The Strength of a Thousand Men Had a Price

[Fair warning: I talk about fictional characters like they're real a lot in this post. I promise I'm not insane.]

I've been thinking a lot about Heracles lately, or, as most people know him, Hercules.

Well, to be honest, I've been thinking a lot about greek mythology in general, because since it concerns both the books I'm reading and the book I'm writing, it's taking up a lot of my brainspace. But my point is I've been thinking about Hercules in particular.

What spurred this train of thought is that I've been seeing the trailers for the new Hercules movie EVERYWHERE. You know the one, starring Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson? And I watch this trailer, and I see him wearing the lion skin, and I think, wow, maybe we'll actually get an accurate movie about this hero for once. And I haven't seen it, so I can't comment on it, but that's okay, because I'm just going to comment on the strongest aspect of the trailer.

The strongest aspect of the trailer, of course, is that there is so much testosterone I can barely stand it.

And this irritates me.

Because the thing is, yes, Hercules was a hero, and he killed a lot of monsters with his bare hands and had the strength of a thousand men, blah blah blah. But if you actually pay attention the story of Hercules, it's actually very very sad. And I feel like the overall tragedy of Hercules, which is extremely important to the character, always gets overlooked and, more often than not, completely cut out of everything in order for him to become this ridiculous male power fantasy.

Hercules accomplished a lot, but more importantly, he endured a lot. But everytime I see him in pop culture he gets reduced to this chest-beating testosterone junkie who every woman is attracted to. And yeah, that irritates me. There's so much more to his story than that.

Okay, Hercules fought a ridiculous amount of monsters and did a ridiculous amount of stuff in mythology, so I doubt I'll cover everything. (There was a line in a book I was reading that I thought was funny and accurate: "Man, Hercules was like, the Starbucks of Ancient Greece. Everywhere you turn - there he is.") But in any case, here's a crash course of Hercules so that y'all understand what I'm talking about.

So, Zeus had a kid with a mortal woman. What a surprise that is, considering it's basically all he does. This demigod child was Hercules. Now, the problem is that Zeus has a wife, Hera. She causes about ninety-five percent of the conflicts in greek mythology because she's always jealous of the affairs Zeus has, and takes revenge on the mortals involved rather than, I dunno, Zeus. So before Hercules was even born, she was already taking revenge. Basically, she made Zeus swear an oath that whoever be born that night to the party of Perseus (a different greek hero, son of Zeus - Hercules was his great-grandson) would become a king. Then she delayed Hercules's birth in a way that was extremely painful for his mother while causing the premature birth of Hercule's cousin, Eurystheus, and making him king. (This becomes important later). Actually, she would have kept Hercules from being born at all, except she screwed up, basically, allowing him to be born. (By the way, his original name was something entirely different from Hercules - something starting with an A, don't remember, but Zeus convinced his mother to name him Heracles, which means "for the glory of Hera", in order to maybe make it up to her. Spoiler alert: it didn't work. Then, of course, the romans changed his name from Heracles to Hercules, so that part gets lost entirely).

Hercules had a relatively normal childhood, aside from occasionally strangling evil Hera snakes to death and things like that. He grew up and married the daughter of a king, had a few kids, all is happy. And then Hera swoops in, unable to allow an illegitimate child of Zeus to be happy. She makes him go insane, and so, in a rage, he murders his wife and children. When he eventually snaps out if it, he sees what he's done, and is, of course, horrified. And Hera basically goes, "Oh my gods, what have you done? That is a terrible crime, you horrible person! You will have to do ten labours for your cousin Eurystheus in order to atone." Which is pretty bitchy, considering she's the one who made him do it in the first place.

Remember Eurystheus, the one Hera made king instead of Hercules? Well, he's the cousin of Hercules. And he is jealous of Hercules. So, of course, Hera puts Hercules at the mercy of Eurystheus, knowing full well that he will probably try to kill him with the labours. And guess what? Eurystheus tries to kill Hercules with the labours he has him do. Go figure.

I'm not going to go into all ten of them, but they were all designed to be impossible for Hercules to do and hopefully kill him. The most important ones are these: Hercules killed the Nemean lion, whose fur couldn't be penetrated by any weapon, by strangling the monster to death. When that was done he wore the lion's fur, because it handily was weapon-proof and also a great fashion statement. The other two that matter is that Hercules killed the Hydra, which, as you may know, if you cut off one of its head, two more will grow back in its place. At first he didn't know how to kill it, until his nephew advised him to set the stumps of the heads on fire before they could regenerate, which he did. The other one is the cleaning of the Augean stables.

Stable cleaning? Big deal, right?.

Well, yeah, except there were a thousand cattle in the stables. And they were all immortal. And the stables had never been cleaned. And Hercules had to do it all in a day. That is an extremely large pile of cow dung. Anyways, he did it by rerouting the rivers to wash out the icky stuff. He'd been offered a third of the cattle if he did it, but of course, since it was supposed to be an impossible task, that point was moot. Except then it wasn't, and Augeas was all, "lol jk you can't have my cattle" and so Hercules killed him.

Anyways, these labours matter because Eurystheus decided that since A) Hercules hadn't accomplished the Hydra slaying by himself, and B) Hercules had been offered payment for the cleaning of the Augean stables, his accomplishing them didn't really count, and so he had to do two more.

After he finished his twelve labours, Hercules did a lot of other stuff - slayed a lot of monsters and a lot of bad people, became an Argonaut (along with his friend and, according to some myths, lover) with Jason to search for the Golden Fleece. Except they stopped at an island and Hercules's friend/possibly-lover drowned, and all the other Argonauts basically went, "Oh crap, what if Hercules finds out about his boyfriend dying and goes nuts like he did before and kills us all?" and, basically, they left Hercules on the island. What great friends.

Long story short, Hercules finds this other girl, also a daughter of a king, as well as makes friends with her brother, and he takes her and is besties with her brother and things are starting to look up. But then Hera's all, "No, no, happiness is not allowed," and makes him go insane again. This time, Hercules throws his new BFF over the city wall and kills him. Then he snaps out of it and Hera's like, "Well, there you go again killing innocent people, you terrible person. You'll have to be a slave to Queen Omphale for a year to atone for that."

So he does that. It's humiliating for him. After his year of slavery was up, Omphale decided to marry him. I'm not sure how that ended, exactly - some myths delight in being vague - all I know is that after a while there's this other open space for a wife that Hercules decides to fill with Deianira, who he fought the river god Achelous for. (Also breaks off the horn of Achelous, which incidentally becomes the first cornucopia).

At one point, Deianira gets attacked by a centaur (who were essentially the douchey frat boys of greek mythology). Hercules protects her by shooting the centaur with an arrow poisoned by Hydra venom. But the centaur gets its revenge, because as he lays dying, he basically tells Deianira, "Look, Hercules is a womanizer, okay? He's not going to stay with you. So here, take my Hydra-poisoned blood, and put it on the inside of his clothes. It'll burn people like acid. It'll kill him, but he sure won't be cheating on you anytime soon!" (How does this logic even resemble logic, by the way?)

So, when Deianira begins to suspect that Hercules is interested in someone else, she does that. When Hercules puts on the poisoned clothing he is immediately in agony and dying. When he takes it off, his flesh goes with it. There's no winning. So he chooses to die voluntarily, (sort of,) and dies on a pyre. As he dies, the gods decide that he was worthy to become a god, so they turn him into a god. That's Hercules's version of a happy ever after.

And of course, between those stories, he helped the gods kill giants, and slew a lot of monsters, and killed a lot of bad people, etcetera etcetera. Like I said, this was just a crash course. He did about a billion other things besides.

But my point is that Hercules's story is actually pretty tragic. Every time he gets a friend, the friend either dies or Hera makes him go insane and kill him. Every time he finds a woman (or man - apparently he wasn't picky) he can love, they either die or try to kill him. Every time he kills a monster there's three others, a jealous human and a goddess still trying to kill him. It wasn't a happy life.

And yet, here's the thing. Here's the thing that makes Hercules such an interesting story for me, and also what makes it that much more sad. He keeps trying.

He continued to kill the monsters. He continued to kill the bad guys. He even helped the gods, who by the way, had done nothing but screw him over, he even helped them kill the giants. All things considered, Hercules is a good guy. If he got bitter, if he got angry, it didn't stop him from constantly doing good deeds. I mean, some of the stuff he went through, I feel like it would be enough to make him crazy without Hera's help, you know? But that didn't happen. He kept being good.

Which makes it sadder. Because he deserved a better ending than he got.

I've clearly been thinking about Hercules too hard, but I have a lot of sympathy for the character. He really couldn't catch a break.

But none of the tragedy of Hercules ever gets captured, does it? Nope. People don't want the actual story, the actual sadness. They want a chest-beating, testosterone-driven he-man. Yeah, let's see him strangle the Nemean lion, but gee, ever wonder why they don't show some of the other labours, the more emasculating bits of his story, like stable cleaning, and slavery to a woman? Or the fact that he had male lovers?

I've said it before, I'll say it again, I am tired of seeing a tragedy like Hercules's get reduced to a male power fantasy. But it's all that ever happens. And to be honest? It pisses me off. Because there was way more to it than that. And the representation that pop culture gives Hercules is just not fair to the character that the myths actually described.

I just have a lot of frustration over this. Because for the longest time, I thought Hercules was a lame overrated hero who just killed a lot of things. Now, after I got my mythology straight, I realize that he really was a hero, because of the things he endured, and how in spite of the things he endured he kept being good. That, not the strength he was born with, is what makes him heroic.

And the fact that that's not represented... I think it says something about the things that we value.

And what I read in that, well, I think that's tragic as well.

Movies, Books, and Are They Incomparable?

I was thinking about this because I recently finally watched, in its entirety, the Percy Jackson movie(s). Yes, I know I'm sixteen years old and the movie actually said ages 8-10. I don't care. I was recently obsessed with Artemis Fowl, if you'll recall. I've also been re-reading the Percy Jackson books, which is for middle schoolers. But hey, a good book is a good book, and I will not be shamed for enjoying good stories. So take that.

But anyways.

As I was watching the movie, I couldn't help but get extremely irritated at the people who'd made the adaptation. Yes, I was that person. "They're getting it all wrong! They're missing that character! That's not at all what happened! They're changing everything! Annabeth would never do that! Why is Persephone in the Underworld during the summer?" Blah-dy blah blah blah. This was mostly for the Lightning Thief - The Sea of Monsters actually got most of the important things right, I'd say, aside from the unforgivable mutilation of the Charybdis myth.... (She swallows the sea and then SPITS IT BACK OUT AGAIN!!! YOU DON'T NEED TO BLOW A HOLE THROUGH HER STOMACH IN ORDER TO GET OUT!!! And what even was that stupid attempt at incorporating Circe with Polyphemus? What was the point of that? And even more importantly, how did they manage to get away from Polyphemus by blocking him with a boulder? Like, the same boulder Polyphemus used as a door in the first place? What sort of logic is happening here right now?)

You see that rant in parentheses? That's what I'm talking about.

But it was more than just... messing up the myths (Charybdis) and outright violation of logic (Polyphemus) and stuff. Like, they gave away the final prophecy of the series in the second movie, the prophecy heroes are never allowed to see because trying to change destiny usually only ensures destiny in the worst way possible (Oedipus, anyone?). That was... something. And especially in the first movie, the characters were pretty much entirely changed. And, it wasn't like it made a huge difference on the story, but the character's.... voices, were noticeably different.

Like Grover, for instance. They turned Grover into, more or less, the token black friend. And I have no problem with Grover being portrayed by a black actor at all. But they turned this dorky, small-kid-with-big-dreams, mildly panicky character that was Grover into the one who has all the snarky comebacks and all the answers and, like, he has the guts to beat up a(n admittedly terrible awful horrible example of a) human with his crutches. Book-Grover would never do that.

Never mind the fact that Kronos, and Clarisse, and Thalia's tree, and Grover's search for Pan, and Ares weren't even introduced in the first movie. Like, they're kind of important, and now the movie series has royally screwed itself over if it plans to continue the series. They managed to fix most of that for the second movie, all except Ares, which was kind of a first-book-adventure anyways, so I have no idea how they're going to justify Percy's sudden weakness in the third movie, if that happens, if they're not using Ares's curse. Also they neglected the search for Pan, which is kind of important as well, so I dunno....

But here's the thing. Does the fact that they changed a hundred million things from the book make the movie bad?

You see, as a bookish kid who is also a film kid, I'm kind of having a serious moral dilemma right now.

As a pretty big fan of the Percy Jackson books (they're what got me started in greek mythology in the first place, and now I'm kind of a walking encyclopedia of greek mythology who's been to Athens for pretty much solely that reason, so....) I find it physically impossible for me to watch the movies without comparing them to the books, and it's really hard for me to take a step back and look at the movies and books as two different entities.

But when I did manage to actually think about the movie as something separate from the books, I had to admit, it did its job. It was fun, and it was an adventure, and I laughed in all the right places and everything.

See, the fact that everything was changed or removed - literally, everything that I adored about the books, from the clever modernization of ancient greek myths (Procrustes sells waterbeds, Charon charges credit cards for passage into the Underworld, Circe runs a spa where she gives makeovers, etc.) and the great character foil that Annabeth and Percy made for each other, all that stuff.... it doesn't really change the fact that the movie was still pretty enjoyable.

See, it was just, in general, an entirely different story... but so what?

This is where the serious moral dilemma comes in.

Integrity of story! Character depth! Tone! Blah blah blah! I support Book's Rights! Let's burn down the movie theatre, that'll show 'em!

But here's the thing. The movie is being made by a lot of different people, over a hundred of them, and none of them are the author of the book. And books belong to their readers, right? That's part of what makes books great. It allows the reader the freedom to interpret their own meanings and, possibly, inspiration, from the text.

Do you see where I'm going with this? This is where I'm going with this.

So, if books belong to their readers, does that not also give the creator(s) of the film the liberty to interpret the text? And if so, doesn't that mean it should have the right to be judged as something aside from the book? After all, no one can deny that they're simply not the same thing.

Basically, what I'm saying is that two different creators, no matter how much they're based on each other... should they really be compared? Because, as artists, they have different intentions and different ideas and different things that they think are important to convey.

Now, impartially here, without keeping the books in mind... I wouldn't watch Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief again. The Sea of Monsters? That was better. And even the final showdown in the Lightning Thief, that was pretty cool, I really liked that. But would I watch the entire movie again? Probably not. I wouldn't avoid it like the plague or anything, but it wouldn't be my go-to, you know?

But even if the movie itself was kinda "meh", I still felt like the point had to be made. Artists are allowed to add on and interpret. That is the duty of an artist. Sometimes they're creating something from the meaningless soup of thoughts and images they have in their mind, and sculpting it into something with meaning... and sometimes they're interpreting the art of someone else and re-sculpting it into something meaningful to them. Like, for me personally, I create my own stories and have been for as long as I can remember, but when it comes to music, I'm an interpreter. And I'm not ashamed of that.

So, yeah. I realize I keep talking about Percy Jackson, but this post isn't about Percy Jackson. I'm using it as my main example because I've recently... re-educated myself on it, and it's what got me thinking about it, and, well, it just illustrates my point properly, but yeah-no, it isn't what this post is about.

Basically what I'm saying is that, we should be allowed to look at a movie and look at it for what it is by itself, you know? I can go on and on about what they changed from the book - in fact, I've done that for a while now - but that isn't what's important, really, is it? It should be measured by its own value alone. The movie should be measured by the makings of a good movie, not the makings of a good book. That's just... logic.

P.S SHALLOW SHALLOW POINT HERE BUT LET ME FANGIRL FOR A SEC

So, for Sea of Monsters there was a change in director, and, apparently, a few changes in casting. We got a new Chiron, for instance, among others.

Guess who the new Chiron is?

Anthony Stewart Head, A.K.A GILES

IN OTHER WORDS, BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER'S MENTOR IS NOW THE MENTOR OF PERCY JACKSON.

Also, of course, Hermes had a role to play in this movie. Yay, they didn't cut him out! yells the Books Rights Activist in my soul. But just take a guess who played Hermes?

Nathan. Friggin'. Fillion.

Yeah, that's right, the guy who's been in every Whedon thing ever, known as Mal on Firefly, known as Caleb on Buffy, known as Captain Hammer in Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along-Blog, known as Dogberry in Whedon's modern production of Much Ado About Nothing. Nathan I-kid-you-not Fillion plays my favourite god of all the greek gods, Hermes.

Needless to say, I freaked out a 'lil bit. And we even got what is clearly a reference to the fate of Firefly:

Hermes: (holding out a magic thermos to Annabeth) Collector's item, mint condition. From Hercules Busts Heads, season 1. Best TV show ever. So, of course, cancelled. 

Huh? HUH?!

Also, less freak-out-y, but I was thinking one of the Gray Sisters in the Chariot of Damnation sounded kind of familiar, and naturally, when the credits came up, I was watching the names. And whose name should come up, but Yvette Nicole Brown, A.K.A SHIRLEY BENNETT of Community?

It's like the people casting the movie were like, "We should cast people from shows that Megan Hands likes, so that Megan Hands, who is already a huge fan of Percy Jackson anyways, will actually approve of this sequel." Guess what, team? IT WORKED.

These people are no small part of the reason that Sea of Monsters worked so much better than the Lightning Thief - though I also think a lot of credit is due to the people who worked so hard on cleaning up the mess that was left of the over-arcing plot development after the first movie was through with it.

Okay I'm done now super-promise.

Buffy on a Rewatch: I Robot, You Jane (S1E08)

Yay, more fun Monster of the Week episodes! Not that the Master isn't fun or anything, I just really like the Monster of the Weeks. I miss them, since by the time season 7 rolls around, there pretty much aren't any anymore (which sucks - season 7 could have done with some more plot, even if they were goofy, inconsequential type plots).

Also, this is the first real Willow-centric episode. Yay for Willow! She's been pretty neglected the first half of this season, so I'm glad she finally got something. Even if her first showcasing episode is pretty much to the same caliber as Xander's first showcasing episode (Teacher's Pet) - that is to say, they're both goofy and not quite as sharp as the show is known for being (some would say they're bad. I don't - they're still entertaining - they're just not quite as good as other episodes like, say, The Pack, or The Witch). Also, strangely enough, they're both about the character's love lives. Weird choice, but I'll roll with it.

So, in summary, the sequence of events happen like this: Willow accidentally releases the demon Moloch, who was bound in a book, onto the Internet, where his power is basically infinite since everything is connected to computers. Of course, this is Moloch the Corrupter, so instead of abusing the power to pretty much destroy the world if he wants, he just uses his power to corrupt the young minds of Sunnydale High. And also screw around with random kids' school files, for some reason.

So, he finds Ms. Calendar's computer class, which includes Willow, Dave and Fritz (who, aside from Willow and Ms. Calendar, are one-shots, so don't worry about them, they'll never be seen again.) Of course, Moloch's power tends to revolve around seducing impressionable humans with promises of power and knowledge and love, so that's what he does with these three. He starts an Internet relationship with Willow under the name Malcolm, and she's lovestruck. As for Dave and Fritz, they just kind of become minions. We all saw it coming with Fritz, since Fritz was pretty much crazy to begin with. I mean, his first line is:

Fritz: The printed page is obsolete. Information isn't bound up anymore. It's an entity. The only reality is virtual. If you're not jacked in, you're not alive. 

Like, my "he's crazy" bells are ringin' off the charts, and I wasn't wrong, since he seemed just a liiiiiiiiittle too ready to kill Buffy and Dave when Moloch told him to. His reaction to when Moloch told him to kill Buffy? "Party." Um.....

But anyways, I'm getting ahead of myself. Willow has an online relationship with a guy called Malcolm, and at first Buffy's really happy for her, but then she and Xander start becoming a little bit wary of this Malcolm person, since he could be anyone. An ax murderer, or a circus freak, or an elderly dutch woman (that one came from Xander, surprise surprise). Moloch notices that Buffy's onto him, and so orders Dave and Fritz to kill her. Dave sets her up, and nearly goes through with it too, by turning on a shower in the girl's locker room next to a frayed electric cord, almost electrocuting her (can you say "foreshadowing"?). He chickens out and warns her just in time, because he's just a guy, and he's not really ready to kill anybody. So he tells Moloch he can't do it, and Moloch promptly types out a suicide note on the computer screen while Fritz kills poor Dave. Surprisingly enough, I felt really bad for him.

Meanwhile, Willow's spidey-senses are starting to tingle as well, when Moloch reveals information about Buffy that logically he had no way of knowing. So she starts getting nervous about contacting Malcolm. When Malcolm demands that they meet, Willow ignores it, until Fritz shows up at her door and chloroforms her. Meanwhile, Xander and Buffy are on the case, since they know where Moloch-central is, and Giles is recruiting Ms. Calendar (I'm going to call her Jenny since it's her name and it's easier) to do her techno-pagan magic (yes, techno-pagan, I'm not making this up) to bind Moloch back into the book.

Moloch promptly kills Fritz for no apparent reason besides making the point that he's corporeal now (in robot form, naturally) and can do things like that, while telling Willow that he loves her. Willow doesn't buy it. Xander and Buffy burst in; Buffy can't fight a robot. Then Moloch goes all spasmy for a bit and they figure that Jenny and Giles's spell worked, and he's back in the book. He's not; he's now bound into the robot. So, at least he doesn't have infinite power over the Internet. He goes after them, and again, Buffy can't fight a robot since it's made of metal and stuff, and Willow goes all psycho on him, and then eventually Buffy manages to electrocute the robot to death. Remember that foreshadowing I was talking about? That can't be an accident.

Now, as I mentioned, this is the first real Willow-centric episode, and it introduces a major insecurity for Willow, though definitely not her biggest one (still, closer to the mark than Xander's "I'm a virgin" insecurity thing in Teacher's Pet), and that is that she isn't popular. Willow is the kind of girl who loves her friends, and mostly, she loves who she is, but from the emotional hell that is high school, it appears to her that no one else loves who she is, which can suck for self esteem. So, when she meets Malcolm, she's so happy to find someone who likes her - and not only that, likes her for her personality, since they'd never seen each other - that she doesn't consider that it could be someone else. Like, say, a pedophile. Or, you know, a demon. The other thing, of course, is that Willow is technology savvy, but I don't think we needed a Willow-centric episode to figure that out, since she's hacking into government records in the second episode of the series, and that's not really as deep as I like Buffy to go anyways.

There's, obviously, the introduction of Jenny. That's bittersweet, knowing how she ends up. It is fun, though, seeing she and Giles going at it, books versus computer arguments day and night, while knowing that for real, they're attracted to each other, and would they just kiss already.

Oh, right, Giles and his - as he puts it - "childlike terror" of computers! It sounds stupid for me to like, seeing as blogging during the wee hours of the morning is pretty much all I do with my life, but I absolutely adore his monologue about books near the end of the episode. See, he and Jenny had been arguing all episode - Jenny, the computer lab teacher, was for the idea that computers allowed easy access to basically any information you could want, and it did it for anyone, while Giles had been showing apparently unfounded disdain for computers the entire time, which made Jenny say that Giles was a snob who only wanted information bound up so that only a handful of old white men could get at it. Giles replied that that was nonsense, and that he just didn't subscribe to the idea that new automatically means better. So, finally, at the end of the episode, this exchange happens:

Jenny: Honestly, what is it about them that bugs you?

Giles: The smell. 

Jenny: Computers don't smell, Rupert. 

Giles: I know. Smell is the most powerful trigger to the memory there is. A certain flower or a whiff of smoke can bring up experiences long forgotten. Books smell. Musty and rich. The knowledge gained from a computer, is... it has no texture, no context. It's there and then it's gone. If it's to last, then the getting of knowledge should be tangible, it should be, uh... smelly. 

And if you don't think that's a great monologue, I'm not sure what to say to you.

Also, "a certain flower"... well, that's just great, knowing that later on, Giles will probably never be able to smell a rose again without thinking of finding Jenny's dead body on his bed. My soul hurts just thinking about it. (It's from Passion. I'm sure we'll get to it at some point).

Okay, here's a thing that happens. After Moloch orders Fritz to chloroform Willow, kidnap her, bring her to an unknown place, appears before her in the form of a giant robot, and then snaps Fritz's neck right in front of her, he's telling her he loves her and is begging her to basically just join the dark side. Willow's response? She berates him for lying to her about who he was, and that he didn't really love her. On one hand, yay for Willow, you own that self-respect, girl!

On the other hand, that's your biggest qualm with this whole thing? That he lied to you? You're not even going to complain about the being chloroformed and the killing for no reason? Cause I dunno about you, that would be at the forefront of my mind. Maybe she's being clever, by ignoring the Moloch and appealing to the Malcolm (spoiler alert, it doesn't work). I'll buy that, because she did similar things in The Pack, when trying to get Xander to reveal whether or not he was himself anymore, and when allowing herself to get tied up by the Mr. Evil Zookeeper Guy to get the hyenas out of Xander and the others, by making herself look naive in order to allow the necessary things to happen. But when she did it, it just kinda came off like she wasn't reaaaaaally seeing the big picture here.

I love what Xander did in this episode. I know, I talk about (and defend) Xander all the time, but let me explain here. First of all, he's actually useful to the group, giving them useful information about where Moloch-central probably is. Giles calls this usefulness "unprecedented", which kind of makes me sad, but to be fair, this is only episode eight.

Secondly, Buffy+Xander bonding! It makes me so happy, because it's not like I think they'd be a good couple or anything - they really wouldn't be, sorry Xan - but they make such great friends, and you don't see a lot of solely Buffy+Xander scenes, as far as I remember (although I do recall Willow saying later on, "You two are the two who are the two! I'm the other one.") So, yeah, it's nice to see them be friends. Like, Buffy and Willow are girlfriends, and they'll always be girlfriends, but I always got the feeling that when Buffy and Xander were together, they were the ones who really clicked. Even in both versions of the pilot, they're the first of the Scoobies to really bond together (in the unaired one, they're talking about school cliques; in the aired one, Buffy's comforting Xander by telling him stories of slayage).

And also, Xander jumping right into the fight. Even though he can't fight. He didn't even think about it, and no one questioned it. That's kind of the main thing I admire about Xander.

And Willow and Xander's friendship is still adorable. The weird thing is, I'm not really even all that bothered by the fact that Willow has a huge crush on him, and Xander knows it and ignores it to pine after Buffy. Like, that's an issue for sure, but it's really hard to let that bother me when I'm watching the two of them interact in the way they do. They're just so dorky and cute, and they're so (friendly) affectionate right in the middle of the hallway in front of everyone because who cares, they've been friends for as long as they've had memories and I just really love it.

And that ending scene is the best. It goes like this:

Xander: We gonna go to the Bronze tonight? We three?

Buffy: It'll be fun!

Xander: Yeah, Willow, fun? Remember fun? That thing where you smile?

Willow: Oh, I'm sorry guys. I'm just thinking about...

Buffy: Malcolm?

Willow: Malcolm, Moloch, whatever he's called. The one boy that's really liked me, and he's a demon robot. What does that say about me?

Buffy: It doesn't say anything about you.

Willow: I mean, I thought I was really falling...

Buffy: Hey, did you forget? The one boy that I've had the hots for since I've moved here turned out to be a vampire.

Xander: Right, and the teacher I had a crush on? Giant praying mantis?

Willow: That's true.

Xander: Yeah, that's life on the Hellmouth. 

Buffy: Let's face it. None of us are ever going to have a happy, normal relationship. 

Xander: We're doomed!

Willow: Yeah!

(they laugh, then it sinks in, and they fall awkwardly silent)

It's funny. It's still funny, even retrospectively knowing that it's all true.

Like, let's think. Buffy/Angel - yeah, that was never going to work, duh. Buffy/Riley - that kinda fell apart when Riley decided he'd rather be a vampire's juicebox. Buffy/Spike - horrifically abusive for the first half, and the latter half? It was a lot easier to watch than Buffy/Angel, but it still had the same issue, being that he's a vampire.

Willow/Oz was actually pretty close to a happy, normal relationship, except that Oz was a werewolf and left her so as not to hurt her. Willow/Tara was also pretty close to a happy, normal relationship, except for when Willow got all magic-junkie and it got kind of abusive. And then Tara had to go and die. Technically, Willow/Kennedy is the closest this show has ever gotten to a happy, normal relationship, since they were happy, healthy and human, but let's be real, Kennedy's rebound girl. And I'm not a fan.

Xander/Cordelia... I don't really have a problem with, to be totally honest, except that Xander acted like a douche. To be honest, that's probably the closest to a happy, normal relationship, before Xander cheated on Cordy, because again, they were both happy and human at the time, and so much more good for each other than Willow/Kennedy. Xander/Anya is the one I love the most, I think they're perfect for each other, but, um.... Anya was a demon for a thousand years, then became human, then Xander left her at the altar, then she became a demon again and tried to seek revenge, then became human again. I still think they're perfect for each other, but happy and normal? Well..........

And of course, those are only the big relationships. After this episode, we've got Xander falling in love with a girl who turned out to be an Incan mummy who sucked the life force from others to stay alive. Buffy briefly falls for Parker, who isn't Hellmouthy, just the world's biggest douchebag. Also, much later on, Xander falls for a girl who turned out to be a demon who nearly killed him to open the Seal of Balthazar or something like that. Basically, every girl Xander's ever fallen for either had been a demon in the past (Anya), was a demon currently (Inca Mummy Girl, the she-mantis, Demon-Lisa Chick), or would turn into a demon in the future (Anya and Cordy. Yep, even Cordelia).

So, yeah. They're doomed. Their love lives are doomed. Which, somehow, only makes this scene funnier for me.

There still was not enough Cordelia. Season 1 is sorely lacking in Cordelia. I miss the girl who is the mega-popular super-bitch, who has sass coming out of her ears, who is smart enough to do very well in her SATs, but dumb enough to think they can chase a giant snake demon with a box of germs. Cordelia is amazing, I love her when she's there and miss her when she's not and there's just not enough of her.

The good thing? NO ANGEL. Can I get a hallellujah?!

I feel like I haven't talked enough about Willow. Even though the theme of the episode about her insecurity sorta misses the point with her - which, fine, they're still figuring her out and everything - this is still the episode where Willow really proves herself. Even if she just complains at Malcolm for lying to her, she stands her ground when Moloch starts fighting. In fact, when she starts beating him with the fire extinguisher, I had a distinct flashback to Teacher's Pet (for some reason I am able to draw many parallels from this episode to Teacher's Pet), when Xander is chopping up the she-mantis egg sacks with the ax, which in turn reminded me at the time of a later episode in season 2, When She Was Bad, when Buffy is majorly taking a sledgehammer to the Master's skeleton. Seems like everyone gets a moment of "Now it's personal". And if I admire Xander for jumping into a fight without question, I admire Willow just as much for being able to actually hold her own (in these early seasons I admire her for it - in the later seasons, it's kinda just a given, what with the being able to cause gods pain and stuff). So, yes. Go Willow. I am not afraid to admit that I still cheered when she hit that dumb robot with the fire extinguisher. At this point, I still, you know, like her. She's still an interesting, and more importantly, relatable character to me at this point. After she becomes a junkie, that's when I kind of start to lose her.

Also, there is much good banter to be had in this episode. Banter is nice. And, one of the funniest lines that I always laugh at (and quote constantly, though no one recognizes it):

Jenny: (walks into the library and sees Buffy and Xander there again) You're here again? You kids really dig the library, don'tcha?

Buffy: We're literary!

Xander: To read makes our... speaking english good. 

I snort every time.

Buffy on a Rewatch: Angel (S1E07)

The introductory episode to Angel's character. Highly forgettable. Angel is just so BORRRRRRRING. This will probably be a short one because Angel bores me to death.

Summed up: Buffy gets attacked by vamps, Angel jumps into the fray, they make a break for Buffy's house, where Angel stays the night because Buffy doesn't want him leaving and possibly getting attacked again. Note: Angel doesn't put up too much of a fuss when she comes to this conclusion, even though he's a perfectly capable fighter and probably wouldn't get attacked anyways due to the fact that HE'S A VAMPIRE.

The next day, Buffy trains a bit, Xander gets jealous of Angel (whoa, didn't see that one coming), and Buffy gets home to find Angel still there. I guess he couldn't just leave while Buffy's mom was home was his excuse, although it's really because he can't go out in sunlight because HE'S A VAMPIRE. And then...

I can pinpoint the exact moment Angel stopped being an interesting character to me, and it was this:

Angel: I did a lot of thinking today. I really can't be around you. Because when I am...

Buffy: Hey, no big. Water... over the bridge, under the bridge...

Angel: When I am all I can ever think about is how badly I want to kiss you.

OH FOR GOD'S SAKE.

So, Buffy and Angel kiss, and then for some reason when this happens Angel turns vampface, revealing that, spoiler alert, HE'S A VAMPIRE. (I read a theory somewhere that said that he turns vampface because it's a precursor to when he ultimately loses his soul when he and Buffy eventually frickle frackle, which I'll buy, but was that really where their mind was going when it happened? Well...)

And can I just talk about how fundamentally weird the Buffy/Angel relationship is? I mean, besides the perverse vampire/slayer relationship thing, because that I can get over, whatever. I'm more concerned with the fact that Buffy's sixteen. She's my age. And she's in a relationship with a guy who looks like he should be finishing college, and in actuality has been around since the industrial revolution. Like, he wasn't even her age before he was turned. I don't mind Buffy being attracted to him, because, um, that's a nice piece o' man. I do think that Angel, on the other hand, should have the presence of mind to, well, to break her heart. Because, seriously.

And don't get me wrong, there are parts of the Buffy/Angel thing that are genuinely beautiful. The cross thing, for a start (I'll get into that, don't worry), and Becoming (don't worry, I'll probably reference that ordeal). But the relationship bugs me, and that's mostly because Angel has been around since the 1700s, and Buffy's still.... she's still becoming someone. She's still cookie dough. Not even. She's batter. And there's Angel, just eatin' that batter. (This was an extended metaphor Buffy used in the last episode, when Angel asked if they would ever get together. She responded that she was cookie dough, and she wasn't done baking yet, she wasn't done becoming whoever it was she was going to become. Which Angel took to mean, don't worry, you'll get cookies soon, which was SO NOT the point, but anyways).

Honestly, this episode was really not memorable (other people will argue with me but Angel is so boring I just arghhhhhhhh). So I'll just go through the highlights.

We meet Darla. I mean, she was already a recurring character, but we actually meet her here, and what she's all about. Turns out, she and Angel had a thing, since she was his sire and all. I'm very disappointed, actually, because Darla was a recurring villainess who was close to the Master, managed to get an invite into Buffy's house (Buffy's mom made an understandable mistake, whoops), was Angel's sire, and let's face it, was fun and diabolical, and then Angel stakes her by the end of the episode.

Honestly. What were they thinking. Even if Darla wasn't the strongest of villains, that wasn't her primary purpose anyways. She exists to just screw with people. I just keep thinking how much fun could have been had with the weird twisted love triangle between Buffy and Angel and Darla. That would have been a fun dynamic to explore. Unfortunately, Darla gets barely anything to work with from the Buffy series. (Luckily she later gets resurrected on the Angel spin-off. Fun times.)

Although, thinking on it, it's maybe for the best she didn't become a big deal at the time. This is season 1, it's all about the Monster of the Week. I don't think they wanted to alienate people with long-running storylines right away. Still, I think Darla had more to say than people give her credit for. Problem is, she didn't really get to say it.

But yes, Angel kills Darla, which convinces Buffy that Angel is good. Or something like that. This is all after a big long fight between Buffy and Angel, because she was convinced he was evil (he is, after all, a vampire). That was an awesome fight. Is it really bad of me that even on the rewatch I was yelling at my screen, "Kill him! Stake him! KILLL HIMMMMMM!!!!"?

And then the Master throws a little tantrum because he was so fond of Darla, and Angelus used to be such a promising pupil before he got that dumb soul of his, and the Master actually gets quite emotional about the death of Darla (this makes more sense in retrospect, because we find out in the Angel series that Darla was actually sired by the Master. In vampire circles, that pretty much makes him her father). Then he's comforted by the Anointed One who, in case you've forgotten, is like a six year old boy. So, yeah, that's a thing.

Also, I realize that Xander was already wary of Angel just because of teenage jealousy, but can I please  defend him right now and say that he has good reason to distrust Angel. Angel is a vampire. Giles told Xander at the beginning of the series that vampires are not the people they're inhabiting, they're the thing that killed them. Can you blame him? And that's putting aside the fact that Angel was dishonest with Buffy to begin with, and still slept over at her house. Justified distrust, I believe. It's not all about the girl.

Speaking of Xander, that first scene at the Bronze, though. One can only see Xander making a fool of himself for so long before the laughter is replaced with really feeling sorry for him. Or maybe that's just me.

Also, Buffy kicks Giles's ass during training. It's delicious.

Buffy: Cool! Crossbow! Goodbye stakes, hello flying fatality. What can I shoot?

Giles: Uh, nothing. The crossbow comes later. You must first become proficient with the basic tools of combat. And let's begin with the quarterstaff. Which, incidentally, will require hours of vigorous training. I speak from experience. 

Buffy: Giles, 20th century? I'm not going to be fighting Friar Tuck. 

Giles: You never know with whom or what you'll be fighting. Now, you show me good, steady progress with the quarterstaff, and in due course we'll discuss the crossbow. Now put on your pads.

Buffy: I'm not gonna need pads to fight you. 

Giles: Well, we'll see about that. En garde!

(They fight with the quarterstaffs. Buffy blocks all of Giles's blows, then pretty much just whoops him good.)

Giles: (laying on the ground) Good. Let's move on to the crossbow. 

I mean, even besides the fact that it's funny, the balance of power between Buffy and Giles is such a fascinating dynamic. It's one of the things that can shift so quickly, and they both let the scale sway as it will and it's just really fun and interesting to see.

And what else was there..... Buffy's mom gets attacked by Darla, and for some reason people still think it's a good idea to just not tell Joyce about vampires and demons and the Slayer... even Giles, which I don't understand. Although Giles is all about  letting Buffy learn on her own, though, so maybe that's one of those things, where he'll go along with it so that Buffy will eventually just see how dumb it is and not get upset with him. I dunno, seems weird to me. Also, how does Joyce not suspect anything? Literally everyone in Sunnydale seems to be victim to this weird denial thing, where whenever anything weird happens, they completely forget about it, and usually blame it on gang fights. Again, how much gang activity could there possibly be in a "one Starbucks town like Sunnydale"?

But the most important part of this episode I think was the end. The symbolism was rich and great and yeah, even as someone who isn't a huge fan of the Buffy/Angel, I can appreciate this.

Remember in the first episode, Angel gave Buffy a cross necklace. It saved her from Luke before, and so she wears it all the time now (and will wear it even during Becoming, which I think says a lot). So basically, they're at the Bronze, and they kiss, and it's this sweet thing. Then, as Buffy walks away to meet with her friends, camera goes to Angel, watching her go, and then down to his chest, where there's a cross-shaped burn on his chest where Buffy was leaning against him when they were kissing.

Because he's a vampire, and so her cross necklace burned him. And he said nothing. Because he loves her. Or something.

Again, as someone who doesn't love the Buffy/Angel, I can still appreciate the symbolism here. Star crossed lovers and all. It's the perfect story of people who can never be together, but they will try and love each other anyways. The cross necklace comes to represent all of that.

I really don't like star-crossed lover stories. Have I mentioned that yet? There just isn't a new way to twist it to make it interesting. No matter the reason why they can't be together, the story will be the same. Love, tears, love, heartbreak. Sometimes death. Whoops, just summed up the entire three season long arc. Did I mention that it's a story that no one has found a way to retell differently?

I always say the post will probably be short and then it ends up being long. It's official. I am physically incapable of writing something under 1000 words.

But yeah, Angel's a guy, he has a dark past, he's a vampire, but he's also a good guy and attractive, so hey, welcome to the team, I guess. Ugh.

There was nothing else noteworthy about this episode. It was basically just a "We need to set up this character properly" type thing. Changed just about nothing, except now Darla's dead. I'll be happy to get back to our Monster of the Week chain (four more before the grand finale), because in my opinion, season 1 Monsters of the Week were some of the most fun.

One last thing: Whedon LIED! Welcome to the Hellmouth was not the last time we saw Xander with a skateboard! Because he has one in this episode! I mean, he's not riding it, he's just carrying it like the big doofus that he is, but still. It exists. Although I'd be willing to bet that this is the last time we ever see Xander with a skateboard at all. He's just... not a skateboarder.

Okay, yes, I believe that is all.

The Fault in Our Stars: Movie Review

The book is beautiful.

The movie is equally beautiful.

They're both beautiful.

I do not use the word "beautiful" lightly.

You should read and watch both of them immediately.

First of all, the movie is so faithful to the book, and that's nice, because the book was wonderful. They didn't change Hazel's illness so that she doesn't have to have tubes sticking into her nose the entire movie, and they don't change the way Augustus and Hazel speak so that they sound more like the media's primary idea of what a teenager sounds like rather than the intelligent and articulate people that they are. Which is nice.

Secondly, you will cry like a baby. I know I did. I was sobbing in the theatre. This movie will do that to you. I thought I'd made it, I'd read the book and knew what was going to happen and then suddenly - BAM! - Augustus's car scene, and - BAM! - Hazel and Augustus are picnicking by the Funky Bones for the second time and then - BAM! - Hazel and Isaac and Augustus are in the Literal Heart of Jesus, and then - BAM! - that phone call in the middle of the night, and finally, the final - BAM! - "Okay, Hazel?" "Okay." (Did I manage to describe all the most heart-breaking scenes without actually spoiling anything? I think so. Go me).

Basically, you will cry a lot, and it's best to just accept it now. As someone who knew it was coming from the get-go, and who cried like a little baby nonetheless, I guarantee it.

Thirdly, you will laugh. Also quite a bit. I know I just described how you will cry so hard and sadness and just all the tears, but there is also a lot of humour to be found in this movie, and that's what makes it work. It's not a happy-go-lucky romcom, but it's also not a "We are desperately pulling out every trick in the book to make sure your eyes are never dry throughout this entire film" kind of movie, because neither of those are really truthful. Life has laughter and tears, that's the truth, that's what's real, and so that's what the movie does. Which is a lot of what makes it so smart and sharp and great.

The acting is fantastic. Really really amazing. Because, the thing is, it could have gone horribly wrong. Augustus could have been turned into a pretentious prick who only talks in such grandiose fashion to sound smart, with words so clearly written by someone behind a laptop instead of coming from his head that they practically sound like they're being read off a teleprompter. The reason being that he had a lot of speeches with a lot of thesaurus-y words. But it still didn't come off like that. Because that's the character. He does that when he's making an important point that he wants to make important, and you get that. Which is only one of the examples of very good acting in the film.

Also, it's just really artfully shot. It's like, every single shot looks like a painting that you could put on your wall and frame. It's just very pretty.

Also, like John Green (the author, and also coincidentally the ruler of the Internet), the movie really utilizes having the perfect words. Again, that doesn't mean that the words sound unrealistic and wooden, it just means that they're put together in a way that's quite poetic, and you know that someone spent time thinking about just the right way to say these things, but simultaneously, you have absolutely no problem believing, for the moment, that the person who did that was the person saying them. Does that make sense? I think it makes sense.

The only thing I would change is that they did not actually use the quote, "there is much fault to be found in our stars" (in relation to the Shakespeare quote from Julius Caesar, I think, in which someone says, "the fault is not in our stars/but in ourselves"). But they did use every other significant quote from the novel, including the everlasting, "Some infinities are bigger than other infinities" which starts as a mathematical paradox that blossoms into this resonating symbolism, as well as the "I fell in love the way you fall asleep" quote, and all the other quotes that everyone quotes ("I'm on a rollercoaster that only goes up, my friend") so I guess I can live without that one, even though it was actually the main one that really got to me, personally.

But, yeah. The movie is wonderful, and I will say it again because I truly believe it, it is beautiful, and I remind you, that is not a word I use lightly. So see it. Just do it.

Where's that quote from, I wonder?
Also, this picture was, in fact, taken with a potato.

Not that I'm biased or anything. 

P.S But honestly, with all integrity as someone who really reaches deep into film and books and stories, it is genuinely a very good movie. 

The End Games: Review-ish Type Thingy

The book is delicious.

Seriously, it's the only way I can describe it. You savour every tense minute of reading it. It's delectable, it's exquisite, it's JUST. SO. GOOD.

Summary:

The zombie apocalypse has happened.

I know, old news, right? Well, here's the thing. It's not like all the (entertaining, but frankly) stupid zombie movies you see being cranked out all the time these days. It's not like that because it uses the apocalypse as a backdrop, not the main event. The book could pretty much be set at any time period where apocalyptic-type things are happening, and it would be just as engaging and wonderful. Certainly, the zombie apocalypse presents a few interesting features to be explored, but again, it doesn't take over the plot.

So, if that's not the main event, then what is?

Well, amid the zombie infested wasteland left behind after everyone either died or found the Safe Zone, two brothers wander around, also looking for the Safe Zone. One is Michael, seventeen years old, and the other is Patrick, five years old, both total gamer nerd guys. Michael is eternally protecting his little brother. And everything after that much information is pretty much a spoiler. There are that many twists in the book.

So, if you don't want the spoilers, stop reading here, and just know that the book is utterly fantastic and wonderful and don't even think take time to think about reading it, just read it because it is just so utterly worth it.

Are the spoiler-less people gone? Good. Full spoilers ahead.

So, Patrick has some kind of special needs. It's never fully explained what sort of special needs that is, we just know that he's been to the mental hospital a few times and needs pills to calm himself down and stuff like that. We soon discover from Michael's memories that if Patrick gets too upset, he will Freak. Freaking involves harming himself, and then basically going comatose. It happened once before, and it was a miracle that he ever came back from that. So, when the apocalypse happens, Michael is very worried that it'll happen to his brother again, so he basically tells his brother that it's all a game. Like a video game. Which means that nothing can actually hurt them, so there's no reason for Patrick to get too upset. And once they get to the end (the Safe Zone) and find their mother, then the game will be over.

Sound screwed up? Maybe a little. But remember, Patrick is a five year old boy who wants to believe this, and Michael isn't doing it for the laughs, he's doing it to protect his brother.

It's also slowly revealed through their memories that Michael and Patrick come from an abusive home, where their step-father would hit their mother and eventually, hit Michael. That's how the first Freak came about - Patrick saw his father (Michael's step-father, Patrick's father) hit his mother. This seems like kind of a soap opera-y thing to throw in there, but it's executed so beautifully, where they reveal it slowly, until you're suspicious, until you're absolutely certain, and by that point it makes perfect sense to reveal it, because parallels are drawn between Michael's step-father and Captain Jopek, the soldier who saved them and brought them to the Safe Zone, which, whoops, isn't actually all that safe. THEN it's slowly revealed that the parallels drawn between Jopek and his step-father are actually kind of invalid, given that his step-father was, from what we can glean from the text (we only ever meet him briefly, in a flashback), basically just mindless mean muscle. Jopek, on the other hand, is crazy and murderous, but very skilled and very cunning.

Which makes Captain Jopek an absolutely delicious character. He changes his persona at the drop of a hat, and can be heroic and then terribly villainous and the truth is that he can do this because he's just totally insane. I've read and reread the chapter where he has Michael handcuffed and is "interrogating" him, and it's just so fascinating and great and, as Michael would say, yes-yes.

Actually, every character in this book is wonderful. They're layered and complex and yeah, I'll say it again, delicious. That is literally the best word to describe this book, as a whole. Michael is a character who lies his way through most of the story, but you can tell that he's trying so hard to be a good person. Patrick, young as he may be, is never ever shown to be stupid, just naive and innocent, which I appreciated, especially since he was special needs. Jopek is such a great character to read about just in general, and Holly, Hank and Bobbie are interesting and good as well in their own ways (while they last..... mwahaha).

But mostly, the book is just so clever. There are so many things in the book that I've never seen in relation to the genre before, but that make so much sense and are so plausible. Like, the Rapture. A group of people that believe the zombies (or the Bellows, as Michael calls them - they bellow every word they hear) are God's chosen ones. They actually protect and worship the Bellows. And often sacrifice people to them. Or to God. Or to whoever their insane priest says they're sacrificing them to.

And the idea of the virus that causes the Bellows to be Bellows mutating. At first the Bellows are stray and alone, then the mutation instructs them to band together, then the mutation instructs them to claw out their own eyes so they can go out in sunlight, then the mutation actually changes the Bellows into Shrieks, which can be shot multiple times without being killed, and can climb on the walls and the ceiling, until we finally see the end mutation, or, how Michael puts it in the book, the End Game.

Artistic license on science? Well, yeah. Cool idea? Damn straight.

Mostly, when I read this, I was (and am) just so enamoured with the real centerpoint of the whole thing, which is that Michael is eternally protecting his little brother, no matter what it takes. If that means throwing himself down a cliff on a bike, he'll do it. If that means getting shot in the leg, he'll do it. If that means running headlong into the place where the virus originated, and where all the Shrieks are inhabiting, and where the insane head of the Rapture is waiting, he'll do it. He does it. Because he will protect Patrick to the bitter end, and I think that's beautiful.

There's also this fun thing with Holly, who he meets at the (not-so-)Safe Zone. It's this teensy little teenage romance in the midst of all this, and I'm usually not into all that, but they play it on the down-low, and then when it does become a highlight it's absolutely adorable, so how can I not like it?

Alright, but out with the fangirl and in with the english teacher. Let's talk theme.

Well, obviously, there is fraternal love. That plays hugely into just about everything Michael does. Which, again, isn't that just so lovely?

But there's also this sort of slightly subtler one about spirituality and the great beyond. You don't really expect it to go anywhere, though, because it's brought up by Bobbie, who dies about halfway through the book - I'm allowed to say that because the spoiler-less people are gone now - but she talks about praying and believing in a greater power. Michael doesn't really believe in any of that, but he does note that sometimes he feels like something else is happening besides the adrenaline-pumped triumph of yes-yes. He describes it like clockwork, like things beyond his control are just aligning right. Also, the deer comes to represent spiritual hope, which, again, is kind of a metaphor that goes nowhere, until the end when the deer inexplicably saves Patrick from Rulon (the head of the Rapture) and it's just such a sense of wonder that you get when reading about it, which is what you're supposed to get, and it's just masterful. What's also good is the conclusion to that question that we get, and I quote:

"Bobbie could have been right, Michael supposed. There could be something watching over them. But if there is, he thought, I don't think I could understand it in a billion years."

What were you expecting, he'd find God? He'd get down on his knees and praise Him and sing Hallellujah? Maybe in a different story, but I find this conclusion much more realistic. And I find myself finding much more beauty in art when it really reflects life.

But, and I know I've said this before, but I love the character of Michael. Because he's just so undeniably flawed. He made so many mistakes through this story, I can't even begin. But I never liked him any less for those. And this isn't an atonement story by any stretch of the imagination, but you know that he's trying very hard to be a good person. Even when he makes those mistakes, he's not trying to screw things up. Usually, he's trying to help someone. And watching him wrestle with morality and how to be a really good person, it hurts my heart, but at the same time, it's such good reading, and strangely relatable? Maybe not in quite the same way, and it may be just me, but anyways let's not look too deeply into that bin of psychology.

There's also the theme of identity, and how Michael wants to be himself, but he also is aware of how he often makes these horrid mistakes in the wake of the apocalypse, and he calls himself a puzzle that only he is giving other people the pieces too, which is a metaphor that just spoke to me. Basically, he's giving the people around him only enough information about himself to make it look like he's much more savvy and skilled and good than he actually is. But he knows that he isn't that person, and slowly, the others find out that he isn't that person either. Before the plot goes into overdrive (which whew, so many things happening, delicious!!!) Holly comments that Patrick must really love him, and Micheal thinks, not love, more like worship, and has a feeling that love and worship are not the same thing.

By the end of the book, however? Patrick has seen the human flaws of Michael that he had to tried so hard to keep hidden, but as a result of that, Patrick now really does love him.

Basically, the core of what I'm getting at here, in the center of this (wonderfully analytical) dance, is warmth. Most zombie stories lack warmth. Dead people rise, more people die, people panic. This story isn't like that. This story contains such a human warmth in it, has such heart, and that's the point. People keep going, and even if the world is falling down around them, they won't give up, and they won't lose their souls to it either, like in Dawn of the Dead where everything is shooting and shouting and killing. (Don't get me wrong, I like Dawn of the Dead, it's a fun movie, far as horrors go, I just find that this book actually touched me on a deeper level). The first chapter is absolutely addicting by itself, beyond the shadow of a doubt, but the warm heart that keeps the story moving and keeps it emotionally engaging is what turns a good book into a great book. Or, yeah, I'll say it again, a delicious one.

Also, this is the epigraph for the book:

It fits the story more than it has any right to. 

Basically, I know it's Teen Fiction, which tends to be questionable, but I promise you, this book is so worth the read. So much so. I don't know how much I can rave about it to convince people. Just trust me on this one. It's fantabulicious.

Okay I'm done.

UPDATE:

Haha, just kidding, I wasn't done.

See, before I even knew about the book, I was subscribed to the book's author, T. Michael Martin on Youtube. I honestly don't know why I didn't think to do this before I posted this, but basically, I think it's necessary to show you what kind of delightfully thoughtful and intelligent mind we have behind The End Games here, because I found his videos thought-provoking.

Okay now I'm really done for suresies.

The True Inner Monologue

So I was getting some filler footage for my film project which involved typing at a computer, so I just opened up a new post on my blog and started typing. I didn't realize I saved it until I found it just now, and I thought it might be entertaining to read, so here you are, though it is mildly edited for clarity's sake.

So yeah I definitely need to type something right now because I'm filming something for nerds typing about stuff they like hah does that sound familiar anyone? hahaha. So yeah. I think I might have enough now. Let's try that again in case I want to use the typing noise without Linkin Park being played in the background. Okay I think this should be enough now. Okay. I'm done. I think. Gooooood. So I guess I'm trying this again except with my hands more in focus this time. This is all going to be stock footage anyways so I'm not sure why I'm working so hard on it but I guess it's good to have because stock footage may be kind of important for this project. Ah. This is so frustrating because it's just going to turn into a huge slideshow without any footage that we actually took and Miss Bates is going to be all mad but whatever we dug our graves now we have to lie in it. Arghhhhh. So I'm doing this again except this time I'm doing a different shot that's not just of my hands because yeah that's necessary let's just take all the stock footage. Quoting memes. This is why I'm doing a documentary on geeks. I feel like this could have been great if it wasn't so bad argh.





Isn't that just telling.