Epic Rap Battles of Middle Earth

          Eric, Joey and I made a rap battle featuring Gandalf and a black rider for our project. Its format was inspired by nicepeter's Epic Rap Battles of History, which can be found on Youtube. The beat for the video was made by Jeremy Purce.

          Here it is.

Ender's Game

          I recently read Ender's Game, a science fiction book by Orson Scott Card published in 1985. I first heard of this book after watching the Futurama movie titled Bender's Game, which I found out was a reference to this novel. I then heard its sequel, Speaker for the Dead, discussed on the Roosterteeth Podcast. The discussion interested me, so, when I saw them in a bookstore, I got them both.
          In Ender's Game, Andrew "Ender" Wiggin lives in the distant future on Earth. After being closely monitored for six years, the International Fleet (IF) has determined that he is qualified to train at Battle School in order to become an officer in the fleet. Ender accepts the offer and, with eighteen other candidates, blasts off from Earth to begin his training, where Ender copes with loneliness and his own brilliance in his journey towards greatness. Ender and the other candidates attempt to prove themselves as the best hope for humanity  against the third invasion of the alien race dubbed the "buggers."
          In Speaker of the Dead, Ender has traveled three thousand years into the future using relativistic space travel (when traveling at the speed of light, time could act differently for those inside the vessel, so traveling twenty life years might only take days for those traveling), where he has taken the title of Speaker for the Dead. As a Speaker, he travels to wherever he is called in order to speak of the life of someone who has died. Ender travels to Lusitania, a colony where contact has been made with an alien species called the Pequeninos (or "piggies"). he is called there to speak for one who has died in his quest to understand the alien species.
          As was the case in The Hunger Games, I believe the perspective helped to make you understand the character. In The Hunger Games the perspective is first-person, which lets you know what Katniss is thinking the whole time. In Ender's Game and Speaker, the perspective is third person. Even though this is a common style of writing, I felt that in this book it helped to emphasize Ender's loneliness. In Ender's Game, he was alone for a few reasons. On his way up to Battle School, the head of the school, Graff, singles him out, saying that he is by far the smartest kid on the craft, which makes the other kids hate him. Graff does this to isolate Ender so he is not hindered by the others. He is later made alone because of his intelligence. His understanding of the Battle Room, a zero-gravity battle simulator in Battle School, removes him from his cohorts almost immediately. Finally, he is alone because of his separation from his sister, Valentine. The perspective helps to emphasize his loneliness because the reader can't even see inside him that well.
          The same is true in Speaker. Ender leaves his new home in order to speak for a death on another planet, leaving his sister behind once more, this time with the expectation of never seeing her again. His loneliness is added to when he reaches the planet, as he is unwanted by the community as a whole. Lusitania is a very religious colony, and as a Speaker renounces religion, the colonists find it an affront to their faith that he should be present. This makes it difficult for Ender to find a friend amongst the colonists.
          While reading Ender's Game, I couldn't help to compare it to my all-time favorite novel, Starship Troopers by Robert A. Heinlein. Both stories are about a boy from Earth who chooses to fight a bug-like alien. They also both address not only the combat but the political and social ramifications of war. I think that these books, especially Starship Troopers, are thought of unfairly. Since they're both science fiction novels, I think most people won't try them because they think that they're just stories about guys with lasers shooting at aliens. I feel as though these books go a lot deeper than any other work of fiction I've ever read, regardless of genre. I'm not usually one to take anything but a story away from a novel, but for some reason these books affected me a bit more.
          I would recommend Ender's Game and Speaker for the Dead for anyone who like science, military, or philosophy, or are just looking for a good story. I hope you enjoy it.

The Hunger Games Follow-Up

          Spoilers follow.
          Tonight, I saw The Hunger Games, the movie based on the novel by Suzanne Collins. I had heard praise for the film from many people, especially those who saw the midnight premiere. Even people I spoke to who went in skeptical came out happily corrected. Hearing all the praise, I went into the theater tonight a very hopeful man. And I came out satisfied. Mostly.
          I don't mean to say that I didn't enjoy the movie, because I did. I just felt that the movie moved unnecessarily away from the book. I equated this film to the fourth Harry Potter movie, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. The plot remained mostly unchanged as it went from book to film, but there were some changes made to the details that felt wrong to me. For example, why didn't they mention that the winner of the Triwizard Tournament would receive a prize of 1000 galleons? It would have taken five seconds, and it would have explained how, in a subsequent movie, the Weasley twins manage to run a gigantic store on Diagon Alley. It's a small detail, but it's so small that I can't think of why they omitted it.
          There were a few things that made me feel this way in The Hunger Games. Some of them were like the prize in Harry Potter, and those really aren't that important, just annoying. The biggest thing I noticed was the alteration of the characters. Most of the characters seemed to have different traits in the film.
          Peeta, I felt, was changed to a criminal degree. I felt as though the character in the movie lacked the spirit that he had in the book. I first felt that way when I saw the train scene. In the book, as the two tributes journey by train from District 12 to the Capitol, Peeta smashes Haymitch's glass after the mentor makes a distasteful joke about their odds of success in the games. This is when Haymitch determines that these two tributes were fighters, that they had the will to win. In the movie, Peeta just tries to take Haymitch's glass, saying that enough drinking had already tanspired, but he is easily overcome by Haymitch's bare foot. In the book, this scene served to show that Peeta had strength and vigor and that he was ready to fight. In the movie, it just made him seem weak and mild-mannered.
          Later on, still on the train, Peeta looks out the window to see crowds of people in the Capitol. They all smile, wave and cheer, and he responds in kind. He does this in both the book and the movie, but it felt wrong in the film. In the book, he looks at Katniss and says, "Who knows? One of them might be rich." This shows that he's clever, trying to manipulate the odds in his favor. He realizes that since he's from a backwater district he's at a disadvantage sponsor-wise, so he needs to try and win the favor of the rich by using his knack for charm. However, in the movie, he just looks like a dope smiling for the crowds. It makes him look immature and dumb, not realizing the gravity of his situation.
          Most importantly, I don't think they conveyed enough how much Peeta cared for Katniss. In fact, in the movie, it was hard to tell if he really did at all. In the book, they hammer the fact that Peeta is in love with Kat from the moment they introduce him. You know for certain that he's not faking all the romance in order to win sponsors. However, in the movie, they only bring up his feelings during the interview with Flickerman, and afterwards Haymitch says that the star-crossed lovers thing will get them sponsors, so you can't tell if he's telling the truth or not. Maybe it's just me, but that seemed really important in the book.
          Haymitch was also different in the film. In the book, he seems useless at first, but you soon discover that he's crafty, he's got connections, and he knows how to give you a chance in the Games. However, in the movie, you don't get that feeling as much. He also sends notes with the care packages in the movie, which means that Katniss doesn't have to figure out how to operate to get more. Lastly, the movie shows Haymitch bargaining with Crane for the rule alteration which would allow both tributes to win. That doesn't make sense to me. I figured it was the Capitol's plan all along to push the two together only to rip them apart so cruelly at the end.
          The last character whose change that I thought was noteworthy was Rue. It wasn't really that Rue was different, rather that Kat's relationship with her was not explained well enough. In the book, you find that Katniss bonds with this girl not only for the assistance that Rue offers, but because she reminds Katniss so much of Prim. That's one of the reasons why Katniss was so devastated to see her die.
          Aside from character alterations, there were a few other things that felt wrong to me. The main one is that the book follows only Katniss. All is seen from her eyes, and her perspective is the only one you see. This makes you identify with the character more because she's the only one you know to the core. However, in the movie, you see things from all sorts of perspectives. You view the games through the Gamemakers' headquarters, you saw Gale's reaction to Katniss and Peeta becoming close, you see Rue die through her own eyes, and you see the ensuing riot in District 11. These, I felt, took away from a viewer's closeness to Katniss.
          My last big complaint is that the Games seemed too easy in the film. Katniss's experience in the movie was no walk in the park, but compared to the book it nearly was. Her agony and anguish in the book seemed to be much more real. They took away the part where she's dying of dehydration for the first few days of the Games, which was important because it was her first real struggle in the arena. The movie also didn't really convey the torturous experience she had with the tracker jacker venom. Nursing Peeta back to health seemed like a piece of cake in the movie since all he had was a limp, whereas in the book he had lost a lot of blood, was feverish, and had a gash the size of a car in his leg. Finally, she didn't have to interpret the meaning of her care packages in the movie as they came with notes. She didn't even follow up on the message in the movie. In the book, she has to pretend to love Peeta in order to get another care package, whereas in the movie she doesn't get another one and she doesn't need it.
          I know I've done nothing but complain in this post, but I don't want to come across as bitter. I felt that the book was better than the movie, but I always feel this way, and I like to compare adaptations. I just wanted to note the differences in the two because, without the things I mentioned above, the movie would have been perfect.
          But I think it was close enough.

Destiny?

            In The Fellowship of the Ring, Aragorn says that his heart is in Rivendell, but he knows that he cannot stay there. Is he destined to be far away from where he believes he belongs? In my opinion, he isn't. Aragorn is physically capable of remaining in one place, especially if that place is Rivendell. However, I think that he would have a hard time justifying this to himself. He won't linger in Elrond's hall because he has a sense of duty. He has sworn to protect Frodo, so he leaves Rivendell as soon as Frodo does. I don't think any greater force is making him do this, I think he's making himself do this. He has free will just like everyone else, he just chooses to take action against the Enemy rather than relax with the elves.
          Aragorn is not the only character whom destiny holds no grasp over. Frodo is capable of doing whatever he feels like as well. I don't think that the undoing of the ring by Frodo's hand was ordained by God. I believe that the opportunity to destroy the ring has been presented to him, and he has decided to give it a shot. To say at the end of his quest that he was fated to destroy it, that it couldn't have gone the other way, is an insult to his daring and courage.
          How does this apply to real life? I believe the same thing about the world we live in. I don't think we have destinies any more than I believe that the characters in the book have one. To me, it seems like a cop-out to blame Fate if something goes wrong. You tried and failed? It must have been an angry god interfering with your plans because there's no way that you were inadequate. The previous two sentences are a joke to me. Blaming destiny means that you're not taking responsibility. People credit themselves for their successes, but blame a vengeful spirit for their failures. I never hear people crediting destiny when things go right for them, so why should the blame go there when it all goes to pieces?

The Hunger Games

       
            I first heard of The Hunger Games when I was a freshman. Mrs. Sheffield was suggesting books to us or something, possibly for our monthly reading list, and this book came up. It was a new release at the time, and she was recommending it as a good read for our age group. She gave a quick overview of the plot, which sounded appealing to me, but I quickly forgot about it.
            I heard about it a few times over the next few years as more of my friends picked it up and recommended it. I knew that it must be good because most people my age don't read that much recreationally, and it was rare that a book would be recommended to me. Finally, when I heard that a movie was coming out soon, I decided that it was about time to read the series. So I did.
            Last week, I read The Hunger Games, Catching Fire, and Mockingjay, the three books that comprise the Hunger Games Trilogy by Suzanne Collins. I enjoyed them immensely. They were all fast-paced, which was a sweet escape from The Fellowship of the Ring. I like Tolkien's works, but the story sometimes comes to a fifty page standstill, which can become unbearable. The Hunger Games lacks that sort of lethargy, as you follow the non-stop action that Katniss experiences as she is thrown from one deadly situation into another, barely able to catch her breath.
            For those who haven't read these books, The Hunger Games is about Katniss Everdeen, a sixteen-year-old girl from District 12. District 12 is a portion of the country called Panem, located where America used to be. The districts, of which there are twelve (there used to be thirteen, but in a past rebellion attempt the thirteenth was obliterated), are ruled by a central governing body called the Capitol, which, to remind the districts of a past failed rebellion, forces the districts to give up their young to a competition called the Hunger Games.
            Each district must provide two children between the ages of twelve and eighteen, one male and one female, to compete in the Games. These children are called "tributes," and they are chosen by lot, usually because no one wants to volunteer. The twenty-four tributes are then sent to the Capitol, where, after a short time of introductions and interviews, they are pitted against each other in mortal combat until only one child is left standing. The victor then lives a life of fame, never wanting for anything, and their district is provided with food for the next year, making them the envy of the other starving districts. Then, a year later, the Hunger Games begin again.
            Katniss, the aforementioned protagonist, has been entered into the Hunger Games lottery for a few years now, and more than her fair share of times. Each year, she has entered her name additional times, not because  of a desire to compete, but to earn the tesserae. Taking the tesserae allows the potential tribute to earn some extra food and oil, but at the cost of a higher chance of being drawn to compete.
            Primrose, Katniss's sister, is now twelve, and will be entered into the drawing this year. However, Katniss has taken out enough tesserae in order to guarantee that her sister would never have to, minimizing her chance of becoming a tribute. However, on Reaping Day, the day when tributes are chosen, Prim is selected. In order to protect her family, Katniss steps forward to volunteer in her sister's place. So begins Katniss's journey as a tribute in the seventy-fourth annual Hunger Games.
            I felt that these books were more emotionally compelling than most other books I've read in a while, which may have stemmed partially from the first person perspective. Nearly all of the fiction books that I've read recently have been third person, which doesn't convey the same personal sense that the first person captures. When you read the Hunger Games, you know exactly what Katniss feels the entire time, and you begin to feel the same way. When she's afraid, you begin to feel that same terror for her.
            Another way this book grabs you is that it's written in the present tense. This allows you to feel as though you're in the moment, experiencing the events as they happen. It lets you be surprised along with Katniss, which adds to the fear that you're already experiencing. Also, since the story is written in the moment and the perspective is not omniscient, you only know what Katniss knows. This takes away all the security that you have because you have no evidence to suggest that Katniss will survive until the end. You know about the sequels, sure, but you tend to forget that when you're in the thick of the action during your reading. Also, who's to say whether the next books are written from the same character's perspective?
            I have the feeling that the movie will be a good representation of the book. Unlike Lord of the Rings or similar works that have been adapted for the silver screen, I don't feel as though making a literal translation from story to script to scene would be cumbersome. I feel as though everything in the book can be accurately conveyed in a movie. I'm sure not everything will make it, because that's the way things go, but I can still hope.
           It dismayed me, then, to hear a rumor that the scenes with the Avox girl from Katniss's past will not be in the movie. If this is true, then I disagree with their decision. I understand that sometimes unimportant details need to get cut to make a film the right length, but I think that the Avox stuff is pretty important, and for two whole reasons. First, it reveals a bit about Katniss's character. She wasn't always brave, and does have a sense of self-preservation. It's the flip side of her saving Prim from the Games: she'll do anything she has to to protect those dearest to her, but otherwise she knows to look out for herself. I think that they might have cut this scene from the final cut of the movie in order to establish Katniss as a more likeable character. Seeing the hero forsake a terrified girl to an unknown, probably painful and terrifying fate leaves a sour taste in a filmgoer's mouth.
           The other reason that they shouldn't leave this scene out (if indeed they do at all) is because it's an important step for Katniss in her journey towards hating the Capitol. It's not her first step, or her biggest, but it's significant all the same. She experiences secondhand another injustice enacted by the Capitol, which leans her towards a more rebellious inclination. It's not as important in this book, but it establishes a better base for her feelings in the sequels.
           Additionally, this scene would really only require about a minute of added length to the movie: ten seconds for the introduction of the character and an explanation as to what an Avox is, twenty to thirty seconds for a flashback where you discover Katniss's connection with the stranger, ten more seconds for coming back to reality and the exit of the Avox. Then later on, you would see the Avox again for about five seconds. That's not so hard, is it? Of course, it's easy to criticize from the comfort of my couch. I'm sure that, if indeed that scene is absent from the movie, the director (or whoever) had a perfectly good reason for removing it. Of course, the scene probably is in the movie and I've just wasted a few minutes of my time complaining about it.
          Anyway, The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, along with its sequels, were excellent reads. I highly recommend these to anyone who likes a gripping novel about survival, and how we sometimes have to do something ugly just to make sure we see another sunrise.

Minecraft Night

            Last Saturday (March 10), Mitchell and I had a few friends over for the most recent installment of Halo Night. Unfortunately, in the merriment of the occasion I neglected to take any photos. So, in lieu of that, I present you with Minecraft Night.

            The following Monday, which was a day off from school, Mason, who was back for the week of his spring break, joined me in purchasing Minecraft. Minecraft is an open word sandbox game developed by Mojang. This game is made for creative people, so the only limiting agent in this game is your imagination. Theoretically, anyway. Mason and I died a dozen times trying to build a safe fort. Nevertheless, we had a good time playing.