LOTRO: The Maps of Middle-earth
I logged into the third preview of Update 23 on Bullroarer test server this evening and perused the various changes that Standing Stone Games have made. For a lot of the “serious” LOTRO players, the focus of this latest build are the statistical changes to all the various classes. As I am not so au fait with this aspect of the game, I shall leave the matter until it is finalised then discuss it with my kinship who are more learned in these matters. My primary motivation for using the preview server is to get an advance look at any new region and to explore the environment. Standing Stone Games continue to do a sound job of realising the Third Age of Middle-earth and I enjoy the attention to detail they provide along with their adherence to the lore. One of the aspects of LOTRO that I’ve always enjoyed are the regional maps. In this latest preview build, all maps for the new region of Ered Mithrin are now available and the temporary placeholders for Erebor and The Steel Keep have been removed.
I logged into the third preview of Update 23 on Bullroarer test server this evening and perused the various changes that Standing Stone Games have made. For a lot of the “serious” LOTRO players, the focus of this latest build are the statistical changes to all the various classes. As I am not so au fait with this aspect of the game, I shall leave the matter until it is finalised then discuss it with my kinship who are more learned in these matters. My primary motivation for using the preview server is to get an advance look at any new region and to explore the environment. Standing Stone Games continue to do a sound job of realising the Third Age of Middle-earth and I enjoy the attention to detail they provide along with their adherence to the lore. One of the aspects of LOTRO that I’ve always enjoyed are the regional maps. In this latest preview build, all maps for the new region of Ered Mithrin are now available and the temporary placeholders for Erebor and The Steel Keep have been removed.
One of the things that attracted me to The Lord of the Rings when I first read it in the early eighties was the fact that the books came with maps. The hardback editions that I read via my local library had sumptuous fold out maps that clearly detailed the various regions. They help convey the sense of history of Middle-earth and depth of culture and lore that existed. The maps also gave a sense of scale to the Fellowship’s journey as well as context. They were integral to maintaining the illusion that Middle-earth was a living and ancient world. Hence the maps that feature in LOTRO serve a similar purpose beyond their immediate practical functionality. They don’t just provide a means of navigating from point A to point B but further embellish the games sense of immersion by showing a world populated by people in a broad variety of geographical locations. They also often reflect interesting details of lore, or minor comments from the source text.
Over the years, due to changes in the game and the streamlining of earlier zones, some maps have been replaced resulting in two distinct art styles. The contrast can be quite jarring at times. For example, the Bree-land map is one of the oldest in the game and is somewhat cluttered. However, if you then cross into the Barrow-downs the map was redesigned and sports a clearer style and breaks the zone up into two. As new content is added to the game, the newer map style naturally prevails. From an aesthetic point of view, I prefer the this to old. The maps are more functional and convey their respective information efficiently. Overall, I think they are an improvement, although I do still think they have some flaws. As to whether SSG intends to standardise all maps and thus replace those that have the older design remains to be scene.
Although the more contemporary LOTRO maps exude an appropriate art style and are easier to read, some still have a flaw with regard to conveying navigational data. Some of the maps do not always clearly show what route a player should take to enter a specific region. The other day, I decided on a whim to do some of the quests in Entwood. From memory I vaguely knew I could access the region from either Broadacres or Stonedean in West Rohan. Sadly, the maps lacked sufficient detail to give me a clear course to follow. Thus, I had to spend some time riding around the various hills that separate zones, until I found the right route. I believe access to Wildermore is similarly esoteric. Another problem are instance maps. They only become fully visible as you explore. If you leave and subsequently return to an instance, the process has to be repeated. Surely the logical thing would be to make it permanently available once the player had initially unlocked it.
The maps in LOTRO are also poor at conveying data for regions that are set on multiple levels. Top down representations do not adequately express three-dimensional data, which can lead to confusion and frustration, especially in instances such as the Grand Stair in Moria. In the past when running this instance, I would have to rely on third party diagrams, outside of the game itself. Another map within LOTRO that is notoriously unintuitive when it comes to travelling around is the Misty Mountains. It displays what appear to be clear linear routes between key locations but fails to convey the topographical features that will impede you. Again, it is steep slopes or crevasses that bar your way. Now there may well be players who will take the view that these maps are not supposed to make things that easy for you and that their deliberate vagaries are designed to force the player to explore. That may well be true, but I find premeditated inconvenience to be poor game design choice. A map that doesn’t impart the necessary data you need to successfully navigate the area it represents, has fundamentally failed in its purpose as far as I’m concerned.
The key to success in getting the most out of the various regional maps in LOTRO is to familiarise yourself with both the pictorial representation of each zone and cross reference that with practical first-hand experience. Basically, learn your way around the physical foibles of an area and use that knowledge in conjunction with the map. The only downside of this strategy is that LOTRO is a big game so that’s a lot of information to commit to memory. Overall, I’m mainly familiar with the zone I’m currently questing through or those that I have a special affinity to. I haven’t really spent any time in South Mirkwood or parts of Rohan since those regions were released. Therefore, I often cannot immediately recall their subtleties or quirks. May be this is something else that can be added to the list of “bug” fixes and “quality of life improvements that SSG need to address. Clearer, more intuitive maps are only going to become more essential as the game continues to expand.
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014)
Unlike so many other blockbusters Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is not just peddling a vacuous spectacle lacking any substance. The sequel to the 2011 reboot embraces both political and social concepts and attempts to explore them in a meaningful fashion. It is absorbing and intelligent, making its point without being too heavy handed. The motion captured performances and visual effects are outstanding, yet do not swamp the story or the subtleties of the actor’s performances. It is also surprising to see a mainstream Hollywood movie cultivate such a bleak and melancholic tone.
Unlike so many other blockbusters Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is not just peddling a vacuous spectacle lacking any substance. The sequel to the 2011 reboot embraces both political and social concepts and attempts to explore them in a meaningful fashion. It is absorbing and intelligent, making its point without being too heavy handed. The motion captured performances and visual effects are outstanding, yet do not swamp the story or the subtleties of the actor’s performances. It is also surprising to see a mainstream Hollywood movie cultivate such a bleak and melancholic tone.
I was not expecting great things from Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. I was raised on reruns of the original Planet of the Apes franchise and was frankly reticent to invest time in movies that were simply going to revisits old ground. However, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes has a greater depth to its narrative than I anticipated and is surprising critical of many contemporary political issues. The story not only explores the concept of institutionalised racism but wider societal inequality and the abuse of power that so often arises in all forms of politics. The thorny issue of gun control is alluded to, although obliquely.
Plot wise, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes takes a familiar story and simply tells it form a different perspective. Since the outbreak of the ALZ-113 virus, Caesar (Andy Serkis) and his genetically modified apes have been living peacefully in Muir Woods. When a band of wandering human survivors encounters them, both parties are equally surprised. After a violent incident, Caesar orders them to leave. However, the matter causes divisions in both human and ape societies. Koba (Toby Kebbell) wishes the apes to strike against humans while they still have the upper hand and likewise Dreyfus (Gary Oldman) wants the humans to deal with the simian threat, once and for all. However, not all humans takes such a hawkish stance. Malcolm (Jason Clarke) is curious about Caesar and feels an affinity towards him as both are struggling fathers.
Director Matt Reeves and screenwriters Rick Jaffa, Amanda Silver and Mark Bomback embellish the narrative with a great deal of thought and creativity. The apes use of sign language is innovative and appropriate. The sophisticated CGI does not impede the actor’s performance. Many of the apes have clear personalities and are strongly defined. The lack of dialogue in many scenes works very well, allowing cinematic art and the physical skill of the actors to tell the story. It's quite astonishing how far the motion capture technology has advanced when it comes to creating tangible characters that audiences can genuinely empathise with. Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is a superior movie to its predecessor, which although enjoyable, still felt very much like a prologue rather than a story in its own right.
However, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes does have a few inconsistencies. Gary Oldman is once again under used and liberal human leader Malcolm is a little bland. As ever with movies, it is the bad guys who are potentially the most interesting character. Yet I was left somewhat underwhelmed by the chimp Koba. It would have been interesting to see a greater exploration of his back story. I get the impression that the editing process left actor Toby Kebbell's performance somewhat choppy.
Overall, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is an above average blockbuster movie that requires audiences to think and reflect, rather than just passively view. It moves the long-term story arc of the franchise forward into interesting new territory. It is quite hard hitting within the confines of its broad PG-13 rating and is surprisingly not afraid to pursue a sombre tone. The technical achievements of the production are prodigious and prove that motion capture performances are as relevant and meaningful as any other form of acting.
Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)
The greatest asset of Rise of The Planet of the Apes is the CGI chimpanzee, Caesar, played by Andy Serkis. It is also the films greatest hindrance. Too much focus is spent on the titular character at the expensive of the remainder of the cast. The pace is also purposely pedestrian to accommodate a list of cinematic pre-requisites that the producers felt must be included. These include moral dilemmas, relationship issues and contemporary ethical themes. If you were hoping that Rupert Wyatt’s Rise of The Planet of The Apes would be a more cerebral spectacle, then you may well be a little disappointed. It is functional and efficient entertainment, but no more than that.
The greatest asset of Rise of The Planet of the Apes is the CGI chimpanzee, Caesar, played by Andy Serkis. It is also the films greatest hindrance. Too much focus is spent on the titular character at the expensive of the remainder of the cast. The pace is also purposely pedestrian to accommodate a list of cinematic pre-requisites that the producers felt must be included. These include moral dilemmas, relationship issues and contemporary ethical themes. If you were hoping that Rupert Wyatt’s Rise of The Planet of The Apes would be a more cerebral spectacle, then you may well be a little disappointed. It is functional and efficient entertainment, but no more than that.
The CGI action scenes of rampaging apes, as shown in the trailer, are well executed but far smaller in scale than you would expect. They also arrive quite near to the films climax and are not as a substantial part of the movie as suggested. There are a few nods to the original series of films during the course of this reboot. But by and large this movie feels that it has been hemmed in and restrained by the need to establish a starting point for a new franchise. Once again, I suspect studio meddling and a continuous stream of memo’s suggesting adjustments based on focus groups and market research.
John Lithgow is good, but there again he is seldom bad. It is also nice to see humanity toppled from its pedestal. I have an inclination for any film that eschews the tired notion that the human race is the summit of evolution and somehow the metaphorical centre of the universe. It cannot be denied that the motion capture techniques certainly do set new standards. But ultimately, if Fox had spent more time focusing on a more even narrative, rather than being pleased with itself by all boxes they were ticking, this would be a better film. Let us hope that the next entry in the series will have a stronger director and a finely-honed screenplay.
The Omen (2006)
Director John Moore is no stranger to remakes, having produced a new version of The Flight of the Phoenix in 2004. Remakes per se are not necessarily a bad thing as long as they bring something new to the table and explores the narrative in a different fashion. This is why Gus Van Sant’s shot-by-shot remake of Hitchcock's Psycho is so universally reviled and deemed to be pointless, because it doesn’t do any of those things. Which brings me to The Omen which is not an exact copy of Richard Donner’s 1976 film, but it does follow the original screenplay. The movie treads a fine line, adding some additional embellishments to the proceeding such as the opening sequence set in the Vatican as the Pontiff considers the impending Biblical prophecy. Yet it still feels a little too familiar to those older viewers who are au fait with the original movie. Furthermore, the 1976 horror classic was a milestone in the horror genre. It was a big budget production, professionally made with a quality cast. Such a critical and commercial success casts a long shadow and remaking such a production is always going to be an uphill struggle.
Director John Moore is no stranger to remakes, having produced a new version of The Flight of the Phoenix in 2004. Remakes per se are not necessarily a bad thing as long as they bring something new to the table and explores the narrative in a different fashion. This is why Gus Van Sant’s shot-by-shot remake of Hitchcock's Psycho is so universally reviled and deemed to be pointless, because it doesn’t do any of those things. Which brings me to The Omen which is not an exact copy of Richard Donner’s 1976 film, but it does follow the original screenplay. The movie treads a fine line, adding some additional embellishments to the proceeding such as the opening sequence set in the Vatican as the Pontiff considers the impending Biblical prophecy. Yet it still feels a little too familiar to those older viewers who are au fait with the original movie. Furthermore, the 1976 horror classic was a milestone in the horror genre. It was a big budget production, professionally made with a quality cast. Such a critical and commercial success casts a long shadow and remaking such a production is always going to be an uphill struggle.
Moore’s The Omen is competently made, with good use of various European locations such as London and Rome. Malta doubles for Israel in the second act. There is also a strong cast of character actors such as Pete Postlethwaite, Michael Gambon and David Thewlis. What essentially carries the film is the central performance by Liev Shreiber as Robert Torn. He remains credible and behaves like he’s struggling to come to terms with the situation. His relationship with his wife Katherine (Julia Stiles) is also plausible. Mia Farrow adds her acting weight to the role of the sinister nanny Mrs Baylock. Horror fans will also be pleased to see genre stalwart Giovanni Lombardo Radice (AKA John Morghen) as Father Spiletto. The only weak link in the proceedings is Seamus Davey-Fitzpatrick as Damien. He is dressed, made up and shot to look sinister which broadly works but he doesn’t do anything particularly evil and thus doesn’t pose an effective threat.
There are flashes of creativity and an attempt to do more than what was done previously. For example, there is a good use of colour throughout the movie. Red is often a signifier off impending death. When Father Brennan senses that demonic forces are closing in during a storm, we see a person in a red raincoat run through the frame in the background. He also passes someone with a red umbrella. It’s a recurring motif throughout the films set pieces. The score is suitably atmospheric and composer Marco Beltrami wisely references Jerry Goldmsith iconic theme but largely does his own thing. Director John Moore also adds several visionary sequences that reflect the growing fear in both Katherine and Robert Thorn. These work as jump scare but more to the point, provide “omens” of the future and reinforce the idea that Damien’s existence is not just an immediate threat to them but has long term consequences for the future of man.
Overall, The Omen is still a little too close to the original and ultimately just adds a modern veneer to the story, rather than doing something substantially different. Then there is the issue of the death scenes which are one of the motifs of the franchise. The original film’s set pieces where ground breaking, in particular David Warner’s decapitation by a sheet of glass, which has now become a genre “treasure”. What made these scenes so visceral in back in 1976 was the fact that they were physical effects and stunts. This time round they’re simply CGI excesses. For example the roving camera follows the falling scaffolding pipe down from the church spire as it impales Father Brennan, in a manner that instantly negates any sense of credibility. Yes, it looks very photogenic, but the brain knows that such a shot is a technical deceit and as a result this sequence lacks the impact of the original. Similarly, the death of photographer Keith Jennings diminished due to it obvious digital construction.
If you have not seen the 1976 version of The Omen and therefore have no respective emotional baggage pertaining to it, then you’ll find the 2006 remake to be an adequate big budget horror movie that fulfils its own remit. For older viewers and horror aficionados, the main obstacle to enjoying the film is its perceived redundancy. Although well made in most respects it doesn’t quite do enough to set it apart from the original. Does it entertain? Yes, but that has to be offset against a strong sense of “so what”. It is interesting to note that The Omen cost $25 million to make and made an adequate $119,496,523 internationally. Yet despite this no sequel has been forthcoming and I suspect that the studio is a little too aware of the audience ambivalence towards such remakes. The cost of another instalment could finance at least two or three other original properties and given the return on investment the horror genre can provide (for example the Saw franchise) this is probably deemed the wiser course of action.
Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 (2001)
If at first you don’t succeed, try the exact same thing over again with more money. Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 is the follow up to the 1999 film The Omega Code. Technically, the film is a quasi-prequel (plot wise) which covers Politician, Industrialist and Antichrist Alexander Stone’s (Michael York) rise to power and his subsequent feud with his younger brother. It then deviates from the sequence of events in the first movie by ending in a large-scale battle at Megiddo between the forces or good and evil, both of whom favour the use of tanks and helicopter gunships. Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 benefits from a substantially larger budget and from superior direction by veteran film maker Brian Trenchard-Smith. It’s hardly a genre milestone but it’s a step in the right direction compared to its predecessor.
If at first you don’t succeed, try the exact same thing over again with more money. Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 is the follow up to the 1999 film The Omega Code. Technically, the film is a quasi-prequel (plot wise) which covers Politician, Industrialist and Antichrist Alexander Stone’s (Michael York) rise to power and his subsequent feud with his younger brother. It then deviates from the sequence of events in the first movie by ending in a large-scale battle at Megiddo between the forces or good and evil, both of whom favour the use of tanks and helicopter gunships. Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 benefits from a substantially larger budget and from superior direction by veteran film maker Brian Trenchard-Smith. It’s hardly a genre milestone but it’s a step in the right direction compared to its predecessor.
Sadly, the script is still weak and therefore the biggest flaw in the production and not even the tinkering of script doctor John Fasano cures it of its failings. Despite the overtly religious framing of the narrative there seems to be little insight into the forces of good. God and Jesus are seldom mentioned, and the plot still focuses on the rise of the beast. The production values are higher than its predecessor and some of the action scenes are okay. However, the use of CGI is variable ranging from adequate to poor. The destruction of the Coliseum in Rome is noticeably inept. In between the action we have a notable cast of international character actors such as Michael Biehn, David Hedison, Udo Kier and Franco Nero. In a fit of inspired casting, R Lee Ermey plays the president of the United States! They all spend their time looking earnest and moving the clumsy story line forward.
Considering the nature of the story, you would expect some flamboyant dialogue and clever theological cut and thrust. But such an approach is distinctly lacking. There are also several plot holes that must surely spring to mind to even the most casual viewer. For example, what is the Pope doing during these proceedings? Is he not Gods representative on earth? Surely the Catholic Church has a few thoughts on the rise of the Antichrist? Also, how does Islam react to these events? The screenplay chooses to omit these lines of enquiry. There is also no mention of the number of the beast, which tends to be a key point in the Book of Revelations. You do not have to be a major religious scholar to realise that Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 is simply cherry picking various religious texts to justify its own narrative. But then again this is a movie funded by evangelical Christians.
However, despite these shortcomings, this is by and large a more enjoyable film than the first instalment. The reliable cast do their best to tackle the screenplay and plot with stoic professionalism. Director Brian Trenchard-Smith stated that he treated the movie as a “a fun romp, not usually what happens with a religious film”. I still got the feeling that I was watching a sanitised version of a The Final Conflict but that is the price you have to pay to reach the widest audience with the ubiquitous PG-13 rating. Oh, and there's no reference to the code of the title in this particular movie. So, if you endured the first movie and feel the need for a second round, then Megiddo: The Omega Code 2 is a more rewarding experience. It still isn’t anywhere near as good as it could’ve been but it’s an improvement. Perhaps if there had been a third instalment, they may have got it right. However, poor box office returns brought this distinctly niche franchise to an end.
The Omega Code (1999)
Action-based faith movies are a curious and somewhat niche genre (“no shit” I hear you say). Apart from this movie and its sequel, the only other I can think of is Left Behind from 2014. There have been others, but they’ve tended to be very low budget affairs, made for Christian TV networks. The Omega Code, directed by Robert Marcarelli, was different, in so far it had a larger budget and managed to get a secure a theatrical release. The premillennialist plot revolves around a plan by industrialist politician and Antichrist Stone Alexander (Michael York) to take over the world using information hidden in the Bible via a hidden code. Casper Van Dien also stars as lifestyle guru Dr. Gillen Lane who unwittingly joins Stone to handle his public relations. The film is based on a novel written by televangelist Paul Crouch, head of the Trinity Broadcasting Network. The plot presents an Evangelical Christian view about the end of days and the rise of the Antichrist. Believe it or not, the box office returns for The Omega Code where greater than Fight Club on its opening weekend in 1999.
Action-based faith movies are a curious and somewhat niche genre (“no shit” I hear you say). Apart from this movie and its sequel, the only other I can think of is Left Behind from 2014. There have been others, but they’ve tended to be very low budget affairs, made for Christian TV networks. The Omega Code, directed by Robert Marcarelli, was different, in so far it had a larger budget and managed to get a secure a theatrical release. The premillennialist plot revolves around a plan by industrialist politician and Antichrist Stone Alexander (Michael York) to take over the world using information hidden in the Bible via a hidden code. Casper Van Dien also stars as lifestyle guru Dr. Gillen Lane who unwittingly joins Stone to handle his public relations. The film is based on a novel written by televangelist Paul Crouch, head of the Trinity Broadcasting Network. The plot presents an Evangelical Christian view about the end of days and the rise of the Antichrist. Believe it or not, the box office returns for The Omega Code where greater than Fight Club on its opening weekend in 1999.
So where to start? The Omega Code is a mess yet a fascinating one at that. The budget although small, is sufficient to portray the proceedings, although the effects work, computer graphics and action scenes are somewhat lacklustre. The direction is poor, the script clichéd and the plot very predictable. Yet a lot of research appear to have been done regarding the religious prophecies depicted. It’s a shame this aspect wasn’t explored more. There are some interesting performances, especially from York, who has a great time chewing the scenery. Genre favourite, Michael Ironside appears as a defrocked priest turned assassin which is as novel as is bizarre. In some respects, the movie come across as The Omen lite, but it struggles to hold the viewers interest. It raises many theological questions and yet for a faith driven movie there's a lot about Satan but precious little about Jesus. The PG-13 rating is not really justified and those looking for action will be disappointed.
A better director, tighter script and larger budget would have greatly improved The Omega Code. On mature reflection many of the films failing can be clearly attributed to the fact that many involved on the production side were not sufficiently experienced. In the right hands this could have been a engaging cult movie or cheesy genre film. Yet despite these factors the film still performed well in the US market. No doubt due to heavy promotion at a parish level. It spawned a prequel which attempted to address some of the criticisms of the first instalment. Overall The Omega Code has very limited appeal to both Christians and non-Christians. For those who like theological horror dealt with in a more traditional fashion, I'd recommend Holocaust 2000 from 1977 staring Kirk Douglas. It’s an interesting Italian cash in on The Omen, filled with visions of the apocalypse, lurid death scenes and yet another British actor (Simon York) playing the Antichrist.
Financing LOTRO
Back in December 2008, I bought a “compilation pack” that contained both the The Lord of the Rings Online: Shadow of Angmar base game, along with the newly released Mines of Moria expansion. I paid £20 for the lot. After the obligatory free months access, I then became a regular subscriber right up until about summer 2012. Since then I’ve subscribed and played whenever new content is released, meaning that for about six months of the year, I’m paying for the “luxury” of playing LOTRO. I’ve also purchased all the expansions over the years. Because I enjoy the game, I am not averse to buying additional LOTRO points when my monthly stipend doesn’t cover the cost of the items I want. I never availed myself of the opportunity to become a lifetime account holder, which is something I regret. It certainly would have been very good value for money, considering that LOTRO is over a decade old.
Back in December 2008, I bought a “compilation pack” that contained both the The Lord of the Rings Online: Shadow of Angmar base game, along with the newly released Mines of Moria expansion. I paid £20 for the lot. After the obligatory free months access, I then became a regular subscriber right up until about summer 2012. Since then I’ve subscribed and played whenever new content is released, meaning that for about six months of the year, I’m paying for the “luxury” of playing LOTRO. I’ve also purchased all the expansions over the years. Because I enjoy the game, I am not averse to buying additional LOTRO points when my monthly stipend doesn’t cover the cost of the items I want. I never availed myself of the opportunity to become a lifetime account holder, which is something I regret. It certainly would have been very good value for money, considering that LOTRO is over a decade old.
Although F2P games offer the benefit of reaching a wider market, I do believe that the business model is troublesome and causes more problems than it solves. Lootboxes similarly can break a game, as content is retrofitted to accommodate monetisation, rather than serve the exclusive needs of the customer. The monetisation per se of the gaming industry remains a perennial debate and one that is not going to be solved anytime soon to every one’s satisfaction. It is certainly a matter that is causing Standing Stone Games to tie themselves in knot at present. Lootboxes have been present in LOTRO for a while but they were never integral to progression through the game until the release of the Mordor expansion. Let it suffice to say that there has been a great deal of player push back against this decision and that SSG have been trying to address this matter in Update 23, which is due for release soon. However, the current proposals are complex and are very much a work in progress. They also seem to be causing a great deal of consternation among players.
I won’t attempt to summarise the latest “plan” at present as it’s being continuously “revised”. If you’re feeling stoic, then read the current thread on the official forums and you’ll see how difficult this matter is to sort out. However, I think the overall problem comes down to a fundamental difference in outlook over the financing of LOTRO, between the players, the publishers and lastly the developers SSG. LOTRO has a mature playerbase. A hardcore of thirty to fifty plus year olds, who all cut their teeth in an era where game monetisation was clear. You bought a game and paid for any additional expansions. In the MMO world, you bought the base game and subscribed. It was a simple “quid pro quo”. You paid money and got content. However, microtransactions, in-game currencies, season passes, paid DLC, lootboxes and “live services” have evolved over the last decade or so and have migrated from the mobile games market, over to console and PC gaming. Younger players who have grown up with mobile games has become “acclimatised” to such business practices. LOTRO players by and large don’t care for them.
And therein lies the rub for SSG or more to the point, their financial backers Daybreak Game Company. I suspect that there are financial targets set for LOTRO each quarter and that these are proving “challenging”. Because of the dedicated nature of many core LOTRO players it would appear that there are significant whales in the community. Yet it is the nature of the current games industry to seek whatever revenue that can possibly be generated and that the fate of a game will often come down to whether or not it yields the financial projections. Hence it become extremely difficult for SSG to find the right balance. Simply removing loot boxes and the LOTRO store from the game is not going to happen. The game is just too heavily dependent upon that business model. Some players have suggested cutting out the “middle man” of loot boxes and keys and just have a store where you buy everything that is offered. Sadly, whatever course of action is taken, it is bound to please one group and offend another. However, gating content or progression in LOTRO behind some kind of pay mechanic could well prove to be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. But I’m sure SSG knows this, so it will be interesting to see what compromise they arrive at by the time Update 23 launches.
Unfriended (2014)
Enjoyment of Unfriended depends heavily on the viewers familiarity with social media and its associated youth culture. If you are not “tech savvy”, then you may struggle with the films format, which is presented as an ongoing Skype call, with additional use of Google, You Tube and other sundry apps. I started watching Unfriended in my lounge but struggled to read the onscreen text even on a 40-inch TV screen. I eventually end up viewing the film at my desktop PC, sitting a lot closer to the screen. Watching the movie in the same way as you would consume real online content IE at a computer or via a laptop or tablet, does indeed enhance the viewing experience and give the story a greater sense of immediacy. I’m curious as to how Unfriended came across during its theatrical release and whether big screen digital projection added to the atmosphere or diminished it.
Enjoyment of Unfriended depends heavily on the viewers familiarity with social media and its associated youth culture. If you are not “tech savvy”, then you may struggle with the films format, which is presented as an ongoing Skype call, with additional use of Google, You Tube and other sundry apps. I started watching Unfriended in my lounge but struggled to read the onscreen text even on a 40-inch TV screen. I eventually end up viewing the film at my desktop PC, sitting a lot closer to the screen. Watching the movie in the same way as you would consume real online content IE at a computer or via a laptop or tablet, does indeed enhance the viewing experience and give the story a greater sense of immediacy. I’m curious as to how Unfriended came across during its theatrical release and whether big screen digital projection added to the atmosphere or diminished it.
The story is a clever variation on a well-established horror theme. Five high-school friends, Blaire, Mitch, Jess, Ken and Adam are chatting on Skype when an unexpected six person joins their call. The “guest” claims to Laura Barns, a friend who committed suicide a year ago after a video was posted on You Tube of her drunk and incontinent at a party. At first the friends simply suspect the caller to be a “internet troll” but it soon becomes clear that the person knows a great deal about them, as they begin to reveal their worst secrets. As the group starts to turn on each other, it becomes clear that that something distinctly supernatural is happening. Is the mysterious caller the ghost of Laura Barns, who has returned to seek revenge on those who wronged her? The friends try to disconnect the mysterious caller but are told that they must all remain online and participate in a game, or else one of them will die.
The structure and format of Unfriended is by far its best-selling point. Beyond the creativity of the medium used to tell the story, the film is standard supernatural revenge tale. The lead characters are far from likeable but very relatable and plausible. The screenplay by Nelson Greaves briefly touches upon that peculiarly American social foible of worrying about being perceived as “a good person”. Naturally in this case the cast are shown to be superficial, backstabbing, narcissists that are the embodiment of “generation consume”. The shocks are not anything special, but the narrative does successfully manage to sustain a strong atmosphere of disquiet. All performances are good in so far as the characters all come across as convincingly duplicitous and hypocritical. The ending is suitably hyperbolic and what you expect from such a specific genre movie.
I’m all in favour of the horror genre experimenting in such a fashion as this, because it is through this process that it remains relevant. Despite my own age related bias and my over familiarity with the horror genre, I enjoyed Unfriended far more than I expected. However, its success has already spawned a sequel and I wonder if social media-based horror is destined to go the same way as the found footage genre. I not sure if it can sustain such a level of interest before the novelty of presenting a story in such a fashion becomes old. However, horror cinema has proven to be a very robust medium so only time will tell. In the meantime, as younger viewers have taken to Unfriended like a duck to water, I would encourage the older open-minded horror fan to give it a go. They may find some virtue in it and enjoy how many classic horror tropes are given a new spin.
LOTRO: Tales from the Barter Wallet
One of the fun things about LOTRO is the way each player evolves their own personal way of navigating around Middle-earth. Although there is an extensive “stable” network throughout the game, I often find it quicker to use the various “Return to” skills, to get where I need to go. Turns out there’s a lot more in LOTRO than I realised. One of the most beneficial is “Return to Minas Tirith” which places you in the city before the Battle of the Pelennor Fields. The main advantage is that you arrive close to the stable-master who has an extensive list of travel destinations throughout Gondor. More so than his counterpart in the Minas Tirith after the battle. The skill “Return to Minas Tirith” is obtained from the Quartermaster (Defenders of Minas Tirith) at the Great Gate of Minas Tirith for 30 Minas Tirith Silver Pieces.
One of the fun things about LOTRO is the way each player evolves their own personal way of navigating around Middle-earth. Although there is an extensive “stable” network throughout the game, I often find it quicker to use the various “Return to” skills, to get where I need to go. Turns out there’s a lot more in LOTRO than I realised. One of the most beneficial is “Return to Minas Tirith” which places you in the city before the Battle of the Pelennor Fields. The main advantage is that you arrive close to the stable-master who has an extensive list of travel destinations throughout Gondor. More so than his counterpart in the Minas Tirith after the battle. The skill “Return to Minas Tirith” is obtained from the Quartermaster (Defenders of Minas Tirith) at the Great Gate of Minas Tirith for 30 Minas Tirith Silver Pieces.
Now you may wonder why I mention something that has existed in the game since October 2017 when Update 17 - The Siege of Minas Tirith was released. Well the above stemmed from me digging around in my in-game barter wallet and wondering whether any of the older reputation reward tokens were still of any practical use. I have one primary alt that I’ve invested a fair amount of time into. I usually end up doing all quests in each zone, so tend to have maximum rep with all factions and a surfeit of barter tokens. Naturally, armour from Enedwaith or Dunland is no longer relevant at current endgame and it is the nature of MMOs to produce gear that has its day in the sun, only to be consigned to oblivion twelve months later. So, it’s par for the course that LOTRO generates a wealth of tokens that simply fills up your barter wallet only to be forgotten. However, there is “gold” to be found if you take the time to look.
Pet, mount and cosmetic collectors would be well recommended to do some research. For example, the Bingo Boffin episodic quest chain yields a wealth of cosmetic pets. Who doesn’t want an Umber Goat? Again, the Defenders of Minas Tirith can supply a Striped Pelennor Pig for 50 Minas Tirith Silver Pieces. Then there’s a Rohirric Follower if you have full rep with the Riders of Rohan. Then there are the respective “Return to” skills to such places as Galtrev, Mirkwood and Snowbourn. If you purchase the right skill from the LOTRO store you can reduce the cooldown time on all of these to 30 minutes. And although I said that a lot of the faction gear becomes statistically obsolete as you progress through the game, you can still equip items cosmetically if you like the look of them.
A lot of items in your barter wallet can also be traded in for practical commodities like Scrolls of Empowerment and Essence and Relic removal Scrolls. These are always of use and it never does any harm to stockpile them. Also, some of the items that you can obtain via your barter wallet can then be sold via the Auction House. And then there are the skirmish marks. I’ve always enjoyed this particular aspect of LOTRO and have often used skirmishes as an alternative means of levelling. They offer short and convenient challenges and it’s surprising how you can build a large fortune of marks and medallions over time. I still use my Landscape Soldier and it’s easy and convenient to buy the tokens for their use, from the skirmish vendors.
If like me, you’ve been playing LOTRO for a while, you may well have equally built up a supply of rep tokens and sundry barter currencies. It is certainly worthwhile investigating what you can actually trade them for and enhance your game. Because of the way LOTRO has grown over the years, many of its game systems are somewhat esoteric and are often overlooked by all but the most dedicated player. However, there’s no real quick or convenient way to really discover what you can or cannot get, other than by visiting the vendors of each particular rep faction and simply trawling through their inventory. Alternatively, you can search through the LOTRO Wiki and just see what’s available in game. All things considered it’s well worthwhile investigating the far reaches of your barter wallet. It may well offer you something unexpected and convenient.
Super Mario Bros. (1993)
Twenty-five years ago, Super Mario Bros. was released upon an unsuspecting public and subsequently met with universal critical derision and box office failure. With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight is seems incredible that this project ever got given a green light. Yet at the time, not only was it granted a generous $48 million budget, but it boasted a cast and production team of the highest pedigree. Produced by Oscar nominated director Roland Joffé, the cinematography was by Dean Semmler and the editing was by Mark Goldblatt. The central characters of Mario and Luigi where played by Bob Hoskins and John Leguizamo and the icing on the cake was Dennis Hopper as King Koopa. You simply couldn't make it up.
Twenty-five years ago, Super Mario Bros. was released upon an unsuspecting public and subsequently met with universal critical derision and box office failure. With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight is seems incredible that this project ever got given a green light. Yet at the time, not only was it granted a generous $48 million budget, but it boasted a cast and production team of the highest pedigree. Produced by Oscar nominated director Roland Joffé, the cinematography was by Dean Semmler and the editing was by Mark Goldblatt. The central characters of Mario and Luigi where played by Bob Hoskins and John Leguizamo and the icing on the cake was Dennis Hopper as King Koopa. You simply couldn't make it up.
Apparently, the script was hawked around most of Hollywood as the production tried to secure a suitable A list director and some bankable box office names. Harold Ramis was initially linked to the project but opted to make Groundhog Day instead. A move I'm sure he has never regretted. Both Michael Keaton and Arnold Schwarzenegger passed on the chance to play King Koopa. The role of Mario was at first offered to Danny DeVito, but he would not commit to the movie until he had seen a complete script. Tom Hanks was then hired and let go, in favour of Bob Hoskins. Mr. Hoskins was subsequently traumatised by his experiences shooting this movie.
“The worst thing I ever did? Super Mario Bros. It was a fuckin’ nightmare. The whole experience was a nightmare. It had a husband-and-wife team directing, whose arrogance had been mistaken for talent. After so many weeks their own agent told them to get off the set! Fuckin’ nightmare. Fuckin’ idiots”.
Then there is of course the script. After numerous incarnations ranging from traditional fantasy, to a post-apocalyptic futuristic setting, it was decided to opt for a dystopic cyberpunk alternative reality where evolved dinosaurs ruled the world. Ed Solomon of Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure fame was brought in to make further, “kiddy friendly” revisions to the plot. This caused major discrepancies with elements of the production that directors Annabel Jankel and Rocky Morton (of Max Headroom fame) had already created, such as costumes, prosthetics and character art.
As the primary shooting ended the original finale involving Mario climbing the Brooklyn Bridge and dropping a bomb on King Koopa and kicking him into the river, was replaced with alternative material where he was shot by a high-tech weapon that melted him. Directors Morton and Jankel were subsequently excluded from the editing process, in which a great deal of new material shot by the second unit was integrated into the film. As you would expect with such a production, the final cut was far from everyone’s expectations. The critics and fans were harsh and unforgiving. The nicest quote I could find was "doesn't have the jaunty hop-and-zap spirit of the Nintendo video game from which it takes – ahem – its inspiration."
Like so many epic failures, Super Mario Bros. seems to have acquired, some sort of cult following over the years. I think that is never does any harm to revisit any movie after a period of time and to attempt to re-evaluate it, although such a process does not guarantee a change of opinion. In the case of Super Mario Bros. the passage of time has not altered the fact that the movie is a mess.
Yet there is a degree of freak show fascination that makes the film compelling. It has an air of car crash cinema to a degree and is most certainly is a text book example of stripping a franchise of all its charm and selling points, while trying to bring it to the big screen. Perhaps one of the interesting aspects about the film, is that the mistakes that were made during its production are still regularly made today. No doubt they will happen again in the future. In the meantime, if you have a strong sense of curiosity and a high tolerance of bad cinema, then watch Super Mario Bros.as some sort of cinematic “Kobayashi Maru test”.
Red Lights (2012)
Rodrigo Cortés proved with Buried, that he was adept at creating a tense and involving drama with a modest budget and strong lead performances. With Red Lights he once again manages to craft a suspenseful story, in spite of the significantly larger production and inclusion of some A list talent. I say this because Red Lights is a bit top heavy with "actors" who seem to be intent on "acting". Robert De Niro presence does for example overwhelm the proceedings particularly in the last act, which becomes somewhat bombastic in tone. The movie is also a curious hybrid because despite being marketed as a supernatural chiller, it has an underlying theme that would be more at home in a political thriller.
Rodrigo Cortés proved with Buried, that he was adept at creating a tense and involving drama with a modest budget and strong lead performances. With Red Lights he once again manages to craft a suspenseful story, in spite of the significantly larger production and inclusion of some A list talent. I say this because Red Lights is a bit top heavy with "actors" who seem to be intent on "acting". Robert De Niro presence does for example overwhelm the proceedings particularly in the last act, which becomes somewhat bombastic in tone. The movie is also a curious hybrid because despite being marketed as a supernatural chiller, it has an underlying theme that would be more at home in a political thriller.
The plot is an old chestnut. Sigourney Weaver and Cillian Murphy are a pair of scientists, Dr Margaret Matheson and assistant Tom Buckley, who debunk mediums and psychics who prey on the public. When blind psychic Simon Silver (Robert De Niro), re-appears on the scene after a thirty-year absence, Tom takes a keen interest. His mentor is not only sceptical, but also somewhat perturbed advising Tom to act with caution with regard to Silver. Is he a fraud or does he actually have powers of a dangerous nature? Cortés steadily turns up the tension, as doors close on their own, lights blow, and birds become suicidal. Furthermore, the audience is presented with a challenging theme that being sceptical is often treated with more scorn these days than openly embracing the supernatural.
It all plays very well initially, with shades of Hitchcock and Brian De Plama, blended with M Night Shyamalan. There's even a hint of the Parallax View. Then for some reason in the last act, the director decides to turn it up to eleven and then Red Lights comes off the rails. The result is an ending that divides audiences and offers a point of debate. Stupid, pretentious, obtuse and ill-conceived are just some of the terms I’ve encountered with regard to this movie. Now it is never a bad thing for a film’s meaning or ending to become a talking point, if that discussion is a positive process. Unfortunately, I feel that in Red Lights case, that is not what has happened. This is a movie that does not travel to its ending by most direct route and the destination is may not be what you expected. Therefore adjust your expectations.
6 Months, 1 Day and 16 Hours
6 months, 1 day and 16 hours. Or put another way that’s 4504 hours. In total, 270,240 minutes. That is the total amount of time to date, that I’ve invested in my primary character in LOTRO. I have had several other alts over the years, many of which are now deleted, so for the sake of accuracy you can probably add another 20 hours or so to that total. That is a sizeable investment of time over an eight-year period. But that is the nature of the MMO genre. They are essentially time sinks. However, that is not what this post is about. I’m not here to dissect whether 4504 hours has been a good use of my time or not. As far as I’m concerned, I’ve gained a commensurate amount of entertainment in return. Plus, those 2504 hours were specifically leisure time, so if I hadn’t of played LOTRO they would have been spent watching TV or on some other pastime. Therefore, I’m not going to claim that in different circumstance I could have learned to play the Sousaphone with that time. This post is about reflecting upon LOTRO and the MMO genre.
6 months, 1 day and 16 hours. Or put another way that’s 4504 hours. In total, 270,240 minutes. That is the total amount of time to date, that I’ve invested in my primary character in LOTRO. I have had several other alts over the years, many of which are now deleted, so for the sake of accuracy you can probably add another 20 hours or so to that total. That is a sizeable investment of time over an eight-year period. But that is the nature of the MMO genre. They are essentially time sinks. However, that is not what this post is about. I’m not here to dissect whether 4504 hours has been a good use of my time or not. As far as I’m concerned, I’ve gained a commensurate amount of entertainment in return. Plus, those 2504 hours were specifically leisure time, so if I hadn’t of played LOTRO they would have been spent watching TV or on some other pastime. Therefore, I’m not going to claim that in different circumstance I could have learned to play the Sousaphone with that time. This post is about reflecting upon LOTRO and the MMO genre.
Over the past eleven years LOTRO has waxed and waned and subsequently stabilised with regard to its playerbase and its place in the hall of MMO fame. Despite regular claims of its imminent demise (some even by myself), the game has doggedly soldiered on. It is my belief that the game is sustained and perpetuated by the loyal support of a group of core gamers who have decided to make LOTRO their online “home”. They may not like every aspect of the game or the way the developers, Standing Stone Games, runs things, but they’ve gotten used to the way things are. The other major factor is that there is no alternative game for the present. The recent news that Athlon Games is developing a new Middle-earth based MMO, doesn’t really have much bearing on the situation. The game doesn’t exist yet and will more than likely be a completely different beast to LOTRO. I can’t see LOTRO players jumping ship any time soon.
So for those who play LOTRO (I won’t use the term “gamers”, because many don’t identify as such or play any other title), it remains simply a fixed constant in their leisure activities. A social hub for staying in touch with friends, an immersive game with ten years’ worth of content to play and a source of inspiration for wider activities such as writing, role play or fan fiction. As for the game itself, it has a wealth quests and activities to undertake, ranging from the Epic Story to the most arbitrary of “busy work”. Therefore, there’s always something to do in LOTRO. Hence that number of 4504 hours. And that time investment is a really big factor for me. One of the reasons I keep coming back to LOTRO is the fact that I have committed a great deal of my own personal life to the game and that is not something that you casually disregard. Such an investment engenders a sense of loyalty and commitment. For some players it even fosters a sense of “ownership”. I may not necessarily agree with such a perspective, but I can see how it occurs.
Although I am not an especially emotional individual, I think it is fair to say that after ten years of playing LOTRO, I have developed some sort of sentimental attachment to the game. One that I have not found elsewhere with any other MMO. I have an abiding love of the Star Trek franchise, but STO doesn’t quite generate the same emotional response from me as LOTRO does. A lot of that is down to LOTRO’s intellectual property. Middle-earth and the writings of Professor Tolkien have a profound effect upon those that love and identify with his work. Then there’s the context of the time that I discovered and initially started playing the game. It filled a large gap in my leisure and social activities back in 2008. Another important point to consider, is that it was my first MMO and major experience of online communities. It’s a variation of the “first love” concept and how your initial experience of something greatly shapes your future outlook. So overall, I think that there’s no real surprise to be had by the revelation that I’ve spent over half a year of my time on LOTRO. Until something happens to change things, that number will continue to increase.
Skyscraper (2018)
I often find the arbitrary distillations of movies into a glib sentence to be a rather tedious trend. However, The Towering Inferno meets Die Hard is a fairly accurate assessment of Skyscraper. Sadly, the film has none of the drama or suspense of either of those two “classics”. Overall Skyscraper is a rather lacklustre affair, despite having two very personable leads (Dwayne Johnson and Neve Campbell). It suffers from a very superficial story and insubstantial characters, leaving only a handful of action set pieces to drive the narrative forward. It also makes the mistake of simply asking too much of its audience with regard to their suspension of disbelief and plays fast and loose with the laws of physics. In a nutshell this is a movie that aims for the “big, dumb and fun” market, but sadly only delivers on “big and dumb”. Not even the presence of Dwayne Johnson can elevate the proceedings.
I often find the arbitrary distillations of movies into a glib sentence to be a rather tedious trend. However, The Towering Inferno meets Die Hard is a fairly accurate assessment of Skyscraper. Sadly, the film has none of the drama or suspense of either of those two “classics”. Overall Skyscraper is a rather lacklustre affair, despite having two very personable leads (Dwayne Johnson and Neve Campbell). It suffers from a very superficial story and insubstantial characters, leaving only a handful of action set pieces to drive the narrative forward. It also makes the mistake of simply asking too much of its audience with regard to their suspension of disbelief and plays fast and loose with the laws of physics. In a nutshell this is a movie that aims for the “big, dumb and fun” market, but sadly only delivers on “big and dumb”. Not even the presence of Dwayne Johnson can elevate the proceedings.
After being invalided out of the services, former FBI Hostage Rescue Team leader Will Sawyer (Dwayne Johnson) now runs a private security company which specialises in skyscrapers and luxury buildings. After the world’s tallest building, “The Pearl” in Hong Kong, is set on fire by a team of international terrorists, Sawyer finds himself framed for arson and wanted by the police. Matters get worse when he learns that his wife Sarah (Neve Campbell) and children Georgia and Henry returned early from a day trip and are now trapped in the building above the fire. Scaling a crane next to the skyscraper and gaining access to the burning building, Sawyer has to play a game of cat and mouse with the terrorist leader Kores Botha (Roland Møller). Can he rescue his family, discover why Botha has targeted the building’s owner, Zhao Long Ji (Chin Han) and clear his name?
Usually these sorts of big budget summer action movies are lengthy undertakings, with self-indulgent running times of two hours plus. Skyscraper comes in at a lean 102 minutes. If you exclude the end credits, the film is about an hour and a half and therein lies one of its problems. The overall pacing is a little too quick, especially after the first act has established the plot and characters. The editing is somewhat “off” and you really get the impression that the film has been re-cut multiple times to try and stress certain aspects of the production and to meet the lucrative PG-13 rating it so obviously desired. Hence many of the support characters, such as Inspector Wu, Fire Chief Shen and Ajani Okeke, Zhao's head-of-security are left somewhat vague. Villains Kores Botha and Xia (Hannah Quinlivan) are similarly two dimensional and have no real impact or feel like a genuine threat.
But perhaps the biggest problem with Skyscraper is the actual conflagration itself. In Irwin Allen’s The Towering Inferno, the fire was in many respects a character that grew as a threat throughout the proceedings. Here it is merely a plot device that comes and goes, depending on when writer and director, Rawson Marshall Thurber, needs it. It never really has the dramatic impact it should have, as does the entire sub-plot about “The Pearl” being the worlds tallest building. This concept is just glossed over. And as ever with action movies of this nature, the technical accuracy of the what is presented is woefully inept, even for a genre that usually only flirts with reality. Quite early on in the film, when Will Sawyer decides to scale a huge crane, a line is crossed with regard to our suspension of disbelief. The following leap from crane to building with the obligatory “peddling in air” trope, simply jumps the shark.
Whereas Mr Johnson’s previous disaster movie, San Andreas, managed to stay on the right side of stupidity, Skyscraper sadly crosses the line. It is superficial, lacking in excitement and tonally inconsistent. Perhaps a longer edit with a greater focus on story may have improved matters. As it stands, not even Dwayne Johnson’s buoyant personality and easy-going charisma can really sustain this indifferent blockbuster. For a movie with such a large budget, international setting and cast, it really is a missed opportunity. The current trend in Hollywood of catering specifically to the Chinese film market, should afford film makers with a lot of new creative opportunities. Sadly, rather than weaving region character into the finished products, such productions frequently end up somewhat homogenous and devoid of any identity or charm. Beyond filling time on a flight, Skyscraper really doesn’t have much to offer, which is a shame because given its star and the underlying premise, it should have been far more entertaining.
Burt Reynolds (1936 - 2018)
Burt Reynolds saw his greatest box office success during the seventies and early eighties, with movies such as Smokey and the Bandit and The Cannonball Run. I was aware of both these movies at the time of their release but was more enamoured with the sci-fi boom that followed in the wake of Star Wars, so was somewhat indifferent to them at the time. However, the release of Sharky’s Machine in 1981 put Burt Reynolds squarely on my radar. As a teenager I was already catching up with a lot of the major action movies from the previous decade such as Clint Eastwood’s Dirty Harry and its sequels. Sharky’s Machine was an extremely gritty, hard edged cop drama, directed and starring Burt Reynolds and it was a notable change of role for him. It left a marked impression upon me at the time, not only due to it’s strong action scenes, but because of Reynolds compelling and nuanced performance. For me, it remains his best movie, showcasing his dramatic range and directing skills.
Burt Reynolds saw his greatest box office success during the seventies and early eighties, with movies such as Smokey and the Bandit and The Cannonball Run. I was aware of both these movies at the time of their release but was more enamoured with the sci-fi boom that followed in the wake of Star Wars, so was somewhat indifferent to them at the time. However, the release of Sharky’s Machine in 1981 put Burt Reynolds squarely on my radar. As a teenager I was already catching up with a lot of the major action movies from the previous decade such as Clint Eastwood’s Dirty Harry and its sequels. Sharky’s Machine was an extremely gritty, hard edged cop drama, directed and starring Burt Reynolds and it was a notable change of role for him. It left a marked impression upon me at the time, not only due to it’s strong action scenes, but because of Reynolds compelling and nuanced performance. For me, it remains his best movie, showcasing his dramatic range and directing skills.
Sadly, it was not to be replicated in his future work. After years of playing light comedies and caper movies, Reynolds struggled to catch up with the lucrative action genre. He appeared in a string of cop movies that were very old school compared to the likes of 48 Hrs and Lethal Weapon. Stick (1985) and Heat (1986) and Rent-a-Cop (1987) never really gained any significant traction at the box office or with younger audiences. In an attempt to adapt to the sort of action vehicle that usually starred the likes of Norris or Schwarzenegger, Reynolds starred in the 1987 action thriller Malone. Although extremely derivative, it was lifted above the average by his strong performance as a troubled government operative running from his past. Malone certainly has a more than passing similarity to the great Alan Ladd movie Shane (1953). Yet a decade later, after slowly slipping from the Hollywood A list, Reynolds re-invented himself and made a significant return in the movie Boogie Nights (1997).
Reynolds cinematic persona was very much shaped by the era in which he saw the most success. The roguish, good ‘ole boy, with a heart of gold was both a boon and a bane for him, along with the traditional “man’s man” label that he was saddled with. It certainly contributed to his type-casting and impeded his transition into broader roles later in his career. Despite being one of the biggest box office stars of the seventies and eighties, his six-decade career had its share of misfires and wrong decisions. Not only did he pass on James Bond, he also turned down Die Hard. Yet, despite never fully finding the critical acclaim that he deserved, Reynold’s remained one of Hollywood’s most loved and congenial old school stars. His talent and versatility as an actor are present in his body of work for those that care to look a little closer. He was a true cultural icon and one of the last Hollywood stars in the traditional sense.
San Andreas (2015)
San Andreas makes the same mistake that most modern disaster movies tend to; namely the human story is simply drowned out by the size of the unfolding disaster. There seems to be some sort of curious inverse scale in this particular genre, in which the greater the magnitude of destruction, the less the audience gives a crap about those experiencing it on-screen. San Andreas is essentially a CGI FX showreel with some bland and indifferent narrative bolted on to it. It taps into societies morbid fascination with our own mortality and the fragile nature of our modern life style. It is odd how we seem to relish visions of our own destruction. I’m sure psychologists have a lot to say on this matter. However, beyond providing a spectacle San Andreas has precious little else to offer. Once again, the only redeeming aspect of the film is the presence of Dwayne Johnson.
San Andreas makes the same mistake that most modern disaster movies tend to; namely the human story is simply drowned out by the size of the unfolding disaster. There seems to be some sort of curious inverse scale in this particular genre, in which the greater the magnitude of destruction, the less the audience gives a crap about those experiencing it on-screen. San Andreas is essentially a CGI FX showreel with some bland and indifferent narrative bolted on to it. It taps into societies morbid fascination with our own mortality and the fragile nature of our modern life style. It is odd how we seem to relish visions of our own destruction. I’m sure psychologists have a lot to say on this matter. However, beyond providing a spectacle San Andreas has precious little else to offer. Once again, the only redeeming aspect of the film is the presence of Dwayne Johnson.
I like Dwayne Johnson; he's an amiable on-screen presence who sticks to what he does best. Yet San Andreas manages to tax an already forgiving audiences sense of disbelief by casting him as a search and rescue pilot. It’s not the first role you associate with him is it? The “stupidity meter” reading quickly increases once a series of earthquakes the West Coast destroying the Hoover Dam and spreading to Los Angeles. People start behaving illogically and according to the movie cliché hand book. The faux science espoused at this point is ludicrous. The rating then goes off the chart when Chief Raymond 'Ray' Gaines (Johnson) just happens to chance upon his ex-wife Emma (Carla Gugino), despite Los Angeles having a population of four million and rescues her in the ensuing mayhem.
If you like to play arbitrary plot device bingo, you're score card will be full by the time San Andreas finishes. These include such clichés as the serious actor playing an academic (Paul Giamatti), whose sole purpose is to facilitate narrative exposition and explain what’s happening next to the intellectually challenged. Then there's the news reporter who's always in the right place at the right time to “get the story”. Oh, and we even get the evil new boyfriend who works in real estate (to be honest it’s a good indicator). As the credits finally roll, you’ll more than likely be partially deaf and have a headache brought about by the hyperactive cinematography. However, despite being immensely stupid there are a few crumbs of entertainment to be had due to Mr Johnson. He is disarmingly watchable. If you need to keep the kids quiet and kill two hours, then San Andreas will fit the bill. Expect nothing more.
Soldier Blue (1970)
Soldier Blue is an American Revisionist Western from 1970, directed by Ralph Nelson, telling a fictionalised account of the events surrounding the 1864 Sand Creek massacre in the Colorado Territory. It was written by John Gay based on the novel "Arrow in the Sun" by Theodore V. Olsen and starred Candice Bergen, Peter Strauss, and Donald Pleasence. The title song was performed by Buffy Sainte-Marie. Released during the height of the Vietnam War against the backdrop of the Mỹ Lai massacre, it provided a depiction of a notorious incident in the history of the American frontier, in which troops massacred an undefended village of Cheyenne and Arapaho Indians. The film creates a back story involving the escape of white survivors from an earlier massacre of U.S. Cavalry troops by Indians. The film was controversial at the time not only as a revisionist western but for its graphic levels of violence. Director Nelson, pushed the depiction of the violence to new levels, showing graphic rape scenes, as well as "realistic" atrocities.
Soldier Blue is an American Revisionist Western from 1970, directed by Ralph Nelson, telling a fictionalised account of the events surrounding the 1864 Sand Creek massacre in the Colorado Territory. It was written by John Gay based on the novel "Arrow in the Sun" by Theodore V. Olsen and starred Candice Bergen, Peter Strauss, and Donald Pleasence. The title song was performed by Buffy Sainte-Marie. Released during the height of the Vietnam War against the backdrop of the Mỹ Lai massacre, it provided a depiction of a notorious incident in the history of the American frontier, in which troops massacred an undefended village of Cheyenne and Arapaho Indians. The film creates a back story involving the escape of white survivors from an earlier massacre of U.S. Cavalry troops by Indians. The film was controversial at the time not only as a revisionist western but for its graphic levels of violence. Director Nelson, pushed the depiction of the violence to new levels, showing graphic rape scenes, as well as "realistic" atrocities.
Forty-eight years later, what is the current opinion of this film? Well an integral aspect of any film review is the prevailing social mood and context at the time of release. Seventies America looked upon this piece of work with very different eyes than today. Liberal, anti-establishment sentiment was still not totally acceptable by the mainstream. America had still not come to terms with its past relationships with its indigenous people. In that respect Soldier Blue was considered to be quite an outspoken and radical piece of cinema, that despite its shocking nature, still had a social conscience. Soldier Blue gained a reputation, that followed it over the years, but overtime the focus on the films politics was lost. When I was growing up in the early eighties amid the "video nasties" witch hunt in the UK, this film was mentioned in the same breath as The Exorcist, Zombie Flesh Eaters or A Clockwork Orange and its political agenda was forgotten.
Considering the film with a more contemporary outlook, Soldier Blue is an awkward mixture of heavy-handed pacifist arguments, with such clichés as the cavalry riding roughshod over the American flag, light comedy and brutal violence. It is very much of its time in its approach to its subject. The female lead is an outspoken feminist and the young cavalry officer a naive puritan. The social stigma of a woman captured by Indians is explored and the military are painted as degenerate, homicidal rapists, run by cruel leaders with a genocidal agenda. Roy Budd's soundtrack is oddly inappropriate and misleads the audience as to the films tone. The films ending is still powerful but is not as visually shocking as you may anticipate. The depiction of violence and its acceptance into all aspects of mainstream TV and cinema really has softened the impact of the climatic massacre. On a purely technical level, special effects have improved so much over the decades. But it is the change in public perceptions toward violence itself, that makes an overall difference. I'm sure that if a group of contemporary teenagers were to watch this film, a percentage would simply not be moved or shocked by what they saw. However, I'm sure that an audience of a more senior nature, particularly parents may still be distressed by what they saw.
To truly appreciate the emotional impact of the films ending, you need to have a grasp of the historical legacy of the Native Americans and a sense of social conscience. Ralph Nelson film, being a product of its environment and time, may not necessarily connected to a modern audience. Over the years, there have been numerous releases of Soldier Blue in censored versions. In the UK, the current DVD release is still incomplete, missing much violence and several horse stunts that have been deemed cruel. However, the US Region 1 release is uncut, as is the Region 2 German copy. There are also Blu-ray releases featuring the uncut print of the film. Soldier Blue is a clumsy yet sincere piece of cinema. It tries to over simplify a historical incident so that it can draw parallels to the ongoing political misdeeds of its own time. It is of interest mainly due to its significance in the evolution of modern cinema. Falling between stools it remains a misguided curiosity and essentially a talking point among film historians.
Your First Mistake Was Having Expectations
Two stories have broken today regarding a pair of established and much-loved pop culture franchises. The first is the news that actor Henry Cavill has been cast as Geralt of Rivia, in the forthcoming Witcher TV show currently in production by Netflix. The second is regarding how newly established games developers Athlon Games are currently working on a new F2P Middle-earth based MMO. Considering there is no further details on either of these two points beyond what has already been stated, one could be tempted to say rhetorically “nothing to see here, move along”. However, this is the age of social media, so let it suffice to say that both these announcements have caused a degree of consternation in certain quarters. Namely fans of those already established iterations of The Witcher and The Lord of the Rings.
Two stories have broken today regarding a pair of established and much-loved pop culture franchises. The first is the news that actor Henry Cavill has been cast as Geralt of Rivia, in the forthcoming Witcher TV show currently in production by Netflix. The second is regarding how newly established games developers Athlon Games are currently working on a new F2P Middle-earth based MMO. Considering there is no further details on either of these two points beyond what has already been stated, one could be tempted to say rhetorically “nothing to see here, move along”. However, this is the age of social media, so let it suffice to say that both these announcements have caused a degree of consternation in certain quarters. Namely fans of those already established iterations of The Witcher and The Lord of the Rings.
As I get older and therefore less sentimental and less invested in fandom per se, I do find the sort of complaints, criticism and sundry “brouhaha” that has accompanied both of these developments, somewhat irrelevant. All are based on a misplaced assumption that existing fans needs are the primary force driving both projects. But they are not. Yes, I agree that the look, feel and voice of Geralt of Rivia where honed to perfection in CD Projekt Red’s video games. This will naturally determine a lot of people’s conception of the character, the same way that a handful of artists such as John Howe and Alan Lee have shaped the popular opinion of what Tolkien’s characters should look like. Another example that is age dependent, is who you consider to be the best incarnation of James Bond. But artistic interpretation as a concept tends to “pooh-pooh” such dogmatic ideas as “the definitive version”.
From what I’ve gleaned from the information that’s available about Netflix’s The Witcher TV show, it is not intended to be merely a fan service to those that enjoyed the three video games. It is a broader adaptation of the original source material by by Polish writer Andrzej Sapkowski, intended to reach as wide an audience as possible. Fantasy as a genre is very popular and marketable at present. Thus, casting a known quantity such as Henry Cavill, who has experience of genre productions along with matinee idol good looks is hardly surprising. The objections of a minority of “core fans” is frankly just standard operational collateral damage when adapting such a franchise. Frankly, when you consider the current trend for remakes, reboots, altering race, gender and generally repurposing any franchise or brand if it is deemed profitable to do so, complaining about the casting of Henry Cavill is somewhat redundant.
As for there being a new Tolkien based MMORPG that is set at some point in The Lord of the Rings timeline, I really don’t see it being a major issue for the existing ten-year-old LOTRO. It’s hardly uncommon for multiple licensed products to share a specific market place at the same time. Look at Neverwinter and DDO for example. Furthermore, it is highly likely that both games will be very different from each other and therefore not in direct competition. I recently wrote about the possibility of a LOTRO 2.0 and how those players “joined at the hip” with the existing iteration of the game are not necessarily disposed towards migrating to a new and more modern game. A new title with contemporary bells and whistles would seek a new audience who favour such mechanics. I see it very much as an “apples and orange” situation. Plus, the point has already been raised as to whether the new Middle-earth based MMO is going to be linked in someway to the TV show that is currently under development for Amazon Prime.
Both of these examples reflect once again the inherent myopia that seems to accompany contemporary fandom. They represent a failure to see both of these franchises for what they are; products. And as such they can be augmented by the rights holder in whatever way they see fit. That doesn’t mean that fans can’t have an opinion. They are of course free to like or not like something. But considering the nature of the global market that all products must compete in these days, the uniquely subjective needs of fans only makes up a small percentage of potential customers. Therefore, these bespoke “requirements” are far from paramount. If you want a more specific example, then consider how the Marvel Cinematic Universe has “adapted” the source material to make it accessible to a wider audience. Lore has been altered and known box-office names have been cast to ensure a wide reach. Yes, some fans have disliked what they’ve seen, but in business terms Disney have struck gold. In a world where hype, following trends and number crunching dictates policy, it’s hardly surprising that the Henry Cavill has been cast as Geralt of Rivia and that a new Middle-earth based MMO is going to embrace the current foibles of the F2P business model. To those bemused by all this, your first mistake was having expectations.
LOTRO: Fishing
Many MMOs have “hobbies” as part of the activities they have on offer. These are usually leisurely undertakings done for their own inherent fun, rather than providing a tangible in-game benefit. In LOTRO the only hobby that is currently available (despite the game existing for over decade) is fishing. It’s a relatively simple affair that’s been further refined (dumbed down, some may argue) over time. When I started playing LOTRO in 2008, fishing had an extra component to its underlying mechanic. There were various types of bait (consumables) that provided a bonus to your fishing skill. These included Leech Bait, Nightcrawler Bait and Red Wiggler Bait. However, this mechanic was removed possibly around the time of the “free to play” conversion. As it currently stands, fishing now just requires accepting the hobby from the Hobby Master NPC (Simon Quinlank would be proud), buying a basic fishing rod and finding a body of water. You equip the rod instead of a weapon and add the fishing skill to your quick slot bar. If you click the skill it will cause a casting animation. You then wait for the fish to bite, which is signified buy your rod bending and twitching. The player then clicks the skill again to land whatever they’ve caught.
Many MMOs have “hobbies” as part of the activities they have on offer. These are usually leisurely undertakings done for their own inherent fun, rather than providing a tangible in-game benefit. In LOTRO the only hobby that is currently available (despite the game existing for over decade) is fishing. It’s a relatively simple affair that’s been further refined (dumbed down, some may argue) over time. When I started playing LOTRO in 2008, fishing had an extra component to its underlying mechanic. There were various types of bait (consumables) that provided a bonus to your fishing skill. These included Leech Bait, Nightcrawler Bait and Red Wiggler Bait. However, this mechanic was removed possibly around the time of the “free to play” conversion. As it currently stands, fishing now just requires accepting the hobby from the Hobby Master NPC (Simon Quinlank would be proud), buying a basic fishing rod and finding a body of water. You equip the rod instead of a weapon and add the fishing skill to your quick slot bar. If you click the skill it will cause a casting animation. You then wait for the fish to bite, which is signified buy your rod bending and twitching. The player then clicks the skill again to land whatever they’ve caught.
Like any activity in a game of this nature, fishing is subject to a levelling mechanic. The maximum rating is level 200 and the player can gain 10 points per day (the "clock" resets at midnight EST). There are currently seven different types of rod available in LOTRO, ranging from the aforementioned basic rod and the latest Exquisite Elven Fishing Rod which adds +10 Fishing. However, these rods are gated behind reputation factions in level specific regions, so you can’t buy a fancy rod and expect to fast path to level cap. It should also be noted that there are multiple deeds associated with fishing (hardly a surprise as LOTRO is rife with deeds) and some of the fancier fish that you can catch can be taken to a taxidermist and turned into trophies and used as housing items. As stated earlier, fishing is mainly a recreational activity which may also appeal to the goal orientated completionist who likes to do everything for personal satisfaction.
Standing Stone Games are obviously not conversent with UK slang.
I started fishing when I first subscribed to LOTRO. At that point in time, MMOs were new to me and I found all of the games foibles endearing. I’ve never pursued fishing seriously and have mainly used it as it was intended, just as something easy to do in-game while unwinding. As you can fish pretty much from any body of water in the game, I’ve often done fishing while waiting for colleagues to log in or while I’m on Discord chatting to friends. It’s something I’ve done casually over eight years and not something I’ve ever monitored. Recently, while fishing in Long Lake, I noticed a notification telling me I was level 183. So, I investigated a little further and determined I was not far from the cap. As a result, I decided to actually complete this deed, mainly due to a “why not” mindset and the want of anything else more significant to do. So, I toured various regions of Middle-earth and spent an hour here and there, slowly working towards my goal. Needless to say, a few days ago I hit level 200 hundred after a decade of not especially trying to do so. It gave me a moments satisfaction and a reason for a blog post, so I guess I shouldn’t “pooh-pooh” this achievement. I wonder whether Standing Stone Games have any new plans to add further hobbies to the game. If they do perhaps I’ll complete them as well in another ten years’ time.
Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse (1991)
There was a time when film making was seen as an artistic endeavour and the idea of the auteur director pursuing a vision was considered a romantic and even noble undertaking. Big multi-million-dollar productions were welcomed when they filmed on location, providing work and glamour to the local population. The might of the dollar would often grease the wheels of industry, making the impossible possible. Egos were massaged, and actors were indulged and treated like minor deities. Huge sets would appear in the middle of nowhere, like Victorian follies and luxury items would be flown around the world to placate the capricious nature of the various Hollywood stars. Money would flow like water, much to the dismay of the producers, sitting back in the offices in the US or Europe. But this era has now past. Big budget movies are still made but it is now driven by corporate accounting and artistic vision is no longer a primary consideration. It is now a rather soulless business process. Hence a movie such as Apocalypse Now would never be made today in the same manner that it was back in 1976 when the production started.
There was a time when film making was seen as an artistic endeavour and the idea of the auteur director pursuing a vision was considered a romantic and even noble undertaking. Big multi-million-dollar productions were welcomed when they filmed on location, providing work and glamour to the local population. The might of the dollar would often grease the wheels of industry, making the impossible possible. Egos were massaged, and actors were indulged and treated like minor deities. Huge sets would appear in the middle of nowhere, like Victorian follies and luxury items would be flown around the world to placate the capricious nature of the various Hollywood stars. Money would flow like water, much to the dismay of the producers, sitting back in the offices in the US or Europe. But this era has now past. Big budget movies are still made but it is now driven by corporate accounting and artistic vision is no longer a primary consideration. It is now a rather soulless business process. Hence a movie such as Apocalypse Now would never be made today in the same manner that it was back in 1976 when the production started.
Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse is one of the best “movies about the making of a movie” ever made. It provides not only a window into them making of one of the most important movies of the seventies but also offers a snapshot of a kind of film making that simply doesn’t exist anymore. After several years of pre-production writer/director Francis Ford Coppola arrived in the Philippines in 1976 and quickly found himself drowning in the logistical, political and human aspects of this mammoth project. He asked his wife Eleannor to document the process which she dutifully did, filming events on and off set and recording conversations with her husband as the production started to spiral out of control. Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse shows all this and more, in broad chronological order over the period of the extended location shoot. As for all the stories surrounding the “troubled” production of Apocalypse Now, they’re all broadly true. To catalogue them is somewhat redundant as it fails to adequately convey they’re true significance or magnitude. But to watch them happening first hand is utterly astounding.
Two of aspects of the production of Apocalypse Now that really stand out are the complex logistical requirements and human management. This was a big budget movie made in the days before computer effects. Therefore, the action scenes where shot on location and for real. A shot requiring a napalm strike in the treeline would subsequently feature a low fly-by by a jet plane and then tons of gasoline exploded by the effects crew, all flawlessly timed. Another scene featuring the crew exploring the jungle and encountering a tiger again would be undertaken with a live tiger and a handler. If the script required an ageing temple set in the jungle, then one would simply be built by local labour. Despite a typhoon destroying multiple sets early on in the production, the moment the weather nominally abated, then the crew were out filming, incorporating the extreme conditions into the narrative. And then there was the entire issue of the cast and their “personal journeys”. To reflect the reality of a soldier’s life in Vietnam, drugs were freely used among the production crew and actors. And presiding over this chaos was Coppola himself. Eleannor Coppola wrote of his experience “The film Francis is making is a metaphor for a journey into self. He has made that journey and is still making it. It's scary to watch someone you love go into the centre of himself and confront his fears, fear of failure, fear of death, fear of going insane. You have to fail a little, die a little, go insane a little, to come out the other side. The process is not over for Francis”.
But perhaps the most significant obstacle to challenge the production was its very own star, Marlon Brando. The seventies were a decade in which the “Hollywood Star” was still a revered, cultural icon. I cannot think of a circumstance nowadays in which a lead artist would be allowed to inconvenience an entire film production so much, while being indulged and cossetted. Brando’s intransigence and hubris were monumental, and he arrived on set late into the production with little or no preparation for the role. His continual questioning and debating the script verged upon gas lighting and his utter indifference to the rest of the cast was a major impediment. It is much to Coppola’s credit that he allowed the actor to eventually just extemporise around certain plot elements and from the hours of footage shot, collate such a powerful performance. When the production finally ended after sixteen months, it took a further year for the director to assemble a workable print of the movie. Half of the original script, written by John Milius, was re-written by Coppola himself and post production required the return of many cast members to re-record new lines and the framing narration.
If one has no knowledge of film history, it would be reasonable to assume after watching the documentary Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse, that the resultant film, Apocalypse Now, was an absolute disaster both critically and financially. However, that was not the case and the movie is now hailed as a “haunting, hallucinatory Vietnam war epic” and “cinema at its most audacious and visionary”. Certainly, the entire production and associated apocrypha surrounding the film can be seen as a metaphor to the entire Vietnam War in itself. As for Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse it is an invaluable exploration of film making process of the times. It not only catalogues but appears testifies to the notion that creating art is a painful and extremely difficult process. Yet the key to success is to stay true to your artistic vision, whatever the cost. Whether you agree with such concepts is up to you to decide. Is Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse showing us the struggles of an auteur director or simply recording the runaway indulgences of an ego maniac? Either way it is an incredible and utterly fascinating documentary to watch.
Writing and Time
Fellow blogger Sandrian recently asked on the Blaugust Discord server, “how do people find the time. I've been nothing but exhausted for the past three weeks and barely remember to post stuff for Blaugust”. It’s a common question asked by people coming to grips with regular content creation. After a decade plus of writing in some shape or form, I believe I have two possible answers. The first and short response is a quote by the great Montgomery Scott, “if something's important, you'll make the time”. The second is a more detailed breakdown of my daily schedule and how I integrate my writing process into it. Perhaps aspects of my approach to writing will be of use to others, however I will once again state that there is no “one size fits all” approach to any sort of content creation. You have to find what is best for you and then build upon it. There is no magic solution and however you undertake your writing, podcasting or streaming, it takes discipline and a degree of self-sacrifice if you wish to persevere.
"Time, time, time see what's become of me. While I looked around for my possibilities".
Fellow blogger Sandrian recently asked on the Blaugust Discord server, “how do people find the time. I've been nothing but exhausted for the past three weeks and barely remember to post stuff for Blaugust”. It’s a common question asked by people coming to grips with regular content creation. After a decade plus of writing in some shape or form, I believe I have two possible answers. The first and short response is a quote by the great Montgomery Scott, “if something's important, you'll make the time”. The second is a more detailed breakdown of my daily schedule and how I integrate my writing process into it. Perhaps aspects of my approach to writing will be of use to others, however I will once again state that there is no “one size fits all” approach to any sort of content creation. You have to find what is best for you and then build upon it. There is no magic solution and however you undertake your writing, podcasting or streaming, it takes discipline and a degree of self-sacrifice if you wish to persevere.
To begin with, I have demands on my time like everyone else. I retired from work to become a carer to both my parents who are disabled. However, both have clearly structured days and routines, so although I am kept busy, I have a very clear idea how my time will be spent at the beginning of each week. I am mainly occupied between the hours of 11:00 AM and 6:00 PM during week days. This affords me time in the morning and the evening to write. I live with my significant other who also took early retirement and is now a lady of leisure. We spend time together each evening and regularly have days out, but we also pursue individual interests. My son is an adult with a family of his own so childcare is no longer an issue, although we do regularly babysit our twin granddaughters. Overall, my life is busy but tends to be well organised. I’m also a “night owl” and will stay up late, getting by quite well with just five hours of sleep. Hence, there are distinct windows of opportunity each day to write, both in the morning and at night.
"hello computer".
Because of the subjects that I write about, at least half of my weekly content is planned in advance. I have an ongoing “to do list” of movies and TV shows which I methodically work through. I take notes as I watch and use these to structure reviews or analysis. Most of the long form “think pieces” that I write about popular culture and gaming are planned ahead of writing and developed over several writing sessions. The other half of my writing is driven by what I read. I will often riff off a talking point in the gaming news or give my perspective on an ongoing debacle or controversy. I keep a spreadsheet on my Windows “start list” where I frequently jot down ideas. If I’m out and about and something worth writing about pops into my head, I’ll use the voice recorder on my phone to collate my thoughts. I also have word installed on my Samsung S8, and have frequently written bullet points for a blog post, while sitting in a hospital waiting room with one of my parents. Again, “if something's important, you'll make the time”.
There are twenty-four hours in a day. If you want to write, then you can always set an alarm and get up an hour early. Or you can skip a superfluous TV show that you watch mainly because you don’t want to get off the couch. Time can be found, if you choose to do so. But that can lead into another potential problem. After creating that window of opportunity and finding yourself in front of your PC, you have to motivate yourself to write. I prefer writing in the morning when I’m feeling enthused and energetic. It is demonstrably harder to do so later at night after a gruelling day. And this is where mental discipline raises it’s head. You have to consciously decided to ignore all distractions (such as cat videos on You Tube) and focus on getting your content out of your head and into a coherent written form. Now if you feel that this is all a little too heavy and you only want to write just for fun, then cool. If the shit fits, wear it as they say. But you’ll soon find that your output will become infrequent and that in itself can kill your motivation further. If you want to pursue a more rigorous writing schedule, then you have to knuckle down and just do it.
Mr T. Insert something pithy, hip and motivational here.
Once you start writing, get as much down as you can in the time that you have. Do not edit as you go, as that really slows you down. Just concentrate in getting the thrust of you post written and worry about spelling, grammar and coherency later. If you find that the writing is “flowing” and that your plan is coming together in such a way it would make Hannibal Smith happy, then capitalise on the experience. If you can get two or more posts written, then do so and bank them. Building up a stockpile of blog posts is great insurance policy for those days when everything you touch turns to shit. Plus, it’s highly likely that you’ll have a holiday at some point during the year, or social engagements that will keep you out all night, so having material in reserve is a real boon. Another point to remember is that every blog post doesn’t have to be an epic. Brevity can be good. Three paragraphs that are on point are far better than six that are vague and flatulent.
Ultimately, how you blog and what you blog about have an impact upon the length and complexity of your output. But if you diligently set aside the time, sit yourself down in a suitable writing environment and focus upon the task in hand, you will find that writing will get easier over time. Blaugust is great for providing the budding writer with a reality check about the nature of regular content creation. Many will have found the experience hard, which is why I sincerely congratulate all those who met the targets that they set themselves. What happens next is in some respects a lot harder. You now have the choice to continue to write, purely for yourselves and not because you publicly agreed to undertake a challenge. But you’ve already proven that you can. You have all the tools that you need at your disposal along with a month’s experience. If you set your mind to it, you will continue to write and integrate it into your regular life. I hope that many of those who partook in Blaugust Reborn this year will do exactly that.
