The Hobbit Stinks!! Part 3

Now that I've gotten all that nostalgia off of my chest...

I have to be straight with you, when we got out of the theater and everyone in my party was gushing over the movie and saying, "I can't think of anything they did wrong." 

I was thinking, "Welll...I can think of like five things." But I didn't say anything cuz that would be a JERK thing to do...

Just like those guys in the back of the theater who were bashing Legolas and talking about how stupid the dwarves were RIGHT BEFORE THE FRIKIN' MOVIE!

------------------

If you haven't seen the movie, this post will probably not make any sense to you. And even if you have seen it, there's no guarantee that my command of the english language will be decipherable.

But just in case: Be advised, this post contains spoilers for The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies.

This post is the third and last in a series exploring why the movies in The Hobbit Franchise Stink.

Here is part one (I also explain what it means for a movie to stink in this post, it's not always a bad thing)

Here is part two 

Here is Part Three:

Changes That Didn't Stink (as bad)

• Attack on Dol Guldur 

I'd been waiting for this scene ever since I found out they were expanding The Hobbit's plot beyond Bilbo's POV. Gandalf tells Bilbo about how he and the rest of the White Council stormed the Necromancer's lair and drove him out of Mirkwood. A bunch of magic people casting out a dark sourceror sounds preety cool, it's even cooler when the Necromancer is actually a disguised Sauron and the "Magic People" are all your favorite mentor-characters from LOTR

IT FINALLY HAPPENS!!! and it did not disappoint. In LOTR, you feel like you're seeing them waining, here you get to see them fight in their hay-day.

(they should do this more often)

My only gripe is: the scene was over pretty fast. :(

• Thranduil

This one is mixed for me. Thranduil in the movies is a very different type of person than he is in the book. Its as if they took a guy with the exact same tragic back story and had him deal with that trauma in a completely different way. 

Thranduil is a seriously damaged dude.

(And not just cuz of his face)

I was watching waiting for the moment when this character was going to get confronted with the magnitude of the destruction that's going on around him. (and kinda go "hey, maybe I should not be such a jerkface") A moment moves him to pity his destitute human neighbors, or recognize/regret his role in magnifying a political dispute.

That moment did not happen

(Don't even get your hopes up for a Thorin/Thranduil reconciliation...not going to happen...)

Thranduil has so many examples of good behavior around him. Bard, Bilbo, Gandalf, Tauriel, Legolas and he takes absolutely none of them to heart. 

I won't say he's heartless, but he might be the most cold-hearted primary character in these movies. When helps the people of Laketown, but makes it clear he's only doing this so he can get his monies. He has this moment during the battle where he stops and looks around at the loss of life around him, but wherase in the book takes into the account the loss of all life (goblins, dwarves, humans, elves) Thranduil is ONLY looking at his own people.

He has this great opportunity to tell his son that he loves him and he chooses not to. And the reconciliation arc between himself and Tauriel is very self-referential. He's talking about her heartbreak, but he's really talking about his own. 

In general, Thranduil is beyond empathy for anything that doesn't affect him personally. AND HE DOESN'T CHANGE.

Usually, this is the type of thing I would find completely irritating in a story, but in this case it made sense. Thranduil is (in a sense) dead on the inside. 

In a story that deals with issues like grief and loss, it's meaningful to have a character who is so irremediably damaged by them.

(On a side note: I really would have loved to see Thranduil finally getting his hands on those diamonds. I really would have loved to know if it was worth it to him.)

• Thorin

I was very close to putting this on the list of thinks that stink, but I think that (despite some inconsistencies and one pretty cheesy moment) it was meaningful.

In the movie, the gold sickness pretty much ONLY effects Thorin. And the manner in which it affects him resembles an episode of psychosis: complete with paranoia and hallucinations. 

The thing I don't like about this alteration is that it robs the story of a moral complexity. If you'd like to read more about moral complexity in The Hobbit, I'd like to suggest this post: In Defense of Bilbo Baggins

For Book!Thorin confronting the reality of a five-sided battle is what made him re-evalute his priories. 

(It's one thing to think, "OMGosh I hate those guys I wish they would all just die." and then sitting there, watching it happen.)

Movie!Thorin overcomes Gold Sickness by confronting his own feelings of guilt and inadequacy...by himself...in one scene. 

It sounds cheesy, and I thought it was at first too...

But in Tolkien's world, people become heroes by embracing humility, and the journey Thorin goes on in this version of the story embraces that morality. 

Even though he's a king and he's prideful and he's gained all of this wealth and power

He still sees himself as the guy who was reduced

 to fixing other people's stuff for a living.

 It's clear that Thorin's "pride" at the beginning of the movie is corrupt. It doesn't stem from self-confidence; it exists to cover up some really, really severe self-esteem issues. 

I think the most compelling personal journey in the series is when Thorin chooses to drop that facade. Thorin chooses a humility and, unlike the hobbit main characters in the story, it does not come naturally to him. But ultimately, it's a choice of self-acceptance and self-affirmation. 

There is a saying I read that goes: "True pride and true humility are exactly the same thing."

Subconsciously I think I've always realized this, but in recent years I've come to know that it's not a concept that a lot of people understand. For that reason, I'm very glad it was included in this movie.

If you'd like to read more about hubris: there's a pretty cool article from Aloha International.

• Killing the dragon-

It was over in like five minutes, but it was a super intense five minutes...not like they were trying to get it over with. The fact that they were able to reinforce a father/child trust relationship in the midst of all that was amazing.

• Romantic Subplot

People who are not fond of this romance will hate this movie. The story-arc pretty much follows their most negative expectations...

(It's a straight up love story. Not even a love triangle. Tauriel never loved Legolas I don't know why people kept thinking that she did, she seemed totally uncomfortable and weirded out when thranduil suggests it And Legolas discovers that his feelings for Tauriel because he identifies her with his mother.) 

As a person who never hated the idea of romance in this story, I was not at all offended. In fact I thought it was really meaningful. 

Remember that Hobbit Radio Drama from BBC I mentioned in my last post?

(No mormonhippie, I don't.) 

The radio drama introduces Rivendell as a community of elves with mixed-race heritage and introduces the king of Rivendell "Elrond Half-elven". 

Well, I automatically assumed that some of their ancestors were dwarves. So it wasn't hard for me to imagine a dwarf/elf relationship when I was first exposed to the story.

Nowhere in Tolkien's work is the possibility of such a union contradicted and the one time this elf chick's jealous elf-boyfriend says anything like "elves and mortals aren't supposed to get married except for, like, one or two times" (In The Children of Hurin)...Tolkien contradicts that by creating a whole other community of mortal half-elves (in Return of the King). This leads me to believe that inter-racial marriage in middle earth was fairly common, even though it probably wasn't talked about a whole lot. 

So, as a response to the question, "Why did they need an elf/dwarf romance??" 

 In a story that's about the importance of compromise, reconciling differences, and appreciating the beauty in other people I say:

"WHY THE HECK NOT??!?!?!"

Can't think of anything that could present these themes in a better way than an inter-racial romance. And although it didn't quite turn out the way I thought it would, it emphasized a sense of the sense of permanent personal loss that was absent in other aspects of the story.

*On a side note: 

Elrond, man...can you imagine what it would be like

 to watch your TWIN brother grow old and die 

while you stay young forever? #ugh #feels

I'm not saying these were improvements upon the book, because most of them are not. But I do understand why these alterations were made and I believe they were appropriate given the change from literary to cinematic format. 

And Now... 

The Things That Stink about "The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies"

• Music

I really didn't notice any new themes when  I watched he movie. I bought the soundtrack on CD to try and listen to it more closely...and the first CD sounds like relaxing background music.

 Kinda lame, especially when most of the movie is fight scenes and all they can play is 'LET'S ALL FREAKING FALL ASLEEP' music

I guess after 5 movies you run out of ideas.

Sad story: The second CD (the one with the credit's song that I really wanted to listen to) split in half before we could even take it out of the container.

 /Cry. 

Billy Boyd has a fantastic voice and the song that he sings during the credits is a lovely tribute to all the people who've spent their lives creating these movies. 

• Azog and Bolg, The Albino Goblins Who Magically Transformed Into Orcs...

They finally mention that these two guys are family (Legolas refers to Bolg as "the spawn of Azog" ) 

But that's about it.  The Book!Hobbit provided this excellent template for exploring the fact that goblins and orcs are people (I mean...corrupt evil people but still) . I think it would have been cool if Bolg's motivation were seeking revenge for the death of his dad (like in the book). But that road was not taken, and I'm disappointed.  

• Bilbo

In terms of acting, I think this movie might be the first time I looked at the character and saw Bilbo and not Martin Freeman (and that was mostly due to his interaction's with Thorin). It's unfortunate that, as far as characterization, Bilbo never succeeds on his own merits. 

 Like I have mentioned before, I don't think this is the actor's fault. The writers gutted Bilbo's personality and either deleted or redistributed everything that made him a unique and engaging character to character's like Tauriel or Legolas. 

His character arc began and finished in the first film, and quality of this series has suffered for it.

• The Battle

I'm not going to go into detail on this one; I'm just going to say that Professor Tolkien wrote out a very involved, dynamic, and compelling battle scene... that I would have LOVED to see on screen...and the filmmakers pretty much scrapped it. Also, it really stinks that Wargs aren't represented as one of the five armies, I liked the idea that wargs are sentient and have their own government and everything, but no...in the movies they're just cool looking horses. 

One thing I did like was that Bilbo was a bit more involved and didn't get knocked out until the end.  

• Pacing (I'm not talking about people walking back and forth, or that actor who plays Thranduil)

An adverse effect of stretching one small book into three big movies is that you have to fill the movies with fluff. (I wouldn't mind the fluff if they included the parts of the story with substance as well; unfortunately they don't) 

But there is another problem as well-

Do you remember this moment? 

(The Bilbo/Thorin hug?)

It's sweet

And awkward.

And says a lot about their relationship.

In the book, there is no single definite moment in which Bilbo "wins" Thorin's affection and friendship. Bilbo and Thorin don't emotionally get to the "Hug" stage until the final act. 

It's sweet

Because Bilbo has been hungering for acceptance and respect since day #1. He's no longer the dorky little brother who needs protecting, Thorin makes it clear that he's respected and valued as an equal.

It's awkward 

Because Bilbo is contemplating treachery. He's just spend this whole book building these relationships with these people and he's about to give it all up. 

It's gut-wrenching and ultimately tragic and it did not translate well to the movie because they built the Thorin/Bilbo relationship in one scene two movies ago.

• Alfrid Wormtongue (I don't care if that's not his real last name)

This character started out pretty interesting. He's an a bit of an inept opportunist; he's not evil, but he's not particularly noble or good. He's morally ambigous and, at the start, it makes him a breath of fresh air. 

Until his third fourth FIFTH vignette...Then you're just hoping he dies as soon as possible. 

• Good vs. Evil

This aspect of the story wouldn't have been so bad IF THE HOBBIT WERE IN FACT A STORY ABOUT GOOD and EVIL...

I'm very embarrassed that some fairly intelligent people (Like Peter Jackson, the three movie reviewers I read today, and millions of movie-viewers all over the world) think that this story is about good and evil

Guys....

The Lord of The Rings is a story about Good vs. Evil...

The Hobbit is a story about Right vs. Wrong

That may seem nitpicky, but it's an important distinction. None of the characters are confronting evil, they are confronting each other (and themselves).

Conclusion:

This movie would have been absolutely wonderful if it weren't for the book. The book, according to new line cinema, is a pesky juvenile fairytale novella that  just isn't worthy of the big screen...that is...until Peter Jackson came along and fixed it.

To be fair, Peter Jackson didn't want to do the job; and I have the feeling that, instead of resigning himself to it as an obligation...as something that he had to do...

he owned it... (a little too much so)

Like, 'If I'm going to do this job, I'm going to do it my way.'

I can't say I resent him for pressing his advantage, especially when he's sacrificed so much of his life and health for something that he apparently didn't want to do in the first place.

I am a bit pissed at people who look down on The Hobbit because it's a more of a fairy tale that just happens to exist in a world of high fantasy. This is not an opinion that was created by the hobbit-movies, but I am seeing it expressed more as people are exploring the source material for the hobbit movies and finding something lacking.

(If you have a general distaste for fairy tales...and I mean, like, Grim-Brothers stuff...the old folk-tales type stuff but hold High Fantasy in regard....PHLEESE DO NOT READ THE HOBBIT!!!

I would also recommend that you refrain from reading The Smith of Wootton Major, Leaf by Niggle or any of JRR Tolkien's works outside of The Lord of the Rings.

These stories will NOT live up to your expectations, PLEASE DON'T READ THEM....

also you suck)

It wouldn't be so bad if these movies weren't called "The Hobbit: [Insert Subtitle Here]" That title suggests the story is actually about one particular character having all these things happen to him....

and that's NOT what these movies are about.

I used to think it would be cool if they made a movie called "Thorin and Company" (because it sounds cool) and it would emphasize this colorful group of people and the different roles each member had (with emphasis on the burglar, of course). That would be epic... (I need to make a poster)

But that's not even what this movie did.

A lot of people like to pretend that Peter Jackson was using Tolkien's unfinished tales/history of middle earth to "fluff" the hobbit story with a history of middle earth (like Thorin's backstory, Thranduil's people, and Azog's background etc.)

(by people who like to fool themselves into thinking that The Hobbit films honor Tolkien's vision of middle earth) 

 if that's the case, he did a pretty bad job at that because those storylines were misrepresented as well.


So what does this movie NOT suck at?

It's good fanfiction.

I don't mean this in a disrespectful way (not all fanfiction is bad) but it's less of an adaption than it is a re-creation. 

I can accept it as an affectionate nod to Tolkien (or rather the Lord of the Rings movies), but it does not necessarily honor the source material. 

Hobbit Nostalgia Post

Yesterday I finished watching The Hobbit Trilogy in theater. And as much I'd love to tell you how much it sucks, I'm too caught up on nostalgia of the past 14+ years of my life.

 So, that's what I'm going to talk about first.

 If you don't want to a review my adolescent/Tolkien #feels please skip this post. I'll upload the content/thematic review shortly (either tomorrow or, you know, whenever I feel like it)

Annyyway....

When I was about 13-14, my sister Red got a dramatized edition of The Hobbit on five white cassette tapes with grainy, 1968-era audio sound (That, judging from the reviews on the product, pretty much everyone except me hates)

The story/script was compelling. Right from the beginning, there are these vivid descriptions that lead into the story without weighing the story down.

The cast was fantastic; The Narrator, the bumbling/stuttering Bilbo Baggins ("B-A-double-G-I-N-S"), Thorin, Gandalf and Gollum. Later, when I started Fellowship of the Ring and decided I should read the book version of The Hobbit, those voices were the ones I imagined.

Movie-goers fell in love with Richard Armitage's voice as he sang the adventure-anthem "Far Over The Misty Mountains" for the movie. (and for good reason, it's an excellent rendition). In the same way, fell in love the version of that song in the radio drama. It's longer, the tone is different but to me it's every even more enchanting because its the song that first ushered me into the adventure.

(I loved this song so much, I wrote more verses to it....mostly about what the people in Dale were doing when the dragon attacked and about what the dwarves were planning on doing. They weren't very good, but you know...fanfiction.)

I don't recall if I was babysitting or at school, but for some reason Red was able to listen to the story ahead of where we had left off. She left me in Gollum's Cave, she was at the Battle of Five Armies. When I  opened the door to the room, she was listening to the last cassette tape...

"NO!! You can't come in!!" 

...and she slammed her body against the door to keep me out.

"You have to listen to it all the way though!" 

I typically don't mind being spoiled when it comes to plot points, but I am so glad my sister did this for me.

 I went in to listening to the story no knowing what was going to happen. She wasn't being mean or anything, we both were enjoying the story and I knew if she didn't want me to skip chapters, it was because what was coming next was really, really good. And that just skipping to the end would make me enjoy it less.

She was totally right. The last 1/3 of the story blew me away.

One of the reasons I think the story resonated with me is because of what was happening in my life at the time.

If I recall correctly we started the story just prior to, or concurrently with, me beginning community college courses and volunteering at the hospital (and, in general, preparing for the future that I wanted to have: as a nurse, as a young adult, and ultimately as a wife/parent).

Bilbo's beginning could have easily been written as a midlife crisis (If it was, he would be looking back at his life with regret and book!Bilbo doesn't do this.) but Tolkien didn't do that. Even though Bilbo is an older man when the story begins, this story is his coming of age. It's the part of his life in which he's deciding who he wants to be.

A Few of Bilbo's "Teen" Struggles:

•  He worries about what other people think about him

• He's wants to be dependable and worthy of trust

• He lacks practical experience. 

• He struggles with fitting in.

• He gets depressed and overwhelmed (and kinda gothy)

• He gets obnoxious and cocky

• He (sometimes) gets lonely, even when he's surrounded by a bunch of people.

• He's competent

• He's the anti hero

I think I can pretty much echo Movie!Gandalf when he says:

Sometimes when I was in school or at work I would quote Bilbo to myself. Not the really memorable/meaningful quotes, just the little snippets of Bilbo being Bilbo: When I was overwhelmed (Why oh why did I ever leave my hobbit hole), or pleased with myself (Now I am a burglar indeed.) or disappointed ([So this is victory...] It seems a very gloomy business).

It sound really pathetic, but it gave me a lot of encouragement because I idolized him (still do ;))

Even if no one had ever thought to turn Tolkien's books into movies, this story would still have had a affect on my life (but it's probably would have been something that I'd have kept in my heart...Not posted twenty blog posts about, or dressed up as Thorin Oakenshield when I go to the theater.)


Here are some of my favorite (meaningful) Quotes from The Hobbit:


“He fought the real battle in the tunnel alone, before he ever saw the vast danger that lay in wait.” 

A sudden understanding, a pity mixed with horror, welled up in Bilbo's heart: a glimpse of endless unmarked days without light or hope of betterment, hard stone, cold fish, sneaking and whispering. All these thoughts passed in a flash of a second. he trembled. And then quite suddenly in another flash, as if lifted by a new strength and resolve, he leaped.

“Well, are you alive or are you dead?” asked Bilbo quite crossly. Perhaps he had forgotten that he had had at least one good meal more than the dwarves, and also the use of his arms and legs, not to speak of a greater allowance of air. “Are you still in prison, or are you free? If you want food, and if you want to go on with this silly adventure–it’s yours after all and not mine–you had better slap your arms and rub your legs and try and help me get the others out while there is a chance!”

“Then something Tookish woke up inside him, and he wished to go and see the great mountains, and hear the pine-trees and the waterfalls, and explore the caves, and wear a sword instead of a walking-stick.

“Go back?" he thought. "No good at all! Go sideways? Impossible! Go forward? Only thing to do! On we go!" So up he got, and trotted along with his little sword held in front of him and one hand feeling the wall, and his heart all of a patter and a pitter.”

“Surely you don’t disbelieve the prophecies, because you had a hand in bringing them about yourself? You don’t really suppose, do you, that all your adventures and escapes were managed by mere luck, just for your sole benefit? You are a very fine person, Mr. Baggins, and I am very fond of you; but you are only quite a little fellow in a wide world after all!” 

“You! You!” cried Thorin, turning upon him and grasping him with both hands. “You miserable hobbit! You undersized—burglar!” he shouted at a loss for words, and he shook poor Bilbo like a rabbit.

“Thief, thief, thief! Baggins! We hates it, we hates it, we hates it forever!” 


“You certainly usually find something, if you look, but it is not always quite the something you were after.” 

“Gandalf, dwarves and Mr. Baggins! We are met together in the house of our friend and fellow conspirator, this most excellent and audacious hobbit—may the hair on his toes never fall out!” 

"[I] have no use for adventures. Nasty, disturbing, and uncomfortable things! Make you late for dinner! I can't think what anybody sees in them."  

“Don't tell us about dreams – dream dinners aren't any good and we can't share them.” 

“I may be a burglar...but I'm an honest one, I hope, more or less.” 

“To the end of his days Bilbo could never remember how he found himself outside, without a hat, a walking stick or any money, or anything he usually took when he went out; leaving his second breakfast half-finished and quite unwashed-up, pushing his keys into Gandalf’s hands, and running as fast as his furry feet could carry him down the lane, past the great Mill, across The Water, and then on for a mile or more.”

T: Trauma

Here is a link to a PDF that talks about resucitstion of a trama victim: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=9&ved=0CEoQFjAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww2.warwick.ac.uk%2Ffac%2Fmed%2Fresearch%2Fhsri%2Femergencycare%2Fprehospitalcare%2Fjrcalcstakeholderwebsite%2Fguidelines%2Ftraumatic_cardiac_arrest_2006.pdf&ei=HplfU6elJoOayAS1u4LwBA&usg=AFQjCNF5Le8OaJfeAsWN4v2ktDkcYivKWQ

Different things have to be taken into account in a trauma victim then a CHF patient. You still analyze theit heart rhythm and defibrillate/start compressions but if they are actively bleeding you don't do it as long, esspecially not if they aren't showing signs of improvement.

I've heard several horror stories but, thankfully,  I've never had to do CPR on someone with penetrating trauma.

T: Tamponade, Pulmonary

I could only find one source on Pulmonary Tamponade. Most of the documents on H' and T's don't even mention this one.

:(

According to the UCSF Children's Hospital Intensive Care Nursery House Staff Manual, Pulmonary Tamponade is a complication of intubation. If ventilator settings are too high, the lungs become over expanded and air gets trapped in them. The Chest wont move as much, CO2 will be high, O2 will be low, and blood pressure will decrease.

Settings will need to be adjusted (which I have no idea how to do, so until I learn about respiratory therapy I'm going to leave it at that).

Disconnect vent for about 5 seconds while you reset to allow lungs to expell air.

T: Tamponade, Cardiac

Cardiac Tamponade is usually a complication of an inflammatory response in the sac that holds the heart and keeps things in your chest from rubbing together (pericarditis).

Inflammation in this area can cause fluid to leak from the vascular compartment to the extravascular space (from the blood vessels into the tissues). The fluid buildup within/beneath the pericardial sack constricts the heart chambers, keeping them from filling completely and subsequently reducing cardiac output.

Sometimes a viral, bacterial, or fungal infective agent is identified. Other times heart surgery or autoimmune disease  (coocommittant with other illnesses like AIDS or tuberculosis) can be identified as a cause. But many times the exact cause is not easily identifiable.

Diagnostic tool is a echocardiogram.

Treatment is pericardiocentisis.

T: Toxins

Toxins-

Sometimes when I think of toxins I only think of pollutiants and posions, like gasoline fumes or a snakebite, but substances that are normally thought to be helpful (like many therapeutic drugs) can also cause toxicity in high doses. It is importiant to get an accurate patient history; including therapeutic and non therapeutic drug use, circumstances surrounding the admitting complaint.

Each toxins mechanism of action is going to vary, but it's still importiant to be familiar with the most common types in case you have a patient who looks like they might code and evidence of the other"H's & T's" are not present. Some toxins disrupt metabolism, others cause cells to break apart, but many of the most common toxic reactions originated from a therapeutic drugs pharmacological reaction accentuated by other factors: Liver failure, kidney failure, accidential or intentional overdose (or a combination of the three).

I've found several PDF's and other graphs that are wonderful educational material to communicate toxin mechanism of action and antidote, once I get back on PC I will update thene here.

Luckily, many pollutants, posions, and drug toxins have antidotes and the effect can be reverse if its cought early enough:

Acetamenophen (Acetylcystine AKA "Mucomyst")
Digoxin (Digoxin immune FAB)
The Blood Thinners
-coumadin (vitamin K)
-heparin (Protamine Sulfate)
Narcotics: Dilaudid, Morphine etc (Narcan)  
Arsonic (Dimercaprol)
(In some instances, dialysis is appropriate)

Drug-toxins may have specific effects on vital organs that, when outside of therapeutic range, cause a characteristic disfunction. I spoke about two of them in "Matters Of The Heart: Drug and Elecrolyte Imballance"

Austrailian Adventure: The Aeroplane

At the end of last year and into January, I got to go to Australia on vacation to visit my big sister Red.

It was extraordinary and I've been meaning to blog about it, howevery computer is out of comission. It is harder to type on this little tablet and I'm not sure I can upload pictures. However I've decided to document the experience as best I can and add the pictures at a later date.

(Edit 11-14-14: I bought my little sister a computer and inherited her old one. I can now upload photos and silly gifs. YAY!)

Before we left, Red and I weren't getting along great. I'd been so happy to see her again and she seemed like seeing me and the rest of the family was an obligation more then a pleasure. I can't say I didn't resent that or that it didn't cause conflict. I had to prepare myself, to try to let that resentment go before we got on the plane.

I'm not sure exactly how successful I was, but we sat next to each other the whole 17 hours and I didn't die or kill her, so it must have turned out ok.

Truthfully, we got finally got back into our old communication patterns of banter and jest, and it set us up nicely for the trip. As I was silly enough to not program a cell phone to work in AU, this was a good thing.

We sat in the back section of the plane, A New Zealand Airlines jet (but not one of the Smaug ones :(
(Their flight safety video is awesome, if you've never seen it I suggest you look it up on youtube.)

Or, alternatively, you could watch it here:

The flight was overnight, so it was easier to sleep (not really restful, but still it staves off boredom). And we got to eat! Warm yummy food for dinner and breakfast, and because we switched flights at Auckland we got breakfast twice (SCORE!!!)

Or I guess you could say we got SECOND breakfast :P

There is also a small entertainment system on the back of the seat in front of every passenger, so you can monitor the progress of the flight, watch a movie or tv show, play a game (I played s type of diamond crush), or listen to music:

Things I listened to:

-The entire Linkin Park-Living Things album (x3) (because its awesome)

-The Greatest hits of that band that sings Mamma Mia (x1) (because they weren't that great)

-Love Never Dies (Phantom of the Opera sequel which was ok but they really made Raoul a forkface) (x1).

-Part of a Beatles album

Its nice time killer, after all that you only have 14 hours left to go!

(Whooot!)
Really though, once I got there it seemed like no time at all. It was New Years Eve, and we had a busy day ahead of us.

Sunday School Dialogue

Volunteer Reader: Moses 1: 12 And it came to pass that when Moses had said these words, behold, Satan came tempting him, saying: Moses, son of man, worship me.

Teacher: "OK..."

Teacher:"so..."

Teacher: "What did Satan want Moses to do?"

In Defense of Bilbo Baggins

For almost a year now I've been following a post on thorinoakenshield.net called, In Defense of Thorin Oakenshield. It's a wonderful, thorough, and thought provoking character analysis of the Dwarf Prince- Turned King in The Hobbit.

To many fans, Thorin is seen as the villian in the third act of The Hobbit. This article notes that Thorin's demands and requests are not unreasonable, and that it is difficult  not to find sympathy with his viewpoint.

"The same traits Thorin exhibited as a prisoner in the dungeons of the Elvenking, such as stubbornness and distrust, are now in conflict with the wishes of the chief protagonist, and he is no longer seen as the victim, but as a miser. In this way, he becomes the antagonist by opposing the goal of the hero, even though his own goals never change; he never makes a secret of his desires, nor a promise that he will be generous with the treasure. As it is, the original contract between the dwarves and Bilbo is very specific on the matter of shares. By being protective of the treasure, Thorin is safeguarding all of the Company’s interests. Looking at it from the standpoint of the dwarves, one could say Thorin remains true to his nature, and everyone else becomes antagonistic toward him."

The the site for this article has evolved into a conversation among fans about the character, primarily thanks to the comments section.

I haven't been a big contributor to the conversation, but reading other people's viewpoints has definitely been interesting for me. At a few points, I can tell people mixed up the events in the book with the event's in the movie (Events that haven't actually happened yet, because the movie has not yet been released!!).



(Note: Spoilers are to follow for the concluding chapters of "The Hobbit")

There seem to be two strains of thought regarding Thorin's actions preceding the battle and his subsequent death.

1) That his actions and demands were justified given his complex social and cultural history of the Dwarves, Elves, and Humans.

2) That his misdeeds contributed to the misery and death of thousands of people and that his own subsequent death was required for him to "redeem himself".

So, who's fault is the battle of five armies???

• Thorin, for not surrendering a portion of the gold to the former inhabitants of Dale in their time of need?
• Thrandull, for his unwarranted intervention and lack of respect of the Dwarve's authority?
• Bard, for refusing due process and insisting on access to gold that technically wasn't his?
• Gandalf-for not seeking out Thorin and Co. in confidence instead of immediately siding with their enemies?
• Or Bilbo for betraying his friends and giving the Elves and Humans a powerful bargaining chip that ultimately ignited the battle itself?

At first glance, it seems that everyone on this list was 'doing the right thing' and was completely justified in making a stand for which ever side he thought was right.

• Thorin agrees the Humans will get financial help in due process. But on his terms, because it is his mountain and his gold.
• Thranduill helped the Human's in the aftermath of the dragon attack, so he has a right to be there.
• Bard and the Laketowners need the money, like, now.
• Gandalf was so busy fighting the Necromancer he forgot that Thorin and Co. still existed. 
• And poor Bilbo just wanted the whole thing to be over without any more hurt or trouble to anyone.

Who was justified in their offence of the other parties?  Whose motives were "right" and whose were "wrong"? Who was "the enemy", and who "started it"?

Sometimes people are so concerned with finding the right side that they miss the most beautiful, the most poetic, the most hear-breaking truth that Tolkien communicated in any of his bodies of writing.

This message is not found in The Lord of The Rings, not in The Silmarillion, or in any of Tolkien's other writing projects: It is that good people can disagree, good people can do bad things, and good people can die at the hands of other good people.

(Although it never really comes to that...they get invaded by a fourth fifth party and the armies of Dwarves, Humans, and Elves join forces to defeat a common enemies. However, the powerful prelude to this battle has been a source of fascination for me ever since I first heard the story...These good people could have just have easily been killing each other instead of their true enemies.)

Sometimes the right thing won't in our best interests, sometimes even if we do act selflessly we can't avoid the negative consequences. I believe Bilbo illustrates this point best when he gives "The Heart of The Mountain" to the Elf king and still returns to Thorin's side. He's willing to take the fall-out for his actions.

One commenter to the thread observed that Bilbo's role and his choices in the battle were "maddening" and said, "he seems so undecided and wavers in his loyalties" as he (Bilbo) initially chooses to stay with the Dwarves, but then goes to fight with the Elf King. I pointed out in another comment that he did no leave Thorin and Co. of his own accord, he was dis-fellowshiped from them...and nearly thrown off a cliff!


Because I've been re-visiting this ongoing discussion for a while, I've come to another conclusion about Bilbo that I'd like to share: I do not think for one second that Bilbo was "undecided" in terms of knowing what the right thing to do was. He was the only member of the Company, and perhaps within the whole realm of Erador, with the clarity to see the destructive course that the pride and greed of both sides would bare.

Bilbo isn't pointing fingers, he knows that the answer to "Whose fault is it" is "It doesn't matter, I still have to do the right thing." He knows that there is no "bad" side, there is simply a "right" thing to do and a "wrong" thing to do. And because no one else is doing those things, he does it himself.



Since there are a ton of parallels between "The Battle of Five Armies and  World War I: I wanted to share this website I really like that helped me learn about the First World War.

http://www.firstworldwar.com/

It's really fascinating how the whole situation just got completely out of control because people over-reacted to a problem and started getting their friends involved in drama.

Tumblr Vs Pinterest and Why Bilbo Is AMAZIN'

I spent a month without Pinning. It wasn't that bad because Tumblr was my methodone. No! Pinterest is the Methadone for Tumblr!!!

Way more fun and interactive!

Oh, and Guess WHAHAT?????? I found my Geek Glasses!!

(Note: In honor of the six-movie series, this will be the first in a six-post series dedicated to the awesome that Tolkien made.)

*pushes her Geek Glasses up the brim of her nose*

There, that's much better. Now, where were we? Oh, yes! The Hobbit.

Now, in ebster's dictionary this one is filled under 'H', or 'T'...no?

OK, maybe 'B' No?” Lemme see....

(rummages through a few more pages)

“Oh, yes! Here it is! Under 'A' for 'Amazin'”

On more then one occasion (before "The Hobbit" movie came out) I've gotten into those geeky movie conversations with people who enjoyed the Lord of the Rings movie series. Whenever I would get into these conversations I would invariably ask the golden question: “Are you familiar with The Hobbit?”

More then once the response has been something like, “Oh, I read that one when I was in school." Followed by a dismissive shrug indicating disinterest in the subject.

Whenever this happens, I really can't help but wonder if I'm the same species as these people.

I think of what an impact this story and it's main protagonist, Bilbo Baggins, has had on how I look at life. For me, it's not just a not a story about a Hobbit and a Wizard and a Ring, its a story about a little man with unflinching integrity.

What Bilbo Taught Me:

1) Even when you stand nothing to gain...

 you can show kindness and mercy.


2) Even when it costs you a friendship...

you can life your standards and do the right thing.

and 3) (This one comes later...)
Even if you are never taken seriously, never get married, and are seen as an eccentric kook for the rest of your life...

you can be true to who you are.

You can choose to be the hero, you can choose to do the right thing. You can live the adventure of your life for the rest of your life.

Facebooking...and Griping

I've been on the geek sites (Livejournal, until I found out it was a whore-house of porn writers. Mugglespace, Youtube, Darkufo (for my LOST fix), and had mostly family members and close friends on Myspace.) for years.

But Facebook is something I entered slowly and cautiously. Mostly because I put my real name and identity are there.

Facebook does have a many practical uses. It does a good job of connecting people, helps us to share information quickly and efficiently. It does exactly what it's supposed to do.

I'm more concerned with what Facebook does not do...Primarily make social interactions as sincere and seamless as I want them to be.

I used to resent the fact that I had to accept 'friend'  requests from people who I really don't know well, in hopes of getting to know them well. (BECUZ THEY DIDN'T WANT TO GIVE YOU THE TIME OF DAY WHEN YOU WERE TALKIN' TO DEM IN REAL LIFE!!)

This "friending to make friends" by the way, doesn't work. If someone extended a "Friend-ship" to you, it doesn't mean they want to get to know you better. 'Facebook Friends' are actually just aquainances. Aquaintances who have access to most of the stuff I write for my family and real friends, they can look at all of the stuff I "Like", where I work, how much school I've had, and as a result they get to make judgement about me.

(:D

The worst thing about this is it (at least at first, and at least for me) it creates the illusion of an interpersonal relationship, because they might know everything about you but still not "know you". Very sad.

Here are a few more of my gripes on facebook-style social networking.

• Private Messages-In my opinion, some things are not private enough. Some things are, you know, private....meaning you don't talk about them with other people unless you are in each other's confidence. I have difficulty having confidence in someone I can't see. So, unless you're the deity I pray to, get to know me face to face before trying to 'get to know me' via PM.

(Plus, I don't want to hear IN A PRIVATE MESSAGE about your trip to the bishops office or the type and amount of sex you have had in the past.)

• Trolling-You'd think there would be some accountability on a site like Facebook, where people pretty much know who you are (AND WHERE YOU LIVE!!) And there is more accountability...maybe...kinda...not really....They're actually proud of being jerks...kind of like Shrek is proud of being a smelly oger (ok, so we know he's actually ashamed of it sometimes, but he is never successful in changing his ways)

(Trolling? Facebook has no Trolls, they have OGERS!)

*Actually I think some of the breeds of Oger flourish particularly well in this habitat, they just have to know how to avoid the big billy goats gruff.

• Tagging-The first time I was tagged at a Facebook event I was so confused about what "Tagging" was. How someone I hardly knew, picked me (and 27 others) out of a crowd. I pictured it in my head that there was some dude with a smartphone; "Oh, I see her, and her, and him!) CREEEPERS!

*A side adventure here is the time I created a Facebook event called "The Toilet" (or was it, The Bathroom"? I can't remember.) and tagged myself there. (Yes, it was very juvenile. XDD)

• Friends-I'll admit I've added friends who ONLY were "Friends" because they vaguely remember seeing me at a real life event and then I was "tagged" on Facebook. Really kind of pathetic, now I have "Friends" who I don't know that I'll ever see again. 

• Similar Interests/stalking-I'll admit I'm guilty of this. It's not exactly hard to do, as soon as you express an interest in a product or service little adds pop up showing you each and everyone on your friend's list who also "likes" that (It also suggests people who you can "suggest" the "like" to. 

Despite all of this, Facebook does make keeping in touch a lot easier. Very few people will know about this blog post until I post a link on Facebook next month.