Thursday, November 6, 2014

TRAILERS: The Battle Of the Five Armies #2, Into the Woods #2, Star Wars VII News

The second, totally amazing, and final trailer for Peter Jackson's The Hobbit: The Battle Of the Five Armies has been released (rumored to be attached to this weekend's opener, Interstellar, along with the trailer for The Avengers 2: The Age Of Ultron). According to Jackson, everything comes together in this film, this is where everything each character has sown--good and bad--will be reaped, for the good of all, or the downfall of the character. In this epic battle, which consumes 45 minutes of the film, Jackson has included giants and trolls in the mix and Smaug, the dragon, is reported to be a killing machine.
What we have is the story of one person, Thorin, who sought to fulfill his destiny, which is a good thing, in and of itself, but who did it through not-so-good means. Every time Thorin has been mean to Bilbo, when he could have been patient, kind, forgiving or hopeful instead, blackened Thorin's heart. It's not the big things we do that make us great, it's the little things we do that build us up so that we can do great things, and that's a lesson Thorin never learned. The leader that Thorin is in The Desolation Of Smaug, when the dwarfs overcome Smaug, is Thorin's great moment, that totally escapes him. The plan set in motion by Sauron is built upon one black heart, Thorin Oakenshield's, and that one black heart is all that is needed for this massive war to break open, because Thorin didn't know how to be a good person or how to honor his word to the people of Lake Town that they would share in the gold inside the Lonely Mountain.
At 1:52, there is a interesting scene, it looks as if Thranduil is stabbing, or hurting (we know he's at least angry) Tauriel (Evangeline Lilly, who we can identify by her green outfit and long reddish hair). Is the king of the elves blaming her for leading them there, when he wanted to turn his eye to the battle he knew was coming and lock themselves up against the potential onslaught of enemies? These two images are very interesting, because Bard (Luke Evans) is the popular leader of the people of Lake Town, and Thranduil is the king of the elves of the wood. Bard has the smoke and soot on his face from his battle with Smaug, but Thranduil, we know from The Desolation Of Smaug, has dragon fire still in his soul and veins because of what he shows Thorin when he offers to help Thorin regain the Lonely Mountain. In other words, what Bard wears on his face, Thranduil hides in his soul; because it's only on Bard's face and he will successfully overcome it, he will be better and stronger for it; Thranduil, we do not know what will happen to him, but we can see that his face is "clean" even though his eyes burn intensely with anger and, maybe even, hatred. When Thranduil says, "I came to reclaim something of mine," that's interesting, because if that "something" is so valuable to Thranduil, why didn't he help Thorin defeat Smaug when the dragon first attacked, so Thranduil could get that "something" back then? Or, which is more likely, that "something" is now expedient for Thranduil to claim, so he is going to do what is expedient, not what is right, and claim that something is his, that is not. Now, I am nearly done with the post for X-Men: Days Of Future Past, and I want to get up the post for Guardians Of the Galaxy. The post I will be finishing after that is for JRR Tolkien's book The Hobbit, then I will follow with the two films in order, to be done before the final film comes out. Isn't that a neat and tidy plan? In other words, please pray for me that I can get it all done because things never work out the way I intend for them to.
"You gave a promise," Bilbo tells Thorin, and now you are not going to keep it, making him even worse than what he accuses Thranduil of being when the dwarfs are hostages to the elves. BUT, what we will see is that, if one black heart can bring great ruin and war, one good heart and help to make things right. This is a film that will not only celebrate the individual and virtue, but (hopefully) how one good person can be a monumental inspiration for others to be good. On the other side, however, we will see how someone who is supposed to be very good, in this case Saruman (Christopher Lee) fall to darkness (Sauron): when Saruman says, "Leave Sauron to me," it's possible that Sauron and Saruman have all ready made a deal that will set in motion later the events that take place in The Lord Of the Rings, or this is the moment when those events will be set in motion.
Now, was it wrong for the Master of Lake Town (Stephen Fry) to assist Thorin with a boat and weapons? That's kind of a mute point, because Gandalf, who we know to be nothing but good, also agreed to help Thorin, and so did the we-don't-know-if-he's-good-or-not Thranduil. Each has their own reasons. What we can say, however, is that Thorin more closely resembles the Master of Lake Town than any other character, and that's by Thorin's disastrous decisions. Just as Thorin decides not to reward the people of Lake Town for their help, maybe he also wasn't going to reward any of the dwarfs (including Bilbo) who had come with him, and who were each promised 1/13th of the share (so how much was Thorin going to give the people of Lake Town from the gold in the mountain, and how much was the dwarfs each going to be cut)? It wasn't necessarily wrong for Thorin to make a promise on the gold (even a large pile of gold from that amazing horde would have appeased the people of Lake Town, and not really cut out anyone's share, especially since Thorin really ONLY needs the Arkenstone). 
Thranduil tells Gandalf, "You started this, you will forgive me if I finish it," and that can only be bad. Was Gandalf wrong in encouraging Thorin to reclaim the Lonely Mountain? No, he wasn't, because Gandalf had a glimpse of what was coming in Smaug potentially becoming part of Sauron's plan. Had the dwarfs not gone to the Lonely Mountain, no telling how far and for how long Sauron's army would have advanced unchallenged; as it happens, because of various events, they all happen to meet to decide the fate of all Middle-Earth. I have to tell you, I could not be any happier with this trailer and what it's promising! I am totally excited to watch this!
The Hobbit: The Battle Of the Five Armies comes out December 17; December 18 of 2015 will see the release of Star Wars VII: The Force Awakens. This morning via Twitter Disney released the long-anticipated sub-title to Star Wars VII: The Force Awakens. Likewise, they have reverted back to the original poster design of the original trilogy instead of a more modern one that had initially been released (for images and discussion, please see Star Wars VII: the Hand That Falls). It has been confirmed that shooting has been completed for the film (if you recall, Harrison Ford had a leg injury which postponed some of the shooting, causing delays further down the production timeline for Star Wars VIII and IX; it is now unsure what, if any role, JJ Abrams will play in the next two installments of the films). Technically, the following information is still a rumor, however, it sounds pretty legit and reasonable with Star Wars story-telling: SPOILER ALERT!! If you do not want to know what the film  is going to be about, STOP READING NOW because it's very possible that this is the story line. You have been warned! After the events of Return Of the Jedi, Luke went into a self-imposed exile, afraid that he would have too much influence in the events of the galaxy and that he might succumb to the temptations of the darker side of the Force the way his father Darth Vader did. The powers of the Force are still with Luke, and the exile he has experienced has their own drawback, making it difficult for people to know, when he does come out of exile, if he is even sane or not. The new villain, and the new hero who rises to stop that villain, will both be the reason Luke comes out of exile, but it won't be until the very end of the film that we know if Luke has fallen to the dark side, or not. Writer/director Abrams has assured fans that he wants a film continuous with the original trilogy, while making the next two films viable. Personally, the only director I put before Abrams is Christopher Nolan, so do I trust Abrams? 100%.
Also released today is the second trailer for Into the Woods. Combining a number of fairy tales into one story about a baker and his wife who want a child but cannot conceive (they want the "curse reversed,") so they make a deal with the witch (Meryl Streep) to bring something from each fairy tale character in exchange for what they want.
This is going to be an impossible call to make without seeing the whole film. One of the mottoes of most Americans is the encouragement to follow your dreams, because, within your dream, is where you will find yourself, what it is you and you alone are supposed to accomplish in this life; a dream, a wish, isn't just a dream or a wish, it's a drive to self-fulfillment, individuation and self-completion, not only for the good of the individual, but we hope, for the good of all society (what is truly good for one person, should be truly good for all people).
What does the title "Into the Woods" mean? The woods is synonymous with darkness and a soul that is lost or has gone astray (has wandered away from the light towards sin, or is being tested by the light purposefully being withheld from them). For example, it could be that the baker and his wife would have had a child without having to make a deal with the witch, and that the long time they are having to wait is to help them overcome their bad qualities that would not make them the best parents; what kind of a lesson is it to set as an example for a child that, when you want something you can't get, you deal with dark and evil forces to get it, and you betray others to get what you want? It's possible that lessons such as these will be a part of the film; why? Because fairy tales are essentially society's "secular gospel" on why we must act the way society wants us to act, not only so we don't hurt ourselves, but so we don't establish bad behavior patterns that are picked up by others. The witch telling the baker and his wife to go "Into the woods," is her making greater darkness grow around them so they can't see the light of hope, which is the fundamental ingredient of all hopes, wishes and dreams.
For example, with Cinderella, her years of hard work and poverty should have made her humble (remember, we have Kenneth Branaugh's re-make of Cinderella coming out in 2015); what is it she wished for exactly? "I wish to be married to the prince and live in a castle and live happily ever-after," or, "I wish revenge upon my step-mother and sisters?" That's not what we know Cinderella (the original Disney version most people are familiar with) wished for; she wished to go to the dance and become re-integrated into society, to no longer be a "marginal member" of society with no future, but to partake of human society once again (instead of just the mice and animals she knows) and be with others in a communal setting (we can't come to know ourselves without the help of others, that's why it's natural to want and need to be around other people, and why it's so harmful to Cinderella that she has been cut-off).
Does Cinderella have a pure heart, or one filled with envy and greed? Socialists don't understand the difference because they tend to be atheists who deny the existence of the soul, therefore, virtue does not exist because the exercising of virtue requires Grace (God's own Life being given to a person so they can do the right thing) interacting with the person's soul and the good that is within their soul; if a person has dedicated themselves to corruption, sin and darkness, it will be harder (but not impossible) for Grace to work on their soul. Another important point to be made is familiar to you: Meryl Streep and Johnny Depp are two of Hollywood's biggest liberals, so their casting in "wicked" roles and as villains might be the anti-socialist platform the director is going to use to make a pro-capitalist film, I sincerely hope. For example, when Chris Pine's Prince Charming tells Cinderella, "I'm charming, I'm not sincere," it's possible that his love for her grows (which is natural, that's reality) so that he's willing to risk his life to save her, or get her back, and that dangerous experience is what makes him a better Prince Charming who becomes sincere as well. But, only seeing the film will be able to tell the truth.
She didn't wish for the fanciest dress at the ball, just one suitable so she could attend. That Cinderella is dis-enchanted with her dream come true APPEARS TO BE (but there is a larger context that could prove this wrong) that all wishes are chimeras, that whatever you wish for is only a daydream, an illusion, and therefore, daydreams and illusions are bad, and you should stay a child, being under the control of the witch (the state government) and never grow up to become your own individual. This has the potential for being really, really bad. On the other hand, if the heroes and heroines of the fairy tales defy the witch, and accept the danger they have to endure, and refuse to stay children and want to grow up, then we would have the fulfillment of the individual, the true lesson of the fairy tales that have been salvaged and adapted to the plagues facing us today.
I have been reading some reviews of Interstellar, and I am very sad. I am not concerned with Nolan delivering, I am sad that these reviewers have not learned anything watching Nolan films. All of Nolan's films are intelligent, you are meant to watch them with your brain. Over and over again, he has given us smart films--and when dumb films come out, the same critics complain that all we get are dumb films and Hollywood doesn't know how to make a smart film--because Nolan wants us to think. Complaints about Interstellar are that it's not an emotional film, and the audience doesn't feel anything because Nolan doesn't know how to direct emotions; this film, nor will any Nolan film, ever be about emotions; why not? Because emotions are weak and they can be highly deceptive (they are a gift from God, and they can be good, we can't suppress our emotions, but when all a person does is "feel" their way through life, they are inevitably, making a disaster of their life). Nolan knows that art is a metaphor, it's something we are supposed to think about, ponder on and discuss. The people in Nolan's films are not real people, they are symbols and situations, they are decisions and possibilities, but they are not real people because they are not supposed to be. The Democrats and liberals want us to "feel," but not to think, because it's easier to control emotions than it is the thinking mind, that's why they invented Common Core, to dumb us down even more. If the film is bad, I am going to tell you it's bad and why; if the film is brilliant, I am going to attempt, with the best of my humble abilities, to explain why it's brilliant. If you are going to see it, remember what you have learned about symbols and what people symbolize. What happens in the film is supposed to be what happens. 
So, tonight I am going to see Interstellar, it lasts three hours, so I will post my impression on Twitter and get that up asap! It had limited openings last night and has all ready made $1.4 million, so it's on track for a successful weekend. ALSO, Downton Abbey has been renewed for a sixth season.
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner