LOTR, the ending(s)

Ya know, some movies and stories just don’t have much of an ending—no denouement, just climax-and-we’re-done, like a dude who falls asleep the moment he’s done having sex. But that’s okay; The Lord of the Rings trilogy has a few to spare.

(A.k.a, so, the Ring of Power is destroyed, the dark army is defeated, and Frodo and Sam are saved by giant birds. Movie’s done, right? Nope.)

1. Frodo wakes up (in Rivendale?) and sees all his friends., a.k.a. The Wizard of Oz ending.

2. Aragorn is crowned King, everyone appluads, he gives a pretty speech, and he gets to make out with his girlfriend, a.k.a, the “It’s good to be the king” ending.

3. Frodo narrates that the Hobbits made it back home, a.k.a., the “all’s well that ends well” ending.

4. Samwise finally chats up the hot Hobbit chick from early in the first movie, cut to their wedding day, and all the Hobbits are happy, a.k.a., the traditional-comedy-ends-with-a-marriage ending(?).

5. Frodo narrates some more, writes in Bilbo’s/his book while melancholy music plays, complains to Samwise about his wound, narrates some more and accompanies decrepit Bilbo to the Elves ship, then Bilbo gets to make a last funny comment about the Ring, a.k.a., the sad but cute ending.

6. Gandalf gives a goodbye speech, a.k.a., the wise old dude ending.

7. Frodo leaves with the Elves (along with Gandalf and Bilbo) after a tearful goodbye to the other Hobbits, a.k.a., the actual sad ending, OR the long, drawn-out ending.

8. Samwise goes back home to the Shire (hot Hobbit wife and Hobbit kids), while Frodo narrates some more about life and the future, a.k.a., the actual ending, OR the unnecessary ending unless there’s gonna be a sequel—perhaps called Hobbits the Next Generation, or maybe Son of Sam...wise.

Survivors

I just finished reading Survivorsby James Wesley, Rawles. Yes, that’s his name: James Wesley Comma Rawles. He’s a former-military, conservative Christian, survivalist blogger/author/consultant.

It was very disappointing. I bought this book mainly because I liked the cover-art and the description suggested a slightly different story than what I got.

It kept me reading, because from the beginning there was a sense that something big and awful, perhaps awesome, was going to happen. It took a long time setting it up, which only increased the tension. But the closer I got to the end, the less I liked it. There was never a pay-off—no truly big, exciting episode, and no real ending. Also close to the end, the author introduces new characters that seemed as though they should’ve been someone we met before, and there was a several-page episode with new characters in a new location that never reappeared nor had anything to do with any other characters.

There was one character who at the beginning was a U.S. soldier in Afghanistan and who worked his way back home. Along the way he kept encountering people who spoke pretty-good English. So that was a big help. Plus all the gold and silver coins he happened to have hidden away.

Basically this book was just a description of how several (presumably fictional) characters and their families survived an economic collapse—mostly because they were prepared ahead of time with a lot of guns and ammunition, as well as gold and silver coins stored up in readiness for such a collapse. It included a lot of description of guns and other equipment. Also prayer and Bible verses, but certainly nothing that really indicated “God” actually exists or was listening or helping them out. 

I think it was shelved in the sci-fi/fantasy section of some bookstore. But it should’ve been in the Christian fiction section, if there was one. 

Let the airing of grievances begin!

Ya know, I wonder about the seeming increase in the length of the Christmas/Holiday Season...apart from the horrid consumerism aspect, which I think on a lot.

Already? Ug.

Perhaps as time goes on in this failed way of life* we have, there’s more and more of a need for some big escape from it all. Like the stakes are getting higher. Like it’s more and more vital to make “the holidays” more and more meaningful. And it’s all to distract us from how generally unfulfilling our lives are—our way of life.

* You know—this civilization of totalitarian agriculture/we control the world and it

needs our control/everyone has to live like us because it’s the one right way to live... etc.

I don’t know if this holiday escape is something that we the people unconsciously perceive the need for, or if it’s perpetuated by the mechanisms continuing our way of life, i.e., those selling us all the shit, etc. Probably it’s bi-partisan effort.  

Dear country...

Dear country,

Now that the election is done, can we please start dealing with the uncomfortable truth that we are destroying the planet? It’s not just us, here in the United States, but we’re definitely a huge part of it.

See, it’s the way we’ve been living and consuming all kinds of stuff—stuff that doesn’t really make us happy, stuff that often makes us less happy, but stuff that certainly makes the planet less happy.

We’ve built cities that require mechanical transportation to get around, and we burn oil to get from place to place.

We make and purchase and use cheaply made products—often not easily recyclable—which fall apart or become “obsolete” when the new version comes out a few years later. So we toss it. We throw it in a bin, put it out on the road where it’s conveniently picked up weekly by a loud, stinky truck.

Meanwhile, our rich people keep getting trickle-up richer, and many of the rest of us keep believing that if we stay in this broken system of ours, we’ll eventually win and be rich ourselves.

We don’t have to be this way. But the thing is, before we can start to make a change, we have to admit that there is a problem. We have to look at ourselves and recognize and say, “Hey this isn’t good, this isn’t healthy, this isn’t sustainable. We have to stop this madness if our children and grandchildren, perhaps even we ourselves, are going to be able to survive on this planet.”

Then we need to make some serious changes. And it would really, really help matters if we had leaders who could admit this stuff to themselves and to us. Leaders who would stop focusing on the election cycle and start doing some real work for the people.

Either that, or somebody needs to invent some magical sci-fi tech and find some other planet where we can relocate. And then we’ll start in raping that planet too. 

Do not vote for this man.

Here’s something I’ve been mulling over for a while.

I have a hard time imagining ever voting for Mitt Romney. 

I find him to be untrustworthy. I’ve had this feeling about him for maybe a year or two. How long has he been running for president?

It’s not just the “flip-flop” on positions. And it’s not just the “lying” or offering misleading information. It’s more basic than that. The man seems disingenuous. He does not seem honest or true or upright. When I watch him speak, I feel that he isn’t being true to himself. I don’t believe him, because he doesn’t seem to believe himself. He doesn’t seem to be himself, he doesn’t ever seem comfortable.

It’s like he’s not just being there, in the moment, speaking, like a person does. It’s more like he’s watching himself and reacting to himself and controlling himself based on what he sees himself doing. I find that disturbing.

And I’m surprised that I haven’t heard this from anyone else. I suppose this is what other people have referred to as Romney’s robotic quality. But I don’t think of it as a robot thing. It’s more of a lack of comfort with one’s self. I’ve known other people like that, and I find them disturbing.

Even if I were a conservative—which is just impossible to imagine—I think I would feel the same way about him. Of course, maybe if I were a conservative I wouldn’t care about that kind of stuff. Maybe the party platform, etc., would be more important. I don’t know. I really have a hard time understanding conservatives. It’s like crazy-talk to me.

Spoiler alert!!! ...2

I’m watching Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. It’s on HBO, which I have here at the beach.

When Scabbers, the rat, turns into Peter Pettigrew, he’s wearing clothes. 

Okay, fine. It’s magic. The clothes he was wearing when he last turned are still with him.

Also, it’s a kids’ story/movie.

I can accept that.

Except that several minutes later, when he turns back into a rat, he shrinks out of his clothes and leaves them behind.

So which is it? I vote for nudity. It makes sense. 

Spoiler alert!!!

Last night I watched The Hangover part II. 

The guys from the first movie went to Thailand for a wedding. They had a few drinks then woke up the next morning with no idea where they were or what happened the night before, and they had to piece it all together in order to find a friend they’d lost somewhere along the way.

Same basic plot as the first movie, just with different details in a different setting.

Oh, there was a scene with some penises.

The gang finds a strip club in Bangkok where they’d apparently been the night before. They were talking with one of the girls, and, well, she turned out to have a penis, as did all the “girls” there.

Early in the scene, before the big “reveal”, I knew they were going to have penises. It just seemed the obvious thing to me. So, then when I did see the penises, they had basically no impact. I assume it’s supposed to be hilariously shocking. Or shockingly hilarious? It was neither.

Was it just that I saw the “joke” coming so it wasn’t funny? Am I jaded? Or just immune to the humor of the penis?

Or, was it just not that funny?

Anyone? Anyone?