauty by recourse to mathematics...and have since, apparently, forgotten all about it. I won't bore any viewers with half-hearted excuses on why I've been gone for nearly a year, but needless to say, I'm back, and I hope to continue the series with some regularity. So, with that out of the way...

Most of us know the standard definition of brevity; it means, in short, to be brief, or concise. Brevity is considered "the soul of wit", since its qualities are deemed pleasing to the ear when expressed in a short, biting apothegm. However, brevity doesn't belong to wit's domain alone; I hope to show that brevity is also the fountainhead of artistic beauty, and an important consideration in the creative process. How, you may ask? I'll try to be brief...

Now, take a look at the following:

E^i*pi+1=0

This equation - known as Euler's Identity - is regarded by mathematicians the world over as arguably the most beautiful ever produced. The reasons are manifold, but there's no doubt that it's short form and simplicity play a big part in it; accustomed as we are to the idea that mathematicians love large tracks of arcane equations, in reality they prefer short statement like the above. It's not hard to guess why; something like Euler's Identity is much easier to remember and communicate to others, which was really the point of creating the thing in the first place (well, not really, but let's roll with that for now).

You see, many people - including artists themselves, unfortunately - seem to forget that art is useless if it fails to communicate something - that "something" being all the dreams, ideals, and definitions of beauty which fog the creative mind on a daily basis. Brevity is, in essence, good, concise communication; no matter how long the novel or sonata movement, or how vast the mural, such expressions are but the end product of a vast and murky process of the creative spirit.

Hm... on reflection, this post can hardly be called "brief"; still, I hope it opens a door into thinking about all these little faucets of artistic expression and beauty. Next topic will be a bit more abstract, but don't worry - I'll try to be bri-

...Oh, never mind.

Wednesday, July 22, 2009

Math and Beauty - Part 1

A while back, I had briefly stopped at the age-old question of beauty's place in art - and, just as quickly, walked past without so much as a backward glance. However, I have now regained my bearings, and feel that I am ready to tackle this juicy question full on. So, I will make a fool-hardy attempt to construct a composite view of beauty by breaking it down and applying it to one art form in particular - mathematics.

Okay, so now you're probably wondering "Why math"?

Well, no...more likely, you're probably wondering "Holy crap! Since when is math an art!?"

Yes, dear reader, it is true, though it may not be recognized as such due to its long-time association with science - not to mention failed tests, bad report card marks, and skinny nerds in coke bottles and suspenders. However, to mathematicians, schools have been going about things the wrong way; no one who really enjoys math pursues it because it's useful - they pursue it for its own sake, because it brings beauty and pleasure to their lives. True, math has nudged its way deep into the sciences, economics, and other applied fields, but just because it can be useful in a few applications doesn't mean that's all it's good for. Take graphic design, for instance; its use is primarily practical, but beneath its polished, Type-A pedigree lies a shared lineage with the great works of Dali, Picasso, and other titans of creativity.

However, that said, math is distinct among the other arts in one crucial manner - it is, in essence, a "discovered art", as opposed to a "created art". Mathematicians will say that they are deducing art from the natural (or imaginary) world via the rules of mathematical logic. It's all very left-brained, to be sure, but theirs is an approach that suites nicely our purposes for defining beauty; since mathematicians "discover" their art, it's much easier to peg down rules for identifying beauty as it manifests, as opposed to - say - a painter, who creates and redefines art and beauty with every passing style and generation.

The above should not be taken as a formal defense of math as an art, nor as a complete explications of its methodological differences with the other creative arts - those would require far more space than I'm willing to allocate here. Still, from there we can move ahead to consider beauty's role in art since, believe it or not, mathematicians are obsessed with beauty. We won't tackle all this in one go, but rather distribute our thoughts over four posts, each centered around what I believe to be the primary components of mathematical beauty: brevity, symmetry, profundity, and truth. The question of why these four will, hopefully, be answered over the course of the discussion, starting with brevity and ending with the familiar (and tantalizing) junction of truth and beauty.

Any artists/writers/mathematicians/musicians - feel free to dive in with your own ideas on what beauty is and how it relates to art. So until next time...

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Quatrain II - "Autumn to Winter"

Do dead leaves rail when our sharp, mashing soles
Weld dust to vein, and stop earth in their holes?
What good is protest when voices are cut,
And Life's Long-shadow ensures they stay shut?
___________________________________

This little thing actually gave me more trouble than I had expected, but no matter - what do you think? The title gives a hint as to what I'm saying.

Wednesday, June 3, 2009

Quatrain

Yo. I've decided to alternate between sonnets and short-line poems; I'm doing quatrains
(four line ) for now, and maybe a couplet here and there. There's always been a strange law of inverses at work when it comes to writing; the shorter and more restricted the medium, the harder it is to make something that sounds halfway coherent, let alone pleasing. And, true to form, quatrains can be a pain since every word and punctuation needs to contribute to the total effect. I'll probably post a couplet and/or sonnet later this week, but for now, enjoy this little tid bit:


Candle Dance

But wonder! Does a burning flame
Know that its dance is one of pain?
But dance! You wrest from sunset's keep
Your joy in pain - sans silent sleep.
----------------------------------
This was actually the last four lines of a longer poem, of which this - it shames me to say - was the absolute best part. Let me know what you think!