I had fun playing Tomb Raider Anniversary almost a decade ago (where does the time go?), but despite being a remake, it didn't capture the magic of the original game (the one that started it all). And so, when this new-fangled reboot of the series came out a few years ago, I was mildly intrigued, but not so excited about the modern direction in which the series was heading that I had to run out and buy it. But now that my new exercise regime has given me regular time to play console games (and what an excuse - it keeps me in shape!), the likes of which I haven't had since before my college days - since the interactive nature of a video game distracts me from the monotony of walking on a treadmill much more effectively than the passive experience of watching a movie or TV show - I've made a point to play it. And here's what I think of it:
It was a fun game. But it doesn't really feel like a Tomb Raider game. A lot of that can be forgiven by the fact that this is an origin story - Lara Croft's first real adventure, before she became the badass we know her as now - but it doesn't really justify this game not simply being called Shipwreck Survivor (starring a Katniss clone with her signature bow and arrow - although, I have to admit, I may have squealed a little bit towards the end when (spoiler!) Lara dual-wielded pistols for the first time), unless or until there's a sequel (and there better be some pyramids!).
As a reboot of the series, this game feels, environmentally, like the Peru levels of the first game (albeit less cavey and more outdoorsy), with a little bit of Natla's Mines thrown in for good measure. But my biggest complaint is that it's only about 10% Tomb Raider. The only actual tombs in the game are literally optional to explore, and are all very samey vertical chambers with some mildly challenging obstacle to surmount. I swear to god, at one point, Lara actually says "I hate tombs" - unironically!
The rest of the game is about 15% Die Hard with button presses - oh, how I loathe the "quick time event" philosophy of modern gameplay. It's ironic, because in the days of Metal Gear Solid, I lauded this new cinematic approach to video gaming, but it's not much fun when you're basically watching a movie, except that you have to press a particular button at a particular point to get to the next scene (and god forbid you should screw it up, and have to rewind the scene and watch it ten more times before moving on).
The remaining 75% of the game is basically Call of Duty or Counterstrike or whatever war games the kids are playing these days (Borderlands? I dunno). Like I said, it was a fun game, but if I had wanted to play a war game, I would have bought a war game. This game is at its best when the world opens up and actually allows you to explore it (a little bit). The way you can hunt for relics (even if they're mostly not that interesting) and documents and salvage that you can use to upgrade your weapons is great. The sequel should have more of that, and less "kill this army of mercenaries (again)".
I'm happy to say that the level design has improved since Tomb Raider Anniversary, but it still has yet to evoke the sandbox appeal of the original Tomb Raider from 1996, where you could climb on everything, and finding the path from point A to point B was legitimately thrilling, and not an exercise in following visual breadcrumbs (emphasized further by your "survival instincts", however helpful they may be). The fact that you are following a scripted path is disguised a little bit better by the impressive graphics, but the effect on the gameplay is pretty much the same.
There is potential here for another winning entry in the Tomb Raider franchise, but the developers will have to iron out some issues first. They've crafted a moving story about the birth of a young explorer, who finds confidence in herself while unraveling the truth behind a Japanese legend about a Sun Queen who was rumored to have been able to control the weather. But there is room to improve, as I think I would prefer a game with more focus on the gameplay than the cinematics. And those of us who appreciated the fact that Lara Croft was simultaneously a sex symbol and a role model for female empowerment are going to have to get used to a less caricatured and more humanized Lara (nevertheless well cast). For better or worse.
---
That's the end of the review. I'm going to finish up with a note on the controversy I remember this game stirring up when it came out. I should probably just let this be, as it's old news by now, but since I never got to have my say...
I remember when this game came out, there was an uproar in the gaming world over a scene where Lara is subjected to "attempted rape". I suspected that it was PC bullshit at the time, and now having played the game, I'm even more confident of that opinion. It's possible that they toned down the scene after the bad publicity, but I can't imagine any reason why it would have been anything like people complained about in the first place. With all the brutal violence that Lara is subjected to in this game (seriously, it's pretty graphic), it's actually offensive that anyone would single out one tiny scene where a shipwrecked savage who is clearly a Bad Guy puts a hand on Lara's thigh in the midst of combat - and that is absolutely as far as it goes. Considering that this is also the scene that immediately develops Lara's motivation for taking her first (of hundreds in this game) human life, feminists should be rallying around this scene, not criticizing it. Of all the things the developers could do to justify their heroine becoming a murderer, they chose (minor) sexual harassment.
And to anyone who thinks it's "insensitive" to put a female character in a video game through this kind of "abuse" - the tagline for this game is "a survivor is born". Tell me why we can create fictional media depicting the birth of a survivor through such natural and man-made hardships as being washed ashore a remote island and having to fend off wild animals and anomalous weather patterns while climbing a mountain (and falling back down the other side), as a literal army of savage, gun-toting mercenaries and supernatural ogres put out all the stops to try to murder and torture said survivor, but we can't depict her being the target of unwanted sexual advances? I'm sorry, but the "Dragon's Triangle" is most decidedly not a "safe space". Tell me that political correctness hasn't gone too far...
Showing posts with label war. Show all posts
Showing posts with label war. Show all posts
Friday, September 16, 2016
Wednesday, September 30, 2015
The X-Files - S4:E16 "Unrequited"
[ S4:E15 "Kaddish" <<< Season 4 >>> S4:E17 "Tempus Fugit" ]
Unrequited features one of the more compelling openers I've seen in a while. Obviously, all of these episodes try to catch your interest in the first few minutes before the opening credits roll - to get you invested in watching the rest of the episode. But after seeing so many episodes, you tend to familiarize yourself with the general formula. Yet this one is kind of unique, using the "in media res" technique (I swear, critics are as irrationally opposed to this technique as they are to found footage - like as if every time they criticize it they earn a gold star from their un-creative, standards-oriented English Major teachers (I'm looking at you, Dolores Umbridge)) that we've mainly seen in a few mythology episodes (Colony and Tunguska spring to mind), to create suspense. The agents themselves are involved - Skinner included, which is always a treat - in tracking a possible terrorist through a crowd celebrating the re-dedication of the Vietnam Veterans War Memorial. They have a hard enough time finding him in a bustling crowd of people, but then he appears to vanish into thin air!
The would-be assassin (an uncannily memorable Peter LaCroix, who played the truck driver in season 1's E.B.E.), who seems to be taking advantage of a "floating blind spot" in a remarkably literal interpretation of the stealth tactics of guerilla warfare, is seeking retribution against a government that left him for dead behind enemy lines. In this he is supported by the leader of a violent revolutionary group (Larry Musser, whom you'll likely remember as the colorfully-spoken Detective Manners in Jose Chung's 'From Outer Space'). But when he starts targeting key members of the U.S. military, Skinner - a Vietnam veteran himself - understandably begins taking it personally.
Also appearing is Marita Covarrubias, whom we've seen very little of since her introduction in the season premiere. She provides an intriguing conspiratorial twist that recalls the mind games of F. Emasculata (also penned, perhaps not surprisingly, by the combination of Howard Gordon and Chris Carter), and that confirms what a smart and subtle series this is (no doubt for some people too subtle). I'm not sure I can speculate why - although maybe it's because military cover-ups and internal government conspiracies are more this show's bread-and-butter than racial tensions and environmentalist creeds - but the social commentary in this episode is more effective than usual. It's more subtle, less forced, and feels less insincere. This is one of those great episodes where you just get lost in the story as it unfolds - an unexpected hit.
Memorable quotes:
Skinner: I've already seen more dead soldiers than I ever wanna see.
Markham: The Right Hand believes in empowering the individual over a corrupt and corrupting federal government. We're prepared for the time when armed resistance will be necessary. Lives will have to be sacrificed. But that day has not yet come.
Scully: This guy's a one-man threat to national security. I'll bet he's got more weapons and ammo than most third world armies.
Mulder: Given the facts of the case, and Private Burkholder's polygraph test, it's the closest thing to an explanation that we've got.
Scully: Or, it's just a clever story being proffered as a cover-up for what is actually an elaborately orchestrated conspiracy.
Mulder: Well, there is that possibility, too.
Scully: That's beyond my capabilities here to make that kind of analysis.
Mulder: I think it's beyond all our capabilities, but somebody's got to explain how a four-star general could be shot and killed in what is symbolically the best-guarded military base in the country.
General Bloch: I am here because people are dying - soldiers, who dedicated their lives to the defense of this country.
Markham: I guess that's one way of looking at it.
General Bloch: I just need to know what he wants.
Markham: You know what he wants. And we both know you can't give it to him. Not without dragging that nice, clean uniform of yours through the mud.
Unrequited features one of the more compelling openers I've seen in a while. Obviously, all of these episodes try to catch your interest in the first few minutes before the opening credits roll - to get you invested in watching the rest of the episode. But after seeing so many episodes, you tend to familiarize yourself with the general formula. Yet this one is kind of unique, using the "in media res" technique (I swear, critics are as irrationally opposed to this technique as they are to found footage - like as if every time they criticize it they earn a gold star from their un-creative, standards-oriented English Major teachers (I'm looking at you, Dolores Umbridge)) that we've mainly seen in a few mythology episodes (Colony and Tunguska spring to mind), to create suspense. The agents themselves are involved - Skinner included, which is always a treat - in tracking a possible terrorist through a crowd celebrating the re-dedication of the Vietnam Veterans War Memorial. They have a hard enough time finding him in a bustling crowd of people, but then he appears to vanish into thin air!
The would-be assassin (an uncannily memorable Peter LaCroix, who played the truck driver in season 1's E.B.E.), who seems to be taking advantage of a "floating blind spot" in a remarkably literal interpretation of the stealth tactics of guerilla warfare, is seeking retribution against a government that left him for dead behind enemy lines. In this he is supported by the leader of a violent revolutionary group (Larry Musser, whom you'll likely remember as the colorfully-spoken Detective Manners in Jose Chung's 'From Outer Space'). But when he starts targeting key members of the U.S. military, Skinner - a Vietnam veteran himself - understandably begins taking it personally.
Also appearing is Marita Covarrubias, whom we've seen very little of since her introduction in the season premiere. She provides an intriguing conspiratorial twist that recalls the mind games of F. Emasculata (also penned, perhaps not surprisingly, by the combination of Howard Gordon and Chris Carter), and that confirms what a smart and subtle series this is (no doubt for some people too subtle). I'm not sure I can speculate why - although maybe it's because military cover-ups and internal government conspiracies are more this show's bread-and-butter than racial tensions and environmentalist creeds - but the social commentary in this episode is more effective than usual. It's more subtle, less forced, and feels less insincere. This is one of those great episodes where you just get lost in the story as it unfolds - an unexpected hit.
Memorable quotes:
Skinner: I've already seen more dead soldiers than I ever wanna see.
Markham: The Right Hand believes in empowering the individual over a corrupt and corrupting federal government. We're prepared for the time when armed resistance will be necessary. Lives will have to be sacrificed. But that day has not yet come.
Scully: This guy's a one-man threat to national security. I'll bet he's got more weapons and ammo than most third world armies.
Mulder: Given the facts of the case, and Private Burkholder's polygraph test, it's the closest thing to an explanation that we've got.
Scully: Or, it's just a clever story being proffered as a cover-up for what is actually an elaborately orchestrated conspiracy.
Mulder: Well, there is that possibility, too.
Scully: That's beyond my capabilities here to make that kind of analysis.
Mulder: I think it's beyond all our capabilities, but somebody's got to explain how a four-star general could be shot and killed in what is symbolically the best-guarded military base in the country.
General Bloch: I am here because people are dying - soldiers, who dedicated their lives to the defense of this country.
Markham: I guess that's one way of looking at it.
General Bloch: I just need to know what he wants.
Markham: You know what he wants. And we both know you can't give it to him. Not without dragging that nice, clean uniform of yours through the mud.
Sunday, August 30, 2015
The X-Files - S3:E7 "The Walk"
[ S3:E6 "2Shy" <<< Season 3 >>> S3:E8 "Oubliette" ]
Mulder and Scully investigate the case of a war vet who, after multiple attempts at suicide, is convinced that some kind of ghostly presence is preventing him from dying. Scully thinks it's a classic case of post-traumatic stress disorder - until the General calls their investigation off, piquing her curiosity. Scully suspects some kind of military coverup, but Mulder connects the paranormal dots and concludes that some kind of phantom killer is involved. The plot thickens further when we're introduced to a rather moody quadruple amputee (an unhinged Ian Tracey), who Mulder believes may be capable of astral projection. Nevertheless, it is Scully who really takes point in this episode, driving the case forward like she has a grudge to settle. There's a pool scene that reminded me of Poltergeist III, and a boiler room-like scene that had shades of A Nightmare on Elm Street, but the closing reflections on the psychological aftermath of war ultimately left me feeling a little cold.
Memorable quotes:
Therapist: We all know how you feel.
Leonard: No, you don't. How the hell could you possibly know how I feel? There's only one way you could ever know, and I can only pray to God that he'll come down, and take your legs and your arms away, and give you a little taste of what it feels like!
Mulder: You really think the General's got something to hide?
Scully: No. I think he's got everything to hide.
Scully: That's insane!
Mulder: Sometimes the only sane response to an insane world is insanity.
Leonard: Now if you're through questioning me, I'd like to get a little shut-eye.
Mulder: No sleepwalking.
Mulder and Scully investigate the case of a war vet who, after multiple attempts at suicide, is convinced that some kind of ghostly presence is preventing him from dying. Scully thinks it's a classic case of post-traumatic stress disorder - until the General calls their investigation off, piquing her curiosity. Scully suspects some kind of military coverup, but Mulder connects the paranormal dots and concludes that some kind of phantom killer is involved. The plot thickens further when we're introduced to a rather moody quadruple amputee (an unhinged Ian Tracey), who Mulder believes may be capable of astral projection. Nevertheless, it is Scully who really takes point in this episode, driving the case forward like she has a grudge to settle. There's a pool scene that reminded me of Poltergeist III, and a boiler room-like scene that had shades of A Nightmare on Elm Street, but the closing reflections on the psychological aftermath of war ultimately left me feeling a little cold.
Memorable quotes:
Therapist: We all know how you feel.
Leonard: No, you don't. How the hell could you possibly know how I feel? There's only one way you could ever know, and I can only pray to God that he'll come down, and take your legs and your arms away, and give you a little taste of what it feels like!
Mulder: You really think the General's got something to hide?
Scully: No. I think he's got everything to hide.
Scully: That's insane!
Mulder: Sometimes the only sane response to an insane world is insanity.
Leonard: Now if you're through questioning me, I'd like to get a little shut-eye.
Mulder: No sleepwalking.
Friday, July 31, 2015
The X-Files - S2:E4 "Sleepless"
[ S2:E3 "Blood" <<< Season 2 >>> S2:E5 "Duane Barry" ]
Following an anonymous tip, Mulder opens an investigation into the mysterious death of a sleep disorder specialist who had been involved in wartime experiments with "sleep eradication". He ends up chasing down a traumatized war vet (Tony Todd) who is looking for retribution for the crimes committed by his squadron. To his frustration, Mulder is also assigned a new partner, which makes Scully a little jealous. This episode contains shades of A Nightmare on Elm Street, but without being too derivative.
Spoiler Warning: the rest of this review may contain spoilers related to important developments in the mythology of this show.
Season 2 is really starting off on a strong note. Sleepless is a perfect example of what I mean by the mythology being more interesting than monsters-of-the-week - even monster-of-the-week episodes are greatly improved when they include mythology elements! Contrasting this episode with the last one, it's clear how much of a difference it makes when the episode includes bureau activity (notably Skinner's involvement), and features development between recurring characters, as opposed to just diving into the case of the week without linking it much to any of the show's overarching plot elements.
This episode also features Nicholas Lea in his first appearance as the character Alex Krycek. I couldn't remember at what point in the series this character appeared, but I can tell you that when he marched over to Mulder's desk and introduced himself, I squealed like a fangirl! Krycek is such a fun character; he's the first television character I've ever described as being someone I "loved to hate". He was certainly a more effective villain on the show than the later appearance of the spindly Agent Spender. We also get our first face-to-face meeting in this episode with Mulder's new informant, the unnamed X (Steven Williams).
The final scene is also quite remarkable, not only in its startling reveal of Krycek's true loyalties (which had been in question all episode-long), but also in foreshadowing what's about to befall in the next few episodes, and preemptively demonstrating that the Smoking Man carries some (if not all) responsibility for the ordeal that Scully is about to be put through. In season 1, the Smoking Man was little more than an archetype - the shadowy authority figure standing in the background to represent a conspiratorial government. Here we're finally beginning to (slowly) get some development of the character, as he becomes a more active villain with more concrete goals, which is a lot more fun to watch.
Memorable quotes:
Krycek: I don't appreciate being ditched like someone's bad date.
X: You still don't get it, do you? Closing the X-Files, separating you and Scully, was only the beginning. The truth is still out there; it's never been more dangerous. The man we both knew paid for that information with his life - a sacrifice I'm not willing to make.
Scully: It must be nice not having someone questioning your every move, poking holes in all your theories.
Mulder (deadpan): Oh, oh yeah, it's great. I'm surprised I put up with you for so long.
Smoking Man: Every problem has a solution.
Following an anonymous tip, Mulder opens an investigation into the mysterious death of a sleep disorder specialist who had been involved in wartime experiments with "sleep eradication". He ends up chasing down a traumatized war vet (Tony Todd) who is looking for retribution for the crimes committed by his squadron. To his frustration, Mulder is also assigned a new partner, which makes Scully a little jealous. This episode contains shades of A Nightmare on Elm Street, but without being too derivative.
Spoiler Warning: the rest of this review may contain spoilers related to important developments in the mythology of this show.
Season 2 is really starting off on a strong note. Sleepless is a perfect example of what I mean by the mythology being more interesting than monsters-of-the-week - even monster-of-the-week episodes are greatly improved when they include mythology elements! Contrasting this episode with the last one, it's clear how much of a difference it makes when the episode includes bureau activity (notably Skinner's involvement), and features development between recurring characters, as opposed to just diving into the case of the week without linking it much to any of the show's overarching plot elements.
This episode also features Nicholas Lea in his first appearance as the character Alex Krycek. I couldn't remember at what point in the series this character appeared, but I can tell you that when he marched over to Mulder's desk and introduced himself, I squealed like a fangirl! Krycek is such a fun character; he's the first television character I've ever described as being someone I "loved to hate". He was certainly a more effective villain on the show than the later appearance of the spindly Agent Spender. We also get our first face-to-face meeting in this episode with Mulder's new informant, the unnamed X (Steven Williams).
The final scene is also quite remarkable, not only in its startling reveal of Krycek's true loyalties (which had been in question all episode-long), but also in foreshadowing what's about to befall in the next few episodes, and preemptively demonstrating that the Smoking Man carries some (if not all) responsibility for the ordeal that Scully is about to be put through. In season 1, the Smoking Man was little more than an archetype - the shadowy authority figure standing in the background to represent a conspiratorial government. Here we're finally beginning to (slowly) get some development of the character, as he becomes a more active villain with more concrete goals, which is a lot more fun to watch.
Memorable quotes:
Krycek: I don't appreciate being ditched like someone's bad date.
X: You still don't get it, do you? Closing the X-Files, separating you and Scully, was only the beginning. The truth is still out there; it's never been more dangerous. The man we both knew paid for that information with his life - a sacrifice I'm not willing to make.
Scully: It must be nice not having someone questioning your every move, poking holes in all your theories.
Mulder (deadpan): Oh, oh yeah, it's great. I'm surprised I put up with you for so long.
Smoking Man: Every problem has a solution.
Sunday, February 5, 2012
Mockingjay by Suzanne Collins
Warning! This review contains spoilers from the very end of The Hunger Games trilogy! For a spoiler-free introduction to the trilogy, see my review of The Hunger Games.
Having now finished the series, I am happy to report that The Hunger Games maintains its pace of drama and excitement through to the very end. In fact, the climax is probably even more exciting than Katniss' first foray into The Hunger Games, and the conclusion seems to hint at the story's underlying conscience. The writing in these books is so good in a way that you don't often come across - in that it is both highly entertaining, and also very intelligent and insightful, probing the nature of the human condition and asking some very difficult questions.
Like the age old question of what's fair in love and war, what sort of atrocities can be justified, and where you cross the line between self-defense and becoming like the enemy that oppresses you. But there is no easy answer. Gale's anger sometimes feels righteous, then seems to cross the line. Katniss makes some stupid decisions that put her at risk, yet you welcome her moral compass. Ultimately it's clear that war is a terrible, terrible thing, but what isn't clear is whether we can ever truly escape it.
But one of the most disturbing revelations, for me, regards the nature of entertainment. Lines are blurred in Mockingjay, when the war itself becomes a sort of Hunger Games. The propos (propaganda spots) that the rebels create have a clear tactical purpose, yet their effectiveness relies on their entertainment value. And it's instantly discovered by those behind the scenes that staged emotions aren't as exciting as the real thing. So Katniss is put in real danger in order to get good footage. And then later, in the warring streets of the Capitol, it's almost as if the rebels are in the position of the Gamemakers (and I'm sure it's no coincidence with Plutarch being around), realizing that in order to stir up some enthusiasm with their propos, some blood's going to have to be shed. It's chilling, really.
And at the end, in the epilogue, Katniss makes her statement on the games, and I want so badly to believe in the righteousness of that statement, but then I can't help realizing that I've been as bad as the smarmy Capitol residents, calling out for blood, all in the name of good entertainment. After all, The Hunger Games would not be nearly as entertaining if not for the horrors it depicts. Prim's death was the one thing I almost couldn't stand. Almost. It destroyed me, and I was really angry that it happened. But afterward, you still have to admit that it makes the story that much more intense. That it will stick with you for that reason, because it wasn't afraid to pull any punches.
But if there's one consolation, it's that in the real world, I think staged entertainment is just as effective as the real thing. More so, probably. Because in a book, when a character you love dies, it's very sad. But it's still just a character. You can move on. It's like what happens in real life, but on a much smaller scale, because you only knew her for those several weeks you were reading the book, and only in those moments. She's not someone you've known all your (or her) life, and you only know of her what the author has given you. In real life, when people die (especially violently), the horror and the sadness greatly outweighs whatever sick entertainment (if any, really) one could glean from it.
And so I can at least rest assured in the knowledge that though I enjoy reading The Hunger Games (and can't wait for the movies!), it doesn't make me like the Capitol in the story. However, the lingering question that does remain, is the question of war. War still rages on in the real world, and we don't seem to be any closer to ending it forever. Despite the clarity of its horrors - at least to me - on it goes. Just as Plutarch alludes to. I don't know how to solve that one.
Having now finished the series, I am happy to report that The Hunger Games maintains its pace of drama and excitement through to the very end. In fact, the climax is probably even more exciting than Katniss' first foray into The Hunger Games, and the conclusion seems to hint at the story's underlying conscience. The writing in these books is so good in a way that you don't often come across - in that it is both highly entertaining, and also very intelligent and insightful, probing the nature of the human condition and asking some very difficult questions.
Like the age old question of what's fair in love and war, what sort of atrocities can be justified, and where you cross the line between self-defense and becoming like the enemy that oppresses you. But there is no easy answer. Gale's anger sometimes feels righteous, then seems to cross the line. Katniss makes some stupid decisions that put her at risk, yet you welcome her moral compass. Ultimately it's clear that war is a terrible, terrible thing, but what isn't clear is whether we can ever truly escape it.
But one of the most disturbing revelations, for me, regards the nature of entertainment. Lines are blurred in Mockingjay, when the war itself becomes a sort of Hunger Games. The propos (propaganda spots) that the rebels create have a clear tactical purpose, yet their effectiveness relies on their entertainment value. And it's instantly discovered by those behind the scenes that staged emotions aren't as exciting as the real thing. So Katniss is put in real danger in order to get good footage. And then later, in the warring streets of the Capitol, it's almost as if the rebels are in the position of the Gamemakers (and I'm sure it's no coincidence with Plutarch being around), realizing that in order to stir up some enthusiasm with their propos, some blood's going to have to be shed. It's chilling, really.
And at the end, in the epilogue, Katniss makes her statement on the games, and I want so badly to believe in the righteousness of that statement, but then I can't help realizing that I've been as bad as the smarmy Capitol residents, calling out for blood, all in the name of good entertainment. After all, The Hunger Games would not be nearly as entertaining if not for the horrors it depicts. Prim's death was the one thing I almost couldn't stand. Almost. It destroyed me, and I was really angry that it happened. But afterward, you still have to admit that it makes the story that much more intense. That it will stick with you for that reason, because it wasn't afraid to pull any punches.
But if there's one consolation, it's that in the real world, I think staged entertainment is just as effective as the real thing. More so, probably. Because in a book, when a character you love dies, it's very sad. But it's still just a character. You can move on. It's like what happens in real life, but on a much smaller scale, because you only knew her for those several weeks you were reading the book, and only in those moments. She's not someone you've known all your (or her) life, and you only know of her what the author has given you. In real life, when people die (especially violently), the horror and the sadness greatly outweighs whatever sick entertainment (if any, really) one could glean from it.
And so I can at least rest assured in the knowledge that though I enjoy reading The Hunger Games (and can't wait for the movies!), it doesn't make me like the Capitol in the story. However, the lingering question that does remain, is the question of war. War still rages on in the real world, and we don't seem to be any closer to ending it forever. Despite the clarity of its horrors - at least to me - on it goes. Just as Plutarch alludes to. I don't know how to solve that one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)