ficus is a funny word

[hafital]

Now, a more substantive post than my last.

I hope everyone is doing well! I do read my f-list regularly, but I know I miss things. So, tell me anything you want that you think I should know! I want to know.

So, on to fannish things!

I have finally finished all 3 books of The Hunger Games Trilogy: I had heard mixed reviews for the last two parts of the trilogy, so I wasn't really expecting to like either of them, and I was already a bit tepid on the first book. Surprisingly I really loved Catching Fire and I think it's my favorite of the three books. I was pretty enraptured throughout. Until the end. But still, I was eager to readlisten to the next book, and was somewhat expecting more of the same. Which, I don't think I got, but that's okay.

What I liked:

~Haymitch. Like, a whole lot. In all three books. I wanted much more of him in the 3rd book.

~Little sister Prim. She was kind of absent in the first two books, but she was AWESOME in the third book. And then she was killed.

~It says something about me that the part of the third book that almost made me cry was when Prim went back for Buttercup and Buttercup was all "WHERE WERE YOU GUYS." Yeah.

~The generally awesome women throughout all three books. Even the evil ones were awesome.

~Speaking of, I LOVED Joanna. And loved the Katniss & Joanna not-friendship. I don't know, she was all weird and stuff in Catching Fire, but I really liked her. And was holding out for a Katniss/Joanna awkward frenemy/friendship. Which we got, and I very much appreciated.

~Also loved Finnick. Wish he wasn't killed.

What didn't work for me:

~I did not get a great sense of this dystopian world. I could have used more world-building. Or something. This might be because it was first person present tense, which is so popular these days I can't really muster any annoyance for it, but it limited the world for me.

~Because of the above, little logicfails would totally bother me -- like, for example, why in god's name would a society with the type of cosmetic surgery advancements existing in Panem, that could surgically alter a person into a catwoman and all the other near medical wonders both great and small, why do they still have to wax unwanted hair?? You can't tell me that such a vain society as the people in the Capitol wouldn't have developed permanent unwanted hair removal. If you tried to tell me that, I wouldn't believe you.

~I wasn't wild about the choices made for Katniss in the third book. I didn't like that she had no direct hand in organizing the rebellion. I didn't like that she spent most of the third book in a drugged haze. At one point, she leaves district 13 and decides to go fight and I was like *finally* but that didn't actually get her anywhere. I appreciated what Collins was saying with the whole televised/war is propaganda/"reality" television/mocking jay thing a lot, but I had to struggle to care what happened to Katniss after a while.

Yes. Well.

And then, I finally managed to go see Ironman 3 this friday. Thank goodness. I was getting desperate, avoiding spoilers! Also, this'll tell you how very well my blinders work in my attempt to remain spoiler free, because I had no idea Shane Black had co-written and directed Ironman 3. No, it's true, I had no idea. And then I was really desperate to watch it because everyone was going on and on about Shane Black and comparing Ironman 3 to Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, which is only my favorite movie ever. No, for serious. There's this very interesting article, "Shane Black Solves his Third-Act Problem", which I recommend.

Anyway, I don't have anything very critical or important to say about Ironman 3 except I loved it all. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang is still, imo, a smarter script, but they're really too different to compare, even if Shane Black's hand can clearly be seen in both.

I don't have the comics background and knowledge to factor in. I only know the films, and the little bit that I've gleamed here and there from fans. For example, I did not know The Mandarin was a well established villain. No clue. Nor the Rebecca Hall (LOVED her in Frost/Nixon) character as well, whom I gather is well known in the comics to be shady. Also, my memory is for shit, really, so I can *barely* recall the first two Ironman films. I know The Avengers well, and the recent other films (Thor and the Captain America films) but I have not rewatched the other Ironman films. Anyway, this is all to say I was just along for the ride.

Stuff:

~ Some of it was a bit predictable? Like Pepper's non-death. But I'm okay with that.

~ Pepper Potts and Tony Stark get the cookie for the most refreshing het couple in a long time.

~ Loved that Tony was without his suit for much of it. Him and the Don Cheadle character, together, fighting crime.

~ I like that Tony was actually challenged, and he had to dig deep to get out of tough spots. I get that he had some of that in the first film, but this felt more raw.

~ I like the continuity with all the films. Lightly done, not overly complicated, but it's there and it works. Yay continuity! Continuity is sexy.

But while I was successful in not spoiling myself for Ironman 3, I couldn't seem to avoid spoilers for Star Trek Into Darkness. Which was too bad. But whatever.

killabeez has already said nearly everything better than I can. And she points to liviapenn's comments, whom I also agree with. But here's a bit more:



So, the truth is, in terms of Kirk and Spock and they're epic friendship and love and all that, well, the films lost me in their very first scene together in the previous film, so going into STID I was pretty much okay with it and knew what to expect. I liked STID quite a bit for what it is, a fun, action packed movie. I love many of the actors, and I dig the new look they're going for, for Star Trek. There was some stuff I genuinely loved.

There was also a ton of stuff that did NOT work for me. The story was a hot mess, and that's irritating. The previous film was a hot mess, too, imo. There isn't a reason for that. Everyone involved in these films is fully capable of writing a good script. I've seen them do it.

I was holding out for a non-Khan reboot. :( Oh well!

Stuff I loved:

~ I really love Chris Pine as Kirk. I do wish he got some quieter scenes with him, though, so that it wasn't all breakneck action and fist pounding all the time, and that we could, I don't know, actually see him be a captain. But he's great as Kirk. When I think of Kirk at his best, I think of "Journey to Babel" when he's seriously injured (because he hurt himself doing his flying butt kick) and can barely sit in his chair, and he has to somehow outsmart the bad guy in space. And he does so, quietly, and with just a few commands. I want that for Chris Pine. I know he would be awesome.

~ I love Uhura. I'm a bit so so on the actress, but it's mostly a non-aggravating so so *g*. The whole Spock/Uhura thing is so weird to me! But I still like it. And I like how they've glommed on to her being the kick ass girl. That's cool, I'm good with that. I'm a little confused, though, because I think she's like supposed to be 10 years younger, at least, to Kirk, but whatever. JJ Abrams and Co. don't seem to care about ages or logic or continuity.

~I love the scope of the film. Which is really only something you can do *with* film. TV is all about that close two shot. So, it's really great seeing the bigness of the ships and space and the planets and all that. These films capture that even better than the previous ST films, IMO. Granted, some of the bigness doesn't make sense, like all of Engineering in both of the films (water turbines? huh?) but I'm willing to hand wave some of that away.

~ Carol Marcus! I know she was a bit under used, but I still liked her, and her inexplicable british accent. I was a bit worried they were going to have her in cahoots with Kahn, so I was glad they didn't. Phew.

~ I can find much to complain about the various plot holes and logicfail in evidence, but I actually thought they did a decent job reworking the Khan story. It was a (somewhat messy) joining of "Space Seed" and TWOK, with feints here and there for the Genesis project "weapon".

~ Mickey!! Wish he could have spoken, wtf. Why didn't they let him speak? Mickey!!! How much would I have loved the Doctor's blue box materializing at Starfleet headquarters?!? He could have seriously helped.


Stuff that amused me:

~ I'm glad the Klingons were ridgey.

~You know, I actually have no trouble with BC as Kahn. But he didn't pontificate enough. haha. I had a moment of amusement on Qo'noS because I am a dork and I kept on thinking of that rather ridiculous ST:ENT story line that explained how/why Klingons had no ridging for the duration of ST:TOS, which was because they were genetically modified by Kahn's crowd and a product of eugenics. Ah, the irony!

What I found irritating:

~I'm going to be alone in this, but Spock doesn't work for me. It's not ZQ's performance, which is lovely. I just don't like this Spock. It goes back to when he blithely abandoned Kirk on that snow planet in the first film. Kirk may have been an ass, and Spock's planet may have just been blown up, but it was still so outside of who Spock is, imo. Not to mention what it means to be a starfleet officer. STID was better with Spock, but I still felt like I'm watching a shade of Spock, but not the real thing. It might go down to the actual difficulty in writing the character. I encountered this back when I used to write K/S, and something I used to see in fic. With Spock, it is so easy to use shortcuts to characterization -- the way he speaks, "illogical" and "fascinating" and voila, you have Spock. And then, writers love to have him have these emotional breakthroughs, with tears, and stuff (I was just as guilty!), but no one does the work to make it in character and he is so much more than that. Although, maybe it's just the same complaint I had with no quieter scenes for either Kirk or Spock, except for the "death" scene, but more on that later. How can they explore that when it's all death and destruction? ZQ does great, and he does make up for a lot of what's lacking. He's not my Spock, but I can't fault him.

~It's like JJ and Co. got a box full of Star Trek puzzle pieces, all jumbled up and disorderly, and then just but them together every which way they wanted, without bothering to see if these disparate parts actually fit. It is so obvious they do not watch Trek. Like, for example, why in heavens did Kirk need to go fix the warp drive, and then die as a result, when the Enterprise needed thrusters? These are separate systems. Too geeky and technical? But stuff like this seriously bothered me. It doesn't make any sense. The ship is careening out of control, no mention of inertial dampers, and "falling" topsy turvy, and Kirk dies to get the warp core back in line, kicking it! yes! that'll work!, but then Spock calls for thrusters. Um?

~ Although the whole thing didn't make any sense as to why Kirk had to "die", I was okay with the reversal of the "death" scene in engineering. That was okay, and that is the sort of thing I like about this reboot. I'm good with that, with switching roles and all that. BUT, I was so incredibly unengaged and detached from that scene, I could have been watching my laundry going round and round in the dryer. Not even a hiccup of sadness. This was probably for various reason, but the biggest was there was NO actual threat. NOTHING to make us believe for an instant that it was even remotely real, that there was even a hint that Kirk was actually going to stay dead, that his sacrifice carried any weight, or occurred for a good reason. I remember the gut wrenching, the hollowness, the devastation watching The Wrath of Kahn, the *truth* of Spock's sacrifice, and (with NO tears I might add) the incredible scene between Kirk and Spock. It's a love scene. It's visceral. It's tragic in the true sense of the word, nothing is right afterward. What happened in STID was so far removed from that, it might as well have been a scene about Kirk and Spock discussing what they were going to have for dinner. They had a difficult job when they choose to reboot TWOK, we all know the ending. The fun thing about reboots are they can be so revelatory, but I didn't see that here. It was pretty much the opposite of that.

~What is up with the magical transporters?? It's like time and space do not matter anymore. Funny, I have Professor Snape in my head right now, "Time and Space matter in magic, Mr. Potter." (paraphrase). Haha. I amuse myself.

~Kirk isn't captain, then he's made captain, then he isn't, then he's first officer, but then he isn't, then he's captain again, then Sulu's captain! but then Spock is "acting" captain. I think Kirk was captain again in between Sulu and Spock. Why is Spock "acting captain?" He was captain once, in the previous film, why does he have to be "acting" captain here when Sulu was made captain? Let's all be captain! This is just to illustrate that I find the flexibility with which they treat Starfleet protocols irritating. It should be like a real institution, not a hot potato.

~ I love Scotty and Dr. McCoy. But I wish they weren't always the comic relief. I wish they weren't such caricatures. Especially McCoy.

~ I know Kirk is an easy lay, but he was never disrespectful, and they're cutting it close there.

Okay, I'm done.

Comments

[cesperanza.livejournal.com]

I'm with you on Spock (and also Kirk - i like Pine as Kirk better than Quinto as Spock, but I don't like the Kirk they're having Pine be, if that makes sense. In other words, I totally believe Pine could be my Kirk but they're not writing my Kirk)--but anyway, what I opened this comment window to say was, weirdly, that IMO there's something RELIGIOUS about Spock they're not getting. Not in the "I love Jesus" way, in the sense that this is a guy who had worked really hard and thought really hard about what kind of, hrm, presence? is that the word? he wants to be in the world. I'm not saying Spock is defined by his meditation, but there was something priestly/unworldly/zen monkish/buddistmaster-ish about Spock, a kind of center of calm that when it got disrupted was DEVASTATING because it was like a priest suddenly revealing he's lost faith, or faith is hard, and it's not all natural to him. It almost is a kind of defrocked/unfrocked kink--it means like a priest getting upset and saying "Fuck!" means, or like Jed Bartlett yelling at God in the west wing. IDK this is incoherent a bit but I feel like your post made me realize I was missing that spirituality in Spock--and the meaning in the falling away from it (or what Kirk means to him that it makes him break it.)

[hafital.livejournal.com]

Spock is the quintessential "still waters run deep" character, which is too simplified but still the truth. And I think they're not really doing the work to make us believe it. And most people won't care, so, you know, maybe they don't have to. It's the shortcut thing. Also, you know, I disliked the scene in the first film where they show Spock being bullied by other vulcan kids, not because I didn't think he wouldn't have had a hard time of it in school and that vulcan kids are above bullying, I fully believe they would have done that, but the way they showed it was exactly how human kids would have done it except without inflection. Speaking in a monotone and not using contractions is not automatically vulcan!! Whatever.

[hafital.livejournal.com]

Also, hugs! xoxo

[killabeez.livejournal.com]

Continuing to natter from my journal, haha. I also totally agree with your comments on The Hunger Games. I loved Katniss and Joanna's conflict, and of course HAYMITCH (not enough of him ever!), and Catching Fire was my favorite book, too. Also loved Prim in book 3, and had much fondness for Finnick. And yes, I have to handwave pretty much all the worldbuilding. It's not terrible, but it's far too simplified and not always logical. (Then again, these are YA books, so maybe she was directed to keep it simple? IDK.)

And back to Trek—there was a moment at the end of the movie where they were panning across the dish of the Enterprise (like you do), and for a second I was expecting it to say "I.S.S. Enterprise." Which would not have fixed all the movie's problems for me? But would have made the flaws so much more interesting. Or maybe that's just me. :D

[hafital.livejournal.com]

And back to Trek—there was a moment at the end of the movie where they were panning across the dish of the Enterprise (like you do), and for a second I was expecting it to say "I.S.S. Enterprise."

:) I definitely have to divorce these films from the rest of Trek in my mind. It exists outside of the Trek universe that I commonly think of as the Trek Universe, which is, I suppose, exactly what it is. But I often forget about it, or did, between the last film and this one.

xoox! hugggggs.