We all know those people.
Those people that have bought the all the Lord of the Rings movies from the moment they were to be bought. Not once, but at least twice as the 12 disc special extended edition (with at least 2 hours of extra footage) just HAD to be bought.
The same people that watched all the Twilight movies at least twice in the cinema (waste of money I'd say), that went to the re-screening on the Titanic movie, that have the complete collection of Harry Potter (both movie and books)...
One of those people is a very good friend of mine and is living in the room next to me.
And he bought the "Hunger Games" DVD...
I didn't want to download it and borrowed it from them. I tried downloading it, but there are more fakes and bad cams than there is a good version of it. Easier to borrow it from a friend than to trust Mister Anon to provide something you don't really want all that much.
So I watched it and I must say I'm not impressed. Even reading the book (a few months ago) was kinda m'eh. Actually the book spoiled it for me. If I'd have read the book after the movie the general impression would've been better.
The reason for this is the writing style. It was too easy to read because the book didn't do anything else but telling the story, telling stuff that's important to the story.
Isn't that what a book's supposed to do?
Not really. A book should also create an atmosphere in another way than by the stuff that happens to the main character.
An example: Currently I'm reading "The Dragon Keeper" of the "Rain Wild Chronicles" by Robin Hobb. Between every chapter there's an intermission where you can read the correspondence between 2 pigeon keepers which gives a broader view on the ruined city after the war that ended in one of the previous trilogies. Concerns about released slaves mixing with the uptown Traderfamilies, concerns about inexplicable illnesses that appear and whatnot.
Next to all that you have dragons that have no idea what happened to them, humans that slowly turn into reptile people, a lost civilization no-one really cares about except for the awesome stuff they left behind, pirates, knights in the north, some angry asshole-nation a bit south of that, and a giant world filled with confusion and mishaps...
Really, I'm not all that into "the Hunger Games", obviously. It could've been so much more if it weren't so easy and accessible (the main reason why it caught on and got itself a movie...)
There are so many more books that could be translated to the Big Screen with ease. The Night Angel trilogy for example (more on that in a later post) or the Left Hand of God. Those are interesting books and may result in some nice series or movies...
But yeah, I've written quite a lot, maybe it's time to call it a day and have you guys read it...
-ThOR
Showing posts with label movies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movies. Show all posts
06 October 2012
21 April 2012
Games
Jah, sure, it couldn't take long before even I'd react on the latest news event.
Wondering what I'm talking about?
Google "Breivik video games" and read the most recent entries.
I just opened the first one, read through it and i the end it adds 5 examples how some murderers (including the most recent, Breivik himself) were inspired by movies/books/games to commit some murders.
Note, there are only 5 listed, 5 cases between 1974 and now.
Sure, these aren't the only 5, but it's still not terribly much compared to the total amount of murders committed...
But now they are all blaming it on video games, saying Breivik used them to prepare for the final "attack" he planned. All those articles against video games, but none noting Breivik himself never said such a thing. He for example played WoW for more than 16 hours a day over a year to "take a sabbatical" (his words), to not be preoccupied planning all that stuff, to do something he'd love to do before he'd die (as he planned his actions to be suicidal).
Not many sources mention his extensive planning BEFORE playing these games, his many hours in a shooting range, perfecting his aim, his claims to be a member of a "anti-Jihad crusader-organization" and his legal/illegal acquirement of his weapons. Nope, it's just video games.
No, I don't want to defend his cause in any way. What he did is horrible and he should be trialed for what he did. But don't blame it on video games. As realistic some first-person-shooters claim to be, they still don't prepare you in any way on the real deal. You can't revive after you die in real life, you can't heal instantly from a bullet in your arm by picking up some health-pack, you can't run around with a rifle, waving it around like it's made of plastic and then kill someone (accurately) seconds after rolling into position by simply playing video games.
You seriously CAN'T.
I remember my first time I fired a bullet.
Yes, it was in an ex-soviet state.
And yes, it was a AK-47 or Kalashnikov.
And no, after all those hours playing Counter Strike 1.6 (I can't link too much, I never exactly know who my audience is...) I still wasn't prepared on anything that thing did.
First off, that thing's HEAVY. You try holding a 5 kg (11 lb) bag of potatoes with arms stretched and imagine shooting stuff with it... take a break before your arms fall off.
The kickback is also a surprise. It's those same 5 kg stomping you in the shoulder every time you pull that trigger. After the first bullet I already had a bruise and I was deaf for the next few minutes. Because that small detail game designers tend to leave out: The bang is so loud you can only understand your own words after 5 minutes. To understand others it takes even longer...
No movie, no game ever actually tells you this, it's all soldiers that storm into battle, screaming to their brothers in arms who understand them from 2 meters away, waving their guns without real fatigue...
As far as I remember I only saw one movie that kinda did show this correctly. And it was some strange French movie we had to watch with school for some reason...
So no, nothing in popular media can prepare anyone on a real battle, only hard training can.
But as long as no one talks about it they all tend to forget about this and blame only video games.
As a final thing I would like to link a more gamer friendly article.
Sure, it starts with the usual panic-inducing headline, with some more panic blah that should accompany these articles, but halfway the writer quotes gamers (more than 30 year-old-gamers) that express their concerns on the current situation.
-ThOR
PS: I found a funny quote in the last linked article:
Now think about it.
How could a virtual "holographic aiming device" possibly help someone aiming a real gun?
PPS: Oh, hey, turns out there's more articles up now. Go read this analysis posted yesterday (currently second result when googling...). I started writing this yesterday, there were more "doom is upon us because video games" articles then, so the current google search may not be all that correct...
PPPS: Thank you for reading.
Wondering what I'm talking about?
Google "Breivik video games" and read the most recent entries.
I just opened the first one, read through it and i the end it adds 5 examples how some murderers (including the most recent, Breivik himself) were inspired by movies/books/games to commit some murders.
Note, there are only 5 listed, 5 cases between 1974 and now.
Sure, these aren't the only 5, but it's still not terribly much compared to the total amount of murders committed...
But now they are all blaming it on video games, saying Breivik used them to prepare for the final "attack" he planned. All those articles against video games, but none noting Breivik himself never said such a thing. He for example played WoW for more than 16 hours a day over a year to "take a sabbatical" (his words), to not be preoccupied planning all that stuff, to do something he'd love to do before he'd die (as he planned his actions to be suicidal).
Not many sources mention his extensive planning BEFORE playing these games, his many hours in a shooting range, perfecting his aim, his claims to be a member of a "anti-Jihad crusader-organization" and his legal/illegal acquirement of his weapons. Nope, it's just video games.
No, I don't want to defend his cause in any way. What he did is horrible and he should be trialed for what he did. But don't blame it on video games. As realistic some first-person-shooters claim to be, they still don't prepare you in any way on the real deal. You can't revive after you die in real life, you can't heal instantly from a bullet in your arm by picking up some health-pack, you can't run around with a rifle, waving it around like it's made of plastic and then kill someone (accurately) seconds after rolling into position by simply playing video games.
You seriously CAN'T.
I remember my first time I fired a bullet.
Yes, it was in an ex-soviet state.
And yes, it was a AK-47 or Kalashnikov.
And no, after all those hours playing Counter Strike 1.6 (I can't link too much, I never exactly know who my audience is...) I still wasn't prepared on anything that thing did.
First off, that thing's HEAVY. You try holding a 5 kg (11 lb) bag of potatoes with arms stretched and imagine shooting stuff with it... take a break before your arms fall off.
The kickback is also a surprise. It's those same 5 kg stomping you in the shoulder every time you pull that trigger. After the first bullet I already had a bruise and I was deaf for the next few minutes. Because that small detail game designers tend to leave out: The bang is so loud you can only understand your own words after 5 minutes. To understand others it takes even longer...
No movie, no game ever actually tells you this, it's all soldiers that storm into battle, screaming to their brothers in arms who understand them from 2 meters away, waving their guns without real fatigue...
As far as I remember I only saw one movie that kinda did show this correctly. And it was some strange French movie we had to watch with school for some reason...
So no, nothing in popular media can prepare anyone on a real battle, only hard training can.
But as long as no one talks about it they all tend to forget about this and blame only video games.
As a final thing I would like to link a more gamer friendly article.
Sure, it starts with the usual panic-inducing headline, with some more panic blah that should accompany these articles, but halfway the writer quotes gamers (more than 30 year-old-gamers) that express their concerns on the current situation.
-ThOR
PS: I found a funny quote in the last linked article:
Breivik said a holographic aiming device used in Modern Warfare helped him develop skills with a real gun....
Now think about it.
How could a virtual "holographic aiming device" possibly help someone aiming a real gun?
PPS: Oh, hey, turns out there's more articles up now. Go read this analysis posted yesterday (currently second result when googling...). I started writing this yesterday, there were more "doom is upon us because video games" articles then, so the current google search may not be all that correct...
PPPS: Thank you for reading.
18 January 2012
Movies
Ah, the movies.
The Art of telling stories with the use of moving pictures.
Yes, we all know examples of it, but I think most movies aren't as much art as I'd like them to be.
No, I don't define what is and what isn't art, but I know there are movies i go and watch for amusement, and others I go and watch because it's something I don't see that often.
No I don't watch movies all that often, I skip some because I don't have a TV close by but mostly because I really don't want to watch them.
Lots of movies remember the fact that they're supposed to tell stories (I've seen exceptions), but awkwardly few remeber that it's supposed to be an Artform. Lots of modern day movies seem to be made to show off the latest technologies, to make the experience as WOW as possible for people watching it, while forgetting you don't need huge explosions in SuperReal3D to have people impressed.
Let me compare the first Big Movie in 3D (Avatar) with one more recent one (Hugo)(watched it a few days ago). Avatar was a Huge success. Why? because of the 3D, the effects, the novelty of technics. It wasn't the story that reviewers were praising, it was the technique. Now 3D has become something of a gimmick for Big Budget movies with Big Explosions, while more storytelling movies still are in 2D (A Dangerous Method).
Now comes Hugo. Not that much action (almost none at all) but still wouldn't it be the same movie if they had released it in 2D. The "feel", the atmosphere wouldn't have been the same. I'm not going to tell you what Hugo is about, there are enough reviews out there to tell you that, but it's certainly a movie to be watched, especially if you tend to like steampunk (sorry, I had to include this, there's a lot of cogs and steam and copper and cast iron and mechanical stuff in it), movies and an Art-Nouveau timeframe.
What they did with 3D in Hugo is uncompareable of what they did in Avatar, and I regret that. If you take a look at the list below: most of them are movies where storytelling isn't only done by the characters, but also by the camera, the locations, the music and the time.
Too many movies nowadays seem to forget about that and I regret that...
Well, that's not entirely true. I do like a brainless movie from time to time. The remake of the A-Team some time ago, good for some laughs, but not something I would call art.
That's about it what I wanted to say...
For people wondering what movies I really enjoyed watching (listed without order):
Oh, and I'd like to give you a Youtube movie that kinda gave me the idea of starting to write this article: The Backwater Gospel. Warning: blood, gore and creepyness is present. But still a good story.
-ThOR
The Art of telling stories with the use of moving pictures.
Yes, we all know examples of it, but I think most movies aren't as much art as I'd like them to be.
No, I don't define what is and what isn't art, but I know there are movies i go and watch for amusement, and others I go and watch because it's something I don't see that often.
No I don't watch movies all that often, I skip some because I don't have a TV close by but mostly because I really don't want to watch them.
Lots of movies remember the fact that they're supposed to tell stories (I've seen exceptions), but awkwardly few remeber that it's supposed to be an Artform. Lots of modern day movies seem to be made to show off the latest technologies, to make the experience as WOW as possible for people watching it, while forgetting you don't need huge explosions in SuperReal3D to have people impressed.
Let me compare the first Big Movie in 3D (Avatar) with one more recent one (Hugo)(watched it a few days ago). Avatar was a Huge success. Why? because of the 3D, the effects, the novelty of technics. It wasn't the story that reviewers were praising, it was the technique. Now 3D has become something of a gimmick for Big Budget movies with Big Explosions, while more storytelling movies still are in 2D (A Dangerous Method).
Now comes Hugo. Not that much action (almost none at all) but still wouldn't it be the same movie if they had released it in 2D. The "feel", the atmosphere wouldn't have been the same. I'm not going to tell you what Hugo is about, there are enough reviews out there to tell you that, but it's certainly a movie to be watched, especially if you tend to like steampunk (sorry, I had to include this, there's a lot of cogs and steam and copper and cast iron and mechanical stuff in it), movies and an Art-Nouveau timeframe.
What they did with 3D in Hugo is uncompareable of what they did in Avatar, and I regret that. If you take a look at the list below: most of them are movies where storytelling isn't only done by the characters, but also by the camera, the locations, the music and the time.
Too many movies nowadays seem to forget about that and I regret that...
Well, that's not entirely true. I do like a brainless movie from time to time. The remake of the A-Team some time ago, good for some laughs, but not something I would call art.
That's about it what I wanted to say...
For people wondering what movies I really enjoyed watching (listed without order):
- Le fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain (don't forget the french audio, it's beautiful ...),
- The Matrix (the first one, everything that follows that is just increasing in WOW and decreasing in interest),
- Modern Times (by and with Charles Chaplin, ah, the Art, ah, the pleasure of watching),
- Inception (why don't you tip over?!!1!),
- The Great Dictator (Charles Chaplin again, beautiful parody on Hitler (Der Führer himself has watched it 2 times, mind you)),
- The Lord Of The Rings (I must say the entire trilogy is really worth the watch, but especially the first movie),
- Hugo (Duh),
- Bin Jip (korean movie, also known as 3-iron, the 2 main characters almost don't speak),
- The early Star Wars movies (ah, the old fashioned sword fighting),
- The newer Star Wars movies,
- ...
Oh, and I'd like to give you a Youtube movie that kinda gave me the idea of starting to write this article: The Backwater Gospel. Warning: blood, gore and creepyness is present. But still a good story.
-ThOR
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)