Tolkien On Speed

Tolkien Tuesday

Maybe I was never great in English class.  Perhaps it was only all my book reports that impressed my Grade School teachers.  Or maybe I just had an off-day during my High School entry test.  Whatever the cause, the Elven Administrative Council that ruled my High School declared that I must take English in Summer School before beginning my Freshman year.

My main recollection from that class was that the instructor tried to teach us how to speed read.  He said that High School classes would be tough, and the quicker we could assimilate information, the better.  He encouraged us to bring our own books to read, and gave us tips on how to scan each sentence, and absorb the bulk of the content at speed.

As it happened, I was reading The Fellowship of the Ring, so I brought in my paperback, and applied my teacher’s instructions to J.R.R. Tolkien’s novel.  I remember reading about Frodo, Sam, Pippin, and Merry leaving the Shire, and traveling toward the village of Bree.  Aside from one instance of running, my recollection is that the bulk of their journey occurs at a relatively easy pace.

Looking back now, the thought of speed-reading The Fellowship of the Ring, one third of the epic Tolkien spent over a dozen years writing, seems rather like running through a museum, then trying to deliver a detailed analysis of each piece of artwork.  But back then, I was young, and it was just another novel that I wanted to read.  And it was an assignment handed down from a High School teacher.  And no, he wasn't an orc.  (At least, I don't think he was).  At any rate, it would take decades for me to realize how monumental Tolkien’s work really was, and how his stories should be savored rather than skimmed.

Of course, in Peter Jackson’s movie “The Fellowship of the Ring,” Frodo, Sam, Pippin, and Merry journey from the Shire to Bree occurs at frantic, breakneck speed, pursued all the way by the Nazgul (Ringwraiths).  The pace of that movie jarred so strongly with my recollections that I had difficulty accepting Jackson’s version.  Later, he brought out his extended version on DVD, and the additional scenes slowed down the overall pace, which allowed me to better appreciate the movie.

Warning: The next paragraph contains plot spoilers!

As with "The Fellowship of the Ring," Peter Jackson's "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug," the second part of his three-movie adaptation of The Hobbit, unravels at breakneck speed.  In violent contrast with my recollections of Bilbo packing the dwarves into barrels and sending them off on a fairly easy ride downriver, the dwarves ride down the river in open barrels, using swords and other weapons to fight a band of orcs that pursue them all the way.  Legolas and a band of Elven soldiers join in, at times even leaping from one dwarf's head onto another along the river as they shoot arrows at (or otherwise battle) the orcs.

I’m not criticizing Peter Jackson.  Even when he differs from scenes in the books, I think he’s trying to do homage to the depth and majesty of Tolkien's stories.  Still, I have to wonder if one of his High School teachers taught him to speed-read, and if so, how he reads Tolkien today.  For just as there's a difference between spending five seconds and five minutes staring at any given piece of art, there's a difference between Bilbo packing the dwarves inside barrels and sending them gently downriver, and the video game sensibilities of Jackson's adaptation.

Dragon Dave

The Link Between The Hobbit & Star Wars

Tolkien Tuesday

One weekend, back in 1977, a friend and his folks took me out to see “Star Wars” in the cinema.  I hadn’t visited my friend with any inkling that he and his parents would take me to my first movie.  It just happened, and in so doing, changed my life forever.  It impacted how I saw the world, what I judged as important, and the type of stories I henceforth sought out.  Still, when it came to storytelling, reading has always been (and I suspect, always will be) my first love.

My most vivid recollection from the Eighth Grade was all my book reports.  What I lacked in technical skills, I made up for by submitting reports on each book I read.  I can’t imagine what my English teacher thought, but she read each one I wrote, and gave me extra credit for all of them, even if she had only assigned us four or eight, and I turned in over twenty.  I can’t tell you all the novels I read that year, but I remember that my expectations of stories changed after seeing “Star Wars.”  Now every story had to be a little bolder, and possess more grandeur, than had previously been the case.

One of my friends was the Eighth Grade Class President, and I had helped him win his electoral campaign by making posters and hanging them around the school.  In addition to hanging out during the week, we occasionally spent weekends at his house, enjoying conversations and embarking on adventures together.  During those weekends, he loaned me a paperback: The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien.   Despite my suspicions to the contrary, he assured me I would enjoy it, and so I opened the cover and started read.  He was right.  Tolkien’s novel wasn’t anything like “Star Wars,” or the other books I had read, regardless of genre.  Yet I fell in love with his characters, his world of Middle Earth, and the way he wrote.  It’s the first time I can remember noticing how an author’s writing style could flow, could draw me into a story, and be beautiful in its own right. 

And so, my friend in the Eighth Grade surprised me with a story that met my heightened expectations of a novel, by handing me a book that was different in every way from the movie I loved.  But that’s the way of life, isn’t it?  So often, it’s the things we either stumble across, or others thrust into our hands—things we neither planned nor sought--that often prove the most important to us later on.  Just like “Star Wars.”

Incredibly, it would take thirty-five years until a filmmaker named Peter Jackson could make a movie version of The Hobbit capable of sitting comfortably beside “Star Wars.”  But that, as they say, is another blog post.

Dragon Dave

Guillermo del Toro is not Peter Jackson

Around the city block, we found a modern marque, and a door that led up the stairs to the box office.  It was neat to go out to a movie at seven o’clock in the evening for $3.    Of course, I had to pay $5.50 for a small soda, but if it keeps them in business...  

Another nice aspect of this second-run cinema in Hilo: no commercials or movie previews.  While I generally enjoy watching previews, the baker's dozen most cinema operators serve up can get annoying, and that's not a good frame of mind to begin a movie with.

"Pacific Rim" reminds me of the Godzilla-type movies I grew up watching on my small B&W TV.  Director Guillermo del Toro clearly intended to do more than just pay homage to the Japanese monster movie mini-genre.  If you've ever immersed yourself in a video game for hours, days, or weeks at a time, you're guaranteed to identify with, if not idolize, the specially trained pilots who operate the immense metal robots called Jaegers.  It's like Rock Em Sock Em Giant Robots Versus Ugly Giant Monsters, and you're inside one of the gigantic robots alongside the pilots, defending the last vestiges of civilization.  "Take this, you Godzilla wannabees!  Return to the Earth's Core from whence you came!"

Guillermo del Toro exhibits his unique visual style that makes all his movies memorable, as well as the quirky, hokey humor of the “Hellboy” movies.  One thing "Pacific Rim" doesn’t display, however, is any great depth of story.  Unlike "Avatar," in which the human soldiers deploy similar mechanical travel-and-fighting machines, you can’t apply reason or rationale to any aspect of his world.  For example, ask yourself this question: could a helicopter lift this second-run cinema and deploy it within minutes on a battlefield?  Now how about several helicopters that lift and carry one of these Jaegers--each as tall as a skyscraper--out to fight the monsters? Don't expect to leave the cinema wondering how del Toro created such a believable world.  This isn't an example of a storyteller suspending your disbelief by slowly introducing aspects of the Fantastic.  Still, if you can disengage your brain for two hours, you'll enjoy the movie!

As I said, I've seen several of del Toro's movies now, and even those I haven't seen for two-or-three years ("Pan's Labyrinth") or sixteen ("Mimic") left me with unforgettable visuals.  Still, that seeming inability to convey reality and depth to his worlds makes me glad that Peter Jackson took over the reins of "The Hobbit" when del Toro’s New Zealand visa expired.  Although they shared a lot of the same movie-making roots, Jackson is clearly someone who understands how a strong and intricate backstory can add weight and interest to his characters and his worlds.  I can’t help shake the feeling that "The Hobbit" movies would be vastly different had del Toro remained in charge of that production.

"Pacific Rim" demonstrates how every director and storyteller is better at some things than others.  It's a great ride, and every once in a while, you need a movie like that to remind you exactly why you love the Fantastic so much.  Just don't expect more from it than that or...well, let me put it like this.  With the exception of one other Hawaiian, everyone bolted after the credits started rolling.  After part of the credits, there was an additional scene, during which one character emerged unscathed from what had seemed, during the movie, to be a deadly encounter.  For me, the short scene exhibited del Toro's quirky humor.  The Hawaiian grunted, "That's stupid!" and marched out.

"Pacific Rim" may not be Tolkien, but it's a lot of fun.  (Thankfully, for Tolkien adaptations, we have Peter Jackson).  Now, where's my DVD of "Hellboy?"  I want to watch that movie again!

Dragon Dave

Falling In Love With A Totally New Hobbit

One of the seminal events of my life was when a friend loaned me his paperback copy of The Hobbit in Junior High.  While I had read Fantasy novels before, J. R. R. Tolkien’s story was wholly different from anything I had encountered before.  One of the first things I did, after I finished the book and gave it back to him, was buy my own copy.  Then I read it again.

Perhaps because the story remains so precious to me, I felt somewhat reluctant to see "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" in the cinema.  This is nothing against Peter Jackson: I had, for the most part, enjoyed his adaptations of The Lord of the Rings.  Of all the filmmakers out there, he was the one I most trusted to bring Tolkien’s story to the big screen.  Yet I told myself not to expect too much from the adaptation, and put off seeing it. 

Sitting in the cinema, there were aspects of the movie I loved, such as the look of Bilbo’s house and Hobbiton.  I loved the way Jackson brought the dwarves to life, giving them each their own personalities.  I loved the way he way he captured the silliness of the dwarves’ song as they hurled Bilbo’s precious plates and saucers while they clean up after themselves.  I loved the visual scope of Bilbo, Gandalf, and the dwarves journey across the incredible landscape of Middle Earth (which some insist is really New Zealand). 

Yet, there were also aspects that kept me at a distance from the movie as I watched it.  By adding so much to the story, it seemed as if Jackson slowed the pace to a crawl.  Perhaps because I saw it in 2D, or because it had been filmed at 48 frames per second, I felt like I was seeing too much: every scene looked like it was taking place on a set, and refused to blend into the background.  He added extra characters and situations that I didn’t remember, that made the movie darker, and more in keeping with the tone of The Lord of the Rings.  But most of all, I kept on expecting certain scenes to play out a given way, only for the characters to surprise me, and resolve the momentary conflict in a different fashion.  I couldn’t believe my memory of those scenes was faulty: clearly Jackson was tinkering with Tolkien’s story, changing those precious moments in a way he felt superior for moviegoers.

How dare he tamper with Tolkienian perfection!

Although I wasn’t anxious to see it again, my wife asked for "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" for her birthday.  As we don’t have a 3D TV or Blu-ray player, we watched the 2D version of the film.  With this second viewing, I found that everything I loved about the movie remained the same, yet those aspects I had disliked faded away.  The pace seemed well adjusted to the story, and the additional scenes and characters, no doubt drawn from sources such as The Silmarillion, blended better into the overall story.  Likewise, the foregrounds and backgrounds blended together on my smaller screen, so I no longer felt as if I were watching actors on a physical set.  Most important, this time I found myself more accepting of the different way certain key scenes played out (at least from the way I remember them). 

I don’t know why, but sometimes aspects of a movie I disliked at first fade away with a repeated viewing.  If you love the novel, but experienced a similar reaction to "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" in the cinema, I suggest that you try a second viewing.  Perhaps, like me, you’ll find you enjoy it more the second time around.  As for me, watching the movie again made me want to read The Hobbit again.  I don’t think I will, because I don’t want to be comparing the novel with the second and third films while in the cinema, but now I feel drawn to make that second attempt at (and actually read all the way through) The Silmarillion.  I also want to read Terry Brooks’ High Fantasy novels again, like The Sword of Shannara.  Ooh, and I’d also like to reread Jim C. Hines' humorous Goblin trilogy, and…

Dragon Dave

The Return of The Hobbit: Part 2

On a mission to collect something precious.

As you may have guessed from the previous post, I’m eagerly looking forward to seeing how Peter Jackson will translate J. R. R. Tolkien’s novel The Hobbit into not one, not two, but three movies (or, if you prefer, a trilogy).  In this regard, I side with Ian McKellen, the actor who played Gandalf in The Lord of the Rings films, and will do so again in The Hobbit movies.  In a short interview for Entertainment Weekly magazine, the interviewer mentions Peter Jackson’s recent decision to expand the story from two films to three.  “Why not four?” McKellen responds.  “Why not five?”  I agree with you, Ian.  After reading The Hobbit, I always wanted to experience more adventures with Bilbo Baggins, and I probably always will.  

Until the movie comes out, the Denny’s restaurant chain has given me a new way to celebrate J. R. R. Tolkien’s novel.  Through their The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey menu, one can eat a number of tasty dinners.  My wife enjoyed Frodo’s Pot Roast Skillet the other night, while I dug into the Dwarves’ Turkey and Dressing Dinner.  While Frodo never appeared in The Hobbit, the character proved so popular in The Lord of the Rings films that Peter Jackson found a way to include him in his adaptations of the earlier novel.  Of course, there are plenty of dwarves in The Hobbit, more than feature in The Lord of the Rings.  Whether they would have selected the turkey dinner, I cannot answer.  I suspect they would have enjoyed either selection.  (Then, after devouring every morsel on their plates, they would have pounded the table with their knives and forks and demanded seconds!)  

As an added bonus, everyone who orders off the special menu gets a pack of playing cards.  Each pack contains two cards, and a coupon for another meal at Denny’s.  Now there’s only one problem.  We’ve got four of the cards, and we need another eight to complete the set.  Perhaps, before they run out of cards, I should run off to Denny's and try Gandalf’s Gobble Melt.  Or perhaps I need something heartier, like The Ring Burger.  Yes, that sounds like just what I need.  The Ring Burger would be so…precious.

Dragon Dave

The Games People Play: Part 1

Hold on, let me consult the manual.

I used to get together regularly with a friend over dinner.  While catching up on each other’s lives, he would mention what his children were up to.  When Peter Jackson’s movie-adaptations of J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings came out, his son read all three books.  This surprised me.  While The Hobbit had been written for children his age, Tolkien’s later trilogy seemed geared for a more mature reader.  Yet the boy enjoyed reading this literary saga as much as his father once had, and this gave the two something they could bond over.  

After reading such weighty works, however, the boy sought out easier reading.  In addition to comic books, he read a series of novels called Warhammer 40,000.  After he mentioned this, I looked for the novels in the bookstore.  Eventually I found them, and came to realize that they were based on a role playing game of the same name. 

Officials keep the gamers in line.

In my teens, I got into Dungeons & Dragons, and enjoyed the game for a few years.  But I never had a stable group of friends who played it, and so after a few years, I lost interest.  Later on, I heard about a new form of games, these based on cards.  The cards served as collectors’ items, and some could be extremely valuable.  Fans of these games, such as Magic: The Gathering, might travel across the country to play in tournaments.  Role-playing games such as D&D and Magic might be played at the smaller, literary conventions I began attending in the late 1990s, but they were usually played in rooms solely dedicated to that purpose.  Gamers might attend the same convention, but I would never see them: they delved into their own interests, while I pursued mine.

I stopped by one booth at Stan Lee’s Comikaze to point out a few Star Wars items to my wife.  It turned out that it was a Warhammer 40,000 booth.  The man there explained the types of miniatures for sale, and described the manner of play involved.  Unlike D&D, in which a player controlled a single character, in Warhammer a player controlled an entire army.  A player could pick and choose what types of characters and equipment he wished for his army, based on each item’s ability and his overall approach to the game.  Thus, Warhammer can be viewed as a merger of Chess and Risk, he said.

"Hmm.  The game board's coming together nicely."

Another thing that caught my attention was the selection of paints available.  Gamers could buy plastic or metal versions of characters and equipment, and paint them anyway he or she wished.  The man in the booth said that, during one period of his life, his interest in playing the game waned.  So he just concentrated on painting his “game pieces.”  Such ongoing creation no doubt helped him envision what types of adventures his characters, tanks, and other vehicles could experience.  Then, when circumstances in his life changed, and his desire to play reawakened, he not only had a larger collection to play with, but had also lived with these pieces awhile.  Now he could live out their stories on the game board.

I watched the players assembling their game boards, consulting their manuals, and measuring distances and angles of attack between their creations and those of their opponents.  Whether store-bought or made in my garage, I’ve assembled and painted all manner of artistic works fashioned from plastic, ceramic, and wood.  But these were always static creations, each intended for whatever amusement it would provide another or myself.  To create whole collections of items, and use them as props to live out a story with another person, sounds like a wonderful platform for interactive storytelling.  

"Hey, don't blow up my tree!"

Over the years, I've heard of several gamers who went on to create fantastic characters and worlds of their own, and turned them into popular novels.  I wonder if any of those authors played Warhammer 40,000?

Dragon Dave