Review: Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

Okay so I don't imagine I'm doing anything but treading well-worn ground by this point, this film is pretty well covered already, but I haven't put out a blog post in a while, so why not?

Okay, so, I'll begin by saying that I actually really enjoyed Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. I was always of the opinion that the world of Harry Potter was far more interesting than anyone in it, or any of their struggles, so essentially, the first Fantastic Beasts film was exactly what I wanted in a spin-off. It gave an expansion of that world, a look at different parts of wizarding society, and some really inventive creature designs, all wrapped up in a nice package of special effects and Eddie Redmayne doing his best Matt Smith impression. I've heard that film described as "Doctor Who: Pokemon Trainer" before, and it was said in a derogatory manner, but what can I say? I thought that was a good mix. I never expected it to win any awards or blow anyone away but it was a perfectly pleasant way to kill a couple of hours.

So, a few years, and what seems like an eternity of headlines and furious fan-debates later, and so arrives Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald which...completely pushes everything I liked about the first one into the background while devoting all the attention to the rise of not-Voldemort and the troubles of characters that haven't really been developed enough for me to care about and completely mishandling one of the few I liked...oh dear.


The entire plot is essentially a bunch of contrivances loosely strung together around the rise of the titular baddie, Ezra Miller's character Credence is still alive (it's never explained how) and is now suddenly obsessed with the secret of his identity, which he never cared about before, and the audience has no reason to care about now. Nagini's there too...she's a woman now, because this is Warner Brothers, and for some reason they like turning previously established monsters into human women *coughshelobcough.* J.K Rowling, as usual, pretends to have always had that in mind, but much like Dumbledore being gay, there is no implication of that anywhere in the source material before she wanted credit for having written it. Speaking of, Dumbledore is in this, Jude Law's pretty good as a young Dumbledore, and for those wondering, yes, they do acknowledge his sexuality...well...it's pretty heavily implied at the very least, he never outright says it, but then this is set in 1927, so I imagine he wouldn't have been that forthcoming with it, perhaps even wizards weren't accepting of homosexuality back then, who knows?

The Dumbledore scenes honestly feel like they come out of a different, better film, any Potterheads reading this should just look those up on YouTube and you'll have seen the best parts this film has to offer.  you'll notice I haven't mentioned much of the story yet and that's because there isn't much of one. No! shut up! No there isn't! Exposition and worldbuilding is not a story, it's supposed to come with one! Nagini got a lot of media attention for the aforementioned being a human woman. Not in the style of an unregistered animagus, she apparently carries a blood curse, which means she can transform into a snake, and does so in her sleep, but before long she'll be stuck as one forever. This would be tragic, but it's treated as a footnote, she's barely even in the film, she's there so that Credence has someone to escape with from the freakshow he works for, and he's only there so that Nagini can be there. After the escape she just sort of, stands around, saying and doing nothing.

Jacob and Queenie are back, I liked them in the first one, but their characters are completely butchered, also, Jacob has his memories back...somehow, apparently memory charms only effect bad memories...even though we've seen them work to the contrary SEVERAL times, wow, Hermione's parents must've REALLY hated her. So he remembers things, basically because the plot needs comic relief, and Queenie is trying to magic-roofie him into marrying her in England which is all kinds of wrong, I mean, at least Newt made her lift the enchantment but still, the fact that she did it at all...
also, not to spoil, but there's a decision she makes at the end of the movie that goes against everything she wants, for no reason but so that there can be dramatic stakes. In fact she abandons her sole reason for doing the thing in order to do the thing because...reasons I suppose? Yeah the writing isn't great.

Also, the Credence's identity thing contains two plot-twists, I'm going to reveal what they are in a few lines so if you haven't seen the film, stop reading at the upcoming space between lines, I'll leave a wide enough gap, but suffice it, for now to say that neither twist makes sense, and the second one actively flies in the face of continuity. if this is where you stop reading, then TL:DR: Crimes of Grindlewald is a bit shit really, the writers seem to think worldbuilding counts as it's own story, it's franchise management disguised as filmmaking, what story is there is contrived as all hell, if I may borrow a line from BoJack Horseman "it has nothing to say, and it says that nothing badly" if you're still going to see it, just manage your expectations.










Okay, so the Credence twists. There's a lead-up to a big reveal, which, we're led to believe is going to be that he is the thought-to-be-lost Corvus Lestrange, but, it turns out he's not, Corvus Lestrange's older sister switches him for another baby in a sinking ship because he's crying, y'know...as one does...you know, just because it's a fantasy story doesn't mean it doesn't have to be believable, there's such a thing as internal logic. Anyway, so it turns out Credence is actually just some guy...But wait!

Once he goes to Grindelwald...for answers...even though, as far as he knows he knows he already has them, it turns out no! he's not just some guy, he's actually a Dumbledore!

WHAT!?

that's even less believable than the whole Lestrange thing! I think we're supposed to believe the Lestranges are bad people, because Bellatrix, but even then, they would at least care about their own family, given the obsession with bloodlines (especially with the villains) in this universe. But, not only does the only other Lestrange we see, not actually seem like a bad person, that is. until she arbitrarily switches her baby brother with another one because the plot demanded it. But now we're expected to believe a Dumbledore was just abandoned as a baby on a sinking ship? I know Albus didn't end up being the best person despite appearances, and we don't know much else about the family, but it's enough of a name that there must be some sort of dynasty to it, because in this world if there wasn't, people wouldn't know the name. Yet we're supposed to believe one was just left there to die, just because? Didn't anyone proof-read this fucking script?

I'm gonna get flak for expecting "a kids film" to make sense, but the target audience has never been an excuse, especially since that isn't actually the target audience, Harry Potter has always gone for broad appeal, and even if it hadn't the fans of the original books and movies, which you must assume are part of the target demographic here, are all adults now. Even if they weren't, even if there were "for the kids" that's not an excuse to slack off, that's accepting a responsibility to try harder, kids deserve good stories to grow up with.

Anyway that's another rant for another post, I guess the point I took so long to arrive at is, I didn't care for Fantastic Beasts: the Crimes of Grindelwald. Which is a shame, because I really enjoyed the last one, oh well.

Fandom identities: Do they need to go?

Disclaimer: This post has been incomplete and on the back-burner for quite a long time, as such, I apologise if it doesn't flow as well as it otherwise could, or if any observations are outdated, I will guard against this as best I can.

Hi all, harkening back to the first post I made on this blog, wherein I pointed out the arbitrary nature of the "nerd" identity, my stance on such things has not changed much, but I do find myself wondering if the world (or at least, the internet) might be an altogether more pleasant place to exist if we all stopped referring to ourselves by our hobbies.

Let me make my stance very clear, I am not saying people can't be fans of things, that would be ridiculous, but I don't understand why the thing you like has to be a part of your identity. For example. A while ago, one of my Facebook friends posted a particularly frustrated status on the subject of Doctor Who, or, more accurately, a facet of the Doctor Who fandom. In a nutshell, this person was annoyed at the newer members of the fandom for referring to themselves as "Dweeks" as opposed to "Whovians."

Essentially this equated to taking issue with a group of people for affixing a name to a fandom, (which they were as much a part of as the person in question) that wasn't the one they were used to. I'm not judging, people can be passionate about whatever they like, with that said I do have to say one thing.

As grievances go, "your arbitrary designation is not as good as mine" seems a little on the petty side, but that's not the entirety of what I'm taking issue with here. The real problem here is that people have an unfortunate tendency to affix self-worth to their status as a member of their chosen fandom. Whether you think identifying by a fandom label is a big deal or not, I would say that this attitude above all else needs to go.

Gatekeepers, that's what these aspects of fandom are called, not by themselves, of course, they prefer to refer to themselves as "hardcore" or perhaps more arrogantly, "real" fans "oh you like Batman? Who was the first person to play him on-screen? Adam West? LOL WRONG!! NOT A REAL FAN!" (it was Lewis Wilson in the 40s by the way, and yes, I did have to look that one up.)

More than anything else, this attitude that one has to commit a large enough portion of their time to amass an arbitrary amount of trivia in order to somehow earn the right to call themselves a fan, is what needs to go in my opinion. Despite what some will say, you are allowed to declare yourself a fan of something without dedicating large portions of your time to it.

If you choose to dedicate that time to it, that's fine too. A problem arises, however when you take the fact that you have invested that time, attach a sense of status to it, and wield your imagined seniority like a club, enacting a smug sense of superiority. In the worst cases, this can not only make a fandom seem hostile and unwelcoming to newcomers, (which directly harms the subject of the fandom by intimidating away new audiences.) But it can also give the entire fandom identity a bad name to outside observers.

It is here I come back to my original point, I, of course, take no issue whatsoever with people enjoying things or the level of time sunk into it, whatever it is, you do you. I do, however, think affixing an identity to the practice of being a fan of something has a less than positive knock-on effect. See, once you assign a name to a group, be it Whovian, Trekkie, or especially the most general ones like Gamer or Otaku, that creates a subcultural label, which in turn, intentionally or not, creates an image, and eventually a stereotype.

This is a problem that makes the aforementioned Gatekeepers exacerbating agents for another problem entirely. That problem is one of cultural perception. I've long disapproved of sorting people into collectives. just for one of my most personal pet-peeves, there is no such thing as "the disabled community" and the fact that people seem to think that I should automatically be inspired by anything noteworthy another disabled person does, is indicative of a larger problem. But anyway, that's a rant for another time.

Going back to fandoms I understand that "Gamer" "Trekkie" "Otaku" and words like that, when they first came into being, were words that helped people find like-minded individuals to discuss their interests with. Even now at the height of the internet age, when everything is more-or-less equally accessible, (provided you know where to look) at the best of times are just harmless shorthand to use in conversation, to give (hopefully) reasonable people a vague idea of your interests without having to talk their ears off, unfortunately it's not always seen that way.

First let's look at it from the point of view of an outside observer, what do you think the uninitiated average Joe thinks of when the word "Gamer" is uttered? I highly doubt it's just an average person who happens to like playing games a lot.

South Park may be able to provide a possible answer to that, with one of my personal favourite episodes, Make Love, Not Warcraft. which features a broad parody of a gamer in the form of a character known as "Jenkins The Griefer" here's a picture of him.

(for those unfamiliar, a "griefer" is a player of online multiplayer games who derives enjoyment from deliberately hampering, harassing or simply annoying other players.)

Within the episode, the Griefer has played World of Warcraft "almost every hour of every day for the past year and a half"

South Park as a show deals in broad parody and satire, so I am of course, well aware that this is not a reflection of Trey Parker and Matt Stone's opinion of people who play games,  However, the caricature exists, and resonates comedically precisely because a distressing amount of people do have that opinion. To many people outside the game-playing community, this is what a "Gamer" is, well, either that or a child/teenager with a headset screaming racism-laden obscenities to an unseen person as if they were just behind his TV set.

Is that fair? No, of course not, but fair or not, there are many who would take this caricature at face value. Granted, these are not people that the more reasonable of us should concern ourselves with, but they do exist.

This is barely a relevant problem though, in fact, I find myself wondering, even as I type this why I devoted so much time to explain the fact that a fandom identity may lead to a stereotype that people who have nothing to do with it might judge harshly. It's bullshit, and it's frustrating but I think it's definitely a more of a symptom than a cause.

A possible cause of this symptom is, in my opinion, a much more serious problem. I'm talking of course about fandom toxicity.

I've touched on this earlier to inform the previous point, but, allow me to be blunt, generally speaking, fandoms are fucking shit, the gatekeepers, the "real" fans, and those that attach a sense of ownership to the thing they claim to love, serve only to hurt the thing they profess to support by making any community of fans it might have inhospitable to newcomers. That's if they don't outright harass new people (and sometimes long-established contributors to the product) away from it because it was taken in a direction they didn't agree with. A lot has happened to showcase this breed of "fan" since I started writing this post all that time ago, among the most notable, the Rick & Morty Schezuan sauce fiasco, proof if further proof be needed that Rick & Morty fans do not understand Rick & Morty. (a fact which has caused me to go from an enthusiastic blabbermouth about the show to the point of being almost embarrassed to be known to like it for fear of association.)  and the less said about Star Wars fans lately, the better. A casual observer could be forgiven for thinking that Star Wars fans don't actually like Star Wars, but for some reason, like to pretend they do or once did. An even more casual observer could be forgiven for thinking that anything that could be so loved by a certain type of Star Wars fan couldn't possibly be worth bothering with.

The inevitable cause of this problem is, to a degree, popularity, and I'm not talking about things being better before they went "all mainstream" but in the words of Terry Pratchett "the intelligence of the creature known as the crowd is the square root of the number of people in it."

The point here is, anything with sufficient exposure and popularity will have a toxic element to the fandom, just by law of percentages, unfortunately, there's not much we can do about that. It also means that as long as fandom identities exist, there will always be toxic shitweasels to taint the image.

Even in spite of that though, since starting to write this all that time ago, I've come across groups of really nice people that were brought together by the very thing I've spent this post decrying, and who, there's a good chance would share my opinion on this stuff on the whole.  The difference is these people never took their status as fans as an indicator of...well, status. so who am I to tell them they can't casually refer to each other by a collective name?

So it appears, I've travelled a very long road to explain why fandoms can often be a bit shit, as well as just some of the negative impact being a "bad fan", can have. So don't be that, being a fan of something is supposed to be a good thing, let's not ruin it.

I don't know whether I pity or envy the people I've decried in this post, on the one hand, I despair at their conduct and think whatever they're a fan of deserves better fans. On the other, I wish I had so few problems that I could get that worked up over some of the things that they do.


TL:DR obsessive, or I suppose "competitive" fans can be the absolute worst, that thing you like is cool, stop being a dick to people who agree with you and maybe people outside will stop seeing you as Jenkins the Greifer.

Review: Avengers: Infinity War

Warning: this review was written largely by the seat of the authors pants with no plan to speak of, as such, there may be spoilers at some point, but I'll try to restrict them as much as possible

At the time of writing this review it is May 3rd 2018, the 10-year anniversary of the release of Iron Man, and by extension, the 10-year anniversary of the formation of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I can't help but wonder why they didn't wait to release Infinity War today, it just seems like it would be more appropriate,, but oh well, a minor detail. I struggle to think how to open this review as this isn't just a regular summer blockbuster, this is the lead-in to the climax of what, for many, will be the entire story of the MCU, a project that has changed the landscape of big-budget film-marketing, probably forever, I say it will be the entire story for many because I honestly don't see many but the die-hards sticking around, at least consistently, after Avengers 4. I like these as much as anyone but a climax is a climax, and I doubt I'll clamor to see what happens after the end of a 10-year series, I'll keep up of course, but I don't think I'll scramble to see the new line of movies as soon as they're out the way I've been doing...unless of course it's part of my job to do so...

 *cough*someonehiremetoreviewstufforyou *cough* 

excuse me. Anyway, this is the conclusion to the story every film so far has been building up to. So, how does it handle?

The movie sets the tone right away with a real ball-breaker of a pre-title-card sequence, letting you feel the stakes for this one right off the bat. The movie wastes no time in establishing our villain as the biggest threat our heroes have ever faced. Thanos has been knocking around in the MCU turning up in the odd scene and teaser here and there for a while now, so I expected them to save the first time we see him actually do something for at least the mid-point. Nope....nope...he's right in there getting his hands dirty from the word "go".

another surprise involving Thanos is just how much care seems to have gone into his character, Marvel movies typically have a "forgettable villain" problem, and sometimes even the memorable ones can be pretty one-note, but Infinity War really is Thanos's movie, he's a fully realised and fleshed-out character who truly believes he's doing the right thing. I'd almost say it treats him as more of a protagonist than the heroes, but then with so many heroes, it can be difficult to zero in on a protagonist. 

That said the balancing act of utilizing so many characters and locations is pulled off very well, there's even some room for worldbuilding here and there. On the side of the heroes, the MVP status has to go to Robert Downey Jr in my opinion, Tony Stark/Iron Man is the original hero of the MCU and has gone through the most development as a character, and you see so much of it on display here, if there was one specific protagonist for the heroes in this one I'd say it would have to be him. 

That said, this is still very much an Avengers movie, and it knows what you came to see. There are fun cameos and unusual character interactions aplenty, Thor's interactions with the Guardians of the Galaxy, particularly Rocket and Groot got a fair few chuckles out of me. There isn't as much time for character interaction as I might have liked, as there is a lot that this movie has to get done, and even then it's definitely a "part 1" movie. For once I believe that the story they wanted to tell here actually needed two parts to tell it. But this part culminates in one of the most satisfying collections of cameo-spots in a battle scene I've ever witnessed, there are a couple of people who don't show up but apart from them, most everyone's there doing their thing.

Then there's the ending, which I'm sure you've at least heard by now, is really heavy for a Marvel movie, like I said, there are real stakes here, and they're more keenly felt than in any other entry in the series I think.

In summary, I don't think you can really appraise an Avengers film traditionally, particularly one as long into a series as this one, if you're not at least familiar with the lore you're going to be lost here, but with the amount of story that has happened I can't really name that as a criticism, you wouldn't start a TV show with the series finale and expect to understand it, you shouldn't do the same here.

But taken as the climax to a long-running series, or at least the first part of it Infinity War is a definite must-see for Marvel fans, even if you leave the theatre going "ow" 

Why I don't write about disability

Okay so, it's been a few months since my last update, so I figured something was overdue, I had given thought to packing the whole blog thing in, and talking to a camera on YouTube instead for the sake of more easily consumable content, but frankly, my words come far more easily when written, I still might make a video component to the content here, using the blogs as a kind of prototype script or something, but a few attempts at vlogging have taught me that talking to a camera causes my mind to go blank, so I'd rather type things up for the sake of  coherence. 

As for subject matter, I couldn't really think of a way to approach this organically, but it might strike some that know me better as odd, that I don't tend to mention disability an awful lot, I mean, you'd think that I would, right?

Full disclosure, this isn't just talking about writing, this extends to the videos I put out, the performance work I've done for my uni courses, everything really. Unless unavoidable, which, when being anecdotal it sometimes is, I've made a point of avoiding the subject of disability altogether when possible. The only notable exception to this is when I do stand-up, people see a disabled guy on stage they expect jokes about it, far be it from me to deny them. Nobody has really asked why I don't write about it despite being more than qualified to do so, but I have mentioned my situation on this blog so it does feel like something of an elephant in the room that I should at some point address. 

There are a few reasons, most of which boil down to my personal wants, foibles, and hang-ups, but broadly speaking, I never wanted to be thought of as a disability figure, not even succeeding "in spite of" disability. The basic reason for this is, frankly, I don't see it as important. It's not relevant to a lot of the stuff I do, my disability doesn't affect my ability to form sentences, therefore it shouldn't come into the equation in my writing. I originally wanted to put content out there and build an audience that would not even know I was disabled so that if someone was surprised to find I was, I could just be like "oh did I not mention that?" (hey, you never know, if I build an audience on YouTube that doesn't read this blog it might still happen) 

Another reason for this is probably something to do with my anxiety, and my borderline obsessive need to be as self-aware as possible. I always felt like if I let my disability influence what I do in any way, then on some level, I was still allowing it to control my life or the content I produce. (Yes, I am aware of the fact that utterly rejecting it to this extent is every bit as "influenced" by it as writing about it would be, but if I can write without mentioning it, then it didn't affect my writing did it?) I get no enjoyment out of writing about it save the occasional bit of catharsis if I'm complaining about the way the world or people in it treats me and those in similar positions. 

But that's the thing, I never want to become the person who shouts and complains about the things he doesn't like, popular though such content proves to be from other figures. (unless I'm talking about writing or entertainment, of course, I'll bitch about that 'till the cows come home.) This, coupled with my obsessive self-awareness and anxiety-driven perpetual guilt, renders me unable, in most cases, to voice my displeasure about anything related to my disability, without feeling like I'm just whingeing.

Again, this is very much my hang-up, but the fact remains that I am subconsciously unable to separate legitimate complaint from whining like a spoiled child. Rationally, I know the difference, but my brain (which you should get used to my reference to as a separate, almost hostile entity) makes me feel like those are the same thing. I've so long since internalized the idea that I should "stop whining and get on with it" that I now can't have a problem, no matter how well-founded, without that message overpowering my thought-process. 

This would be fine, after all, it has allowed me to develop pretty decent coping skills, except for the fact that I feel exactly as whiny and petulant for complaining when I have every reason to do so, as I do when I'm just in a bad mood and fancy a moan. I can no longer separate writing about disability from complaining about it, which I can't separate from whining about it, which I don't like to do, so I don't do it. 

There's also the fact that there's generally stuff I'd just rather write about, I also quietly resent the assumption that I would want to write about disability in the first place. Again, my hang-up, but if someone asks me why I don't write about disability, or suggests that I do, I can't help but feel like the implication there is that I can't have something to say about anything else. I know that's not what (most) people meant, but that's what it feels like. All told I absolutely despise the thought of identifying by my status as a disabled person. Despite what some others may tell you it is not in fact "who I am" or "part of my identity" it is a single facet of my existence that should not be fucking relevant to any other part thereof, no matter how many times I am shown that we, as a species are simply "not there yet." 

Ranking the Star Wars movies

WARNING! FUCKING MASSIVE SPOILERS FOR THE LAST JEDI AHEAD! AS WELL AS ALL THE OTHERS, I SUPPOSE, BUT IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THOSE YET YOU PROBABLY DON'T CARE, SO MOSTLY WARNING ABOUT THE FUCKING MASSIVE LAST JEDI SPOILERS!

Well, I was probably always bound to do this eventually, I was going to wait until Episode IX came out, but fuck it why not do it now? Right, you know how these work, worst-to-best and why, so without further ado, let's get on with this. (BTW, Theatrical releases only)

#10: Star Wars: The Clone Wars (2008)

If this list is a dinner party, then Clone Wars is the guest you only invited to make up the numbers and because they know everyone else is coming and to not invite them would be awkward. Clone Wars really is kind of a nothing-movie to me, a movie-length pilot episode for the  Clone Wars animated series. which, while occasionally pretty damn good, I found mostly mediocre to okay. There's not really much else I can say about it, the story was uninvolving, it came after Revenge of the Sith so there was precisely zero investment to be had in the arcs of most of the characters, because you know how it's going to end up anyway. 

The only saving grace of this film would be introducing Ahsoka Tano, the most interesting original character in the Clone Wars series (haven't seen Rebels yet, but I'm glad to hear she's in it.) Other than that nothing worth mentioning happens, and if the vocal talents of both Christopher Lee and Samuel L. Jackson fail to improve your movie, there is no help for it. 

#9: Episode II: Attack of the Clones (2002)

It shouldn't surprise most people that this one falls where it does, Phantom Menace has its problems, but at least it wasn't boring. I should say before I sound like a hater that I like, and will happily watch all of the Star Wars movies, but Clones is probably the one I most need friends around to help me enjoy it. 

There's stuff to like about this one to be sure, but these things are often few, far between and short-lived. This installment seems far too preoccupied with a painfully written, and badly acted romance between Anakin and Padme. I've got nothing against romance in my sci-fi, but I do ask that it's done...y'know...well...or at least have dialogue that comes across like something a human being might say (no, not even a sheltered space-monk with no experience is exempt from this rule) The saving graces here are that said dialogue is occasionally unintentionally funny. As such the movie remains as quotable as any of the Star Wars movies, albeit for slightly different reasons,  There are some fun performances to be seen, Ewan McGregor is consistently entertaining throughout the entire prequel trilogy as Obi-Wan, and here is no exception. Christopher Lee is Christopher Lee, he was never not a great addition to any cast. there are snippets of good action strewn throughout but as I said, few, far-between and short-lived. Overall, I'd probably need to be doing something else through this one if I was alone, strictly "on in the background while you do other things" or "night in with friends in a particular mood" viewing.

#8: Episode I: The Phantom Menace (1999)

This is the movie that I have seen the most times in theatres, I won't tell you how many times, but I will say it's going to be a tough record to beat. The Phantom Menace came out when I was eight years old, it wasn't my first exposure to Star Wars, that was a special screening of A New Hope when I was about four or five. But the point of my telling you that was to contextualize that I have a certain nostalgic fondness for this film. That said, I do feel like this is where it belongs (most of the order here probably won't surprise you to be fair.) while it hasn't aged well, the visual effects were great for the time, the score boasts some of John Williams' best work (which is really saying something) and has some genuinely thrilling setpieces. Personally, I love the pod race, and, while admittedly a bit dramatically uninvolving, the three-way lightsaber duel at the end is certainly a spectacle to behold. This said, every popular criticism is valid. I don't hate Jar Jar Binks, like, at all, but he is occasionally mildly irritating. That's it though, at the worst of times, mildly irritating, I'll even go as far as to say I found his battle-slapstick funny, he's fine, so just chill out about him already! The story is also all over the place, there are three climactic battles at once as opposed to one, this is a minor problem, but there are more serious ones. This movie does not have a protagonist, or it has so many as to render the distinction pointless and the direction of the story irrelevant. You could level either criticism at the writing and they would make equal sense. 

I don't want to harp on this one, everything I could say has been said many times by many people, but overall, I still enjoy this one when I'm in the mood for it, but I have to admit it's not a good film.

#7: Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (2005)

Is anyone surprised that the prequel trilogy is lumped together here? I don't expect so. I'm not going to waste time going through what most people will know already, many of the same complaints about the other two prequels are still present here, the overreliance on CGI that isn't really good enough to warrant it, the ham-fisted (yet innately quotable) dialogue, the mostly unbelievable character logic, all here. But for once, the good parts in the rest of the movie come together with this stuff to make something that I would not call a bad film, it's not a great one by any means, it's definitely flawed, but by no means bad. John Williams' score remains great as ever, Ewan McGregor is still a great Obi-Wan and the admittedly still overly-choreographed lightsaber fights do manage to be a lot more dramatically involving this time around. Ian McDiarmid steals every single scene, this one is worth watching for him alone, I'd watch a special edition where he plays everyone quite frankly. I feel like the prequel trilogy, in general, is not as bad as people say it is, but this one, in particular, deserves another watch if you've been avoiding them, you might find you like it more than you remember.

#6: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016)

I feel like I should say that, if these were all taken as standalone features, Rogue One would probably make it a lot higher on the list, it's easily a significantly improved display of filmmaking to everything thus far, but that's the thing, it's not a standalone film, it's a Star Wars film, and its place in the franchise just can't place it any higher for me, as much as I like it. Released as part of Disney's initiative to rake in those Star Wars ticket sales every year without missing a Christmas expand the Star Wars universe while the proper numbered installments were still in development, Rogue One tells the story of how the Rebel Alliance came by the Death Star plans immediately before the events of the original film. Mechanically, I struggle to think of many wrongs with this one if I'm being honest, it's clearly a different animal from the rest of the franchise, in fact, if anything this would be just about the best Star Wars Battlefront adaptation you could hope to make. Not that I imagine that was the intention, but therein lies the problem. 

The part of the established story occupied by Rogue One is so small as to be almost inconsequential, it's a big-budget expanded universe entry, and I like that, I see no reason not to do that if you have Disney money behind you. But answering a question most didn't ask, with characters that won't be around afterward is as good a statement of intent as any to indicate that this film is, by design, disposable. 

Again, it's not that there's anything wrong with that, the cast of characters, arch and broad though they may be, is a ton of fun, K-2SO is the driving force for the humor, imagine if you will, a sassy C-3PO who isn't afraid to blast a fool. This attitude is prevalent throughout the entire cast, which seem to exist to show the not-so-squeaky-clean side of the Rebel Alliance. The notable exception to this rule is Donnie Yen's Chirrut Imwe, a moral contrast and interesting look at what Force practitioners outside of the Jedi order might look like. 

Mads Mikkelson is also great as Jyn Erso's under-protest scientist dad Galen, and he's covered up that not-really-a-plot hole from the first Death Star, another question that didn't need answering, but I'm not sad it has been. That's really the whole thing with Rogue One. It's not essential viewing, it's strictly for-the-fans who want to delve a bit deeper into the lore. It's only because of this inconsequential place in the canon that it's not higher on the list, it's a really good way to kill a few hours, even if you haven't seen Star Wars before, but most who haven't probably won't bother, unfortunately.

I do have to reiterate, Rogue One is a fantastic movie, and I really struggled with where to put it. 

#5: Episode VII: The Force Awakens (2015)

It was always going to be hard deciding where to put this one, I fall safely into the camp of people that liked the movie, I like The Force Awakens. This movie may not be the best in the franchise, but it was never trying to be. the whole marketing campaign around this film was about comebacks, the original cast making a comeback for one last big spotlight in this universe. Practical effects were making a comeback, in essence. Star Wars as the fans knew and loved, was making a comeback.

Whatever you think of JJ Abrams he is an exceptional mimic of the Star Wars style, whatever else you might say about him, he gets why Star Wars was special. and brings a similar feeling in this, a two-hour love letter to the original trilogy.

Yes, that's what this is, I wouldn't call it a "remake disguised as a sequel" as I have heard some describe it, but it is unquestionably a tribute to the original trilogy, there are deliberate aesthetic choices that are clearly made for the express purpose of invoking nostalgia, the catwalk scene on the Death Star Starkiller Base, Tatooine Jakku's general existence as a desert planet on which the hero scrapes a meager living with which they are not happy, but cannot leave for reasons that concern their family, but do so when the choice is removed from their hands, among many other things.
Look I'm not going to list every callback to the original trilogy (mainly A New Hope) invoked by this film, you get the picture, it's a nostalgia trip, but is that such a bad thing?

It had been ten years since the last Star Wars film and the last one was attached to the much-maligned prequels, (whether you happen to like them or not, a lot of people didn't) I would argue that a lot of people could've done with a refresher course on what was so great about Star Wars, to begin with. Sure it's a $200m fan-film, but it knows exactly what it is and is a damn good version of it. I would argue that that's all it needed to be.

I haven't even talked about the film beyond comparison yet, so let's do that. The new main characters introduced are instantly likable and for a while, Finn and Rey seem to be jostling for the position of protagonist. Eventually of course it falls to Rey...oh fucking hell I can't avoid it so I might as well open it up now, it's as good a time as any I suppose.

REY, IS NOT, AND DOES NOT EVEN APPROACH BEING, A MARY SUE, ESPECIALLY IN THE CONTEXT OF STAR WARS 

To call Rey a Mary Sue, when talking about Star Wars betrays only that you don't understand either thing. Or that you're not paying much attention at all, one or the other. All of Rey's skills are easily explained by what we know of her background and upbringing and the fact that she has thus far survived them. She's a junker, she needs to strip derelict ships down to feed herself and survive, of course, she'd know how spaceships work! Also, she grew up alone on a desert planet near a settlement populated by scavengers, if she hadn't learned to defend herself, she'd be dead. Thirdly, all of this falls into utter insignificance next to the fact that she's massively force sensitive, a common trait of which is being a fast learner, and also being very intuitive and occasionally just damn lucky. She herself doesn't know what's going on half of the time. Is that a get-out-of-a-tricky-situation free card? Yeah, absolutely, does it make someone a Mary Sue? No, no it doesn't, not at all, not even close. Also she only beat Kylo Ren because he was A) clearly emotionally compromised, and B) just coming off getting gut-shot by a REALLY FUCKING POWERFUL WEAPON in Chewie's crossbow, (y'know, the thing that several times, blows away a few stormtroopers at once?) He tanked that fucker and walked it off, if he'd been 100%, she'd have no chance. (this was demonstrated earlier in the film when he was 100% and effortlessly paralyzed and captured her in seconds)

Oh by the way...Finn was a janitor..don't see anyone complaining that he can use a lightsaber, even with his basic Stormtrooper training that's less believable than Rey, who habitually uses a melee weapon, being able to use one.

Okay, sorry, now that that's out of the way, the returning original trilogy cast members are all great, you know what to expect from them by now. Finn is a great secondary protagonist and occasional comic relief, we don't get to see Poe much but enough to make him interesting, and Kylo Ren is...an interesting one, I wasn't really on board with him at first, but he eventually grew on me, the whole story of The Force Awakens is pretty meta. Being about a younger generation inheriting the galaxy and its struggles in the same way the cast of younger actors have to inherit the mantle of carrying the franchise. This film does little more in the grand scheme of things than set them up to attempt that, but, again, that's all that was needed.

The score is excellent as usual as is the scenery, if I tend not to mention those it's just because Star Wars has always been so consistent for me in that regard. JJ Abrams gets some criticism for playing it safe, but it's done with such a permeating affection for the franchise that I can't mark him down for it. Also, *spoler alert* the choice to kill off Han Solo couldn't have been an easy one to make, even if it was kind of an obvious one in hindsight and during the scene itself pretty much everyone saw it coming a mile away. (It still wasn't easy to watch.) The worst thing I can say is that the tendancy to ape the original trilogy keeps this film from reaching the same heights as those ones did.

#4: Episode IV: A New Hope (1977)

I expect you're surprised that this is the first original trilogy entry on the list, I'm not doing a full run-down, you've seen this one or you wouldn't be reading this. Obviously this is a great film, it's the one that started this whole universe, gave birth to the single biggest franchise on the planet and changed the rules of science fiction, serialized films and visual effects, basically forever. It will never get enough praise for that. 

But this isn't an objective appraisal of cultural impact (if it were, this would be number one without question) this is just my personal order of preference, and while I do love this film, there are a few things holding it back for me. Firstly, I don't like Luke for much of this one, he's annoying and whiny and doesn't seem to care a bit when his family are murdered in cold blood. Even as a kid that didn't feel right to me. My problems are mostly with him to be fair, but he is the protagonist, it is kind of important that he be likable, or if he's not, make that part of the story. 

Those concerns of mine are pretty minor though, this is still a great watch even if some parts of it haven't aged well, Alec Guinness's performance as the original Obi-Wan Kenobi cannot possibly be overstated. Harrison Ford was such a perfect fit for Han Solo I don't even care about Luke and how hard I find it to like him. Not to take away from Mark Hamill, he's...fine, but I get the sense he's kinda green at this point or at the very least hasn't grown into the role. Carrie Fisher sells the character of a not-so-secretly badass princess brilliantly, and Darth Vader was the first villain in a film to actually terrify me (well it was either him or the child-catcher from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, I was 5...I think but I'm pretty sure I saw this first.) I remember being taken to see this in a special screening at my local cinema, and after it had finished, my then-stepdad mentioned we had the video, so I went home and watched it again. 

So yeah don't let it's placement in comparison to the other two of the trilogy fool you there's about a hair's bredth between them, but for me, this is where it goes.

#3: Episode VI: Return of the Jedi (1983)

"WHAT!?" I hear you say. "putting Jedi ahead of A New Hope!? the very idea!" What can I say? I get very slightly more enjoyment out of this one. I'll acknowledge that, of course, I wouldn't get nearly as much out of it without the other two backing it up, but because the other two are, and never won't be, I'm putting it here. Everything good about the others is still here, and Luke actually became likable in the last one so he's not dragging it down for me anymore, the Ewoks don't bother me, at all. but then I first saw this on video soon after A New Hope. So I was 5, certainly no older than 6, so maybe I'm just blinded by nostalgia. All I can tell you is that I liked, in particular the Sarlacc-pit fight scene so much that I think I broke that part of the tape by rewinding it too much. (even if the movie was finished, I never stopped the tape before rewinding, I don't think that was good for it.) 

Even rewatching this as an adult, I find myself oddly preferring it to the original, even while being able to acknowledge it's not as good conventionally, I guess nostalgia is a powerful thing, but to put it all on that does this film a disservice. It's great in its own right, not even in spite of the Ewoks (though certainly not because of them either) they're fine, and C-3PO being mistaken for a god was a really fun direction to take that in. 

Luke's character arc has to be the star of the show this time, and his final confrontation with Vader and the Emperor easily trumps any highlights from anything lower on this list. I gave him crap for being unlikable in A New Hope but throughout Empire and a good stretch of this, he becomes so much more sympathetic. He took some warming up to but he did get there. There are also so many highlights in this one that are impossible to ignore, Vader's redemption, the Emperor, just...in general, again, I would pay any amount of money to see a re-release of the Star Wars saga where Ian McDiarmid plays every character as the Emperor, regardless of the age or gender of the character he's supposed to be, he's that compelling to watch. (I also just think that would be really funny) 

Return of the Jedi is often cited as a let-down, but it's a great time to be had it is my firm belief that this assumption is only because it had its immediate predecessor to follow, speaking of... 

#2: Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back (1980)

Okay, I know you were all expecting this to be number one, hell I was too, even after I started writing it, the switching of places is a last-minute decision upon seeing both films again that I may regret immediately after posting this...actually I won't that's just something I thought of saying to mollify people who wouldn't like it, but even so, this was not an easy decision to make. 

The thing about Empire is that to fully appreciate it, you have to appreciate the time in which it happened. I wasn't born yet, and wouldn't be for another decade or so, but I've heard enough accounts of people that were to at least have some idea of the impact left by this film. 

Sure the twist of Vader being Luke's father seems like the most cliché thing in the world today, but at the time it was a genuinely shocking revelation (to this day I'm seeing reaction videos of people who still, somehow, haven't seen the film and Somehow have never learned the twist through cultural osmosis. For some reason I never get tired of seeing the reveal) 

Of course, that twist wouldn't have meant all that much if it hadn't come at the end of an already-stellar film that takes the characters we met in the last one and gives them a ton of great development. All while introducing a couple of new ones including everyone's favourite muppet, Yoda. (voiced by Miss Piggy...try not hearing that now) There's more character work here than in your average season of a TV series these days, and it doesn't feel overstuffed. the scenery, as ever is brilliant as is the score, it's John Williams what do you expect? The Empire Strikes Back features every facet of Star Wars at it's most potent. Darth Vader at his scariest, Han Solo at his wittiest, Yoda at his most whimsical, the Empire at it's most intimidating (Approaching AT-ATs anyone?) and all of this with a tight script some bold twists and a hitherto-unheard-of down-note to end on, for the longest time this movie was untouchable, which bring me to...

#1: Caravan of Courage: An Ewok Adventure (1984)

Nah I'm just kidding, can you imagine? 

Actual #1: Episode VIII: The Last Jedi (2017)

In all seriousness, I'm as suspicious of my own opinion as anyone else here, but I know what my opinion is, and it's telling me that The Last Jedi is the best Star Wars film to date. I'm not gonna bother reviewing it, as I already did that last time I updated this blog, but I am gonna go into why I think it belongs at the top, one more warning, INCOMING MASSIVE FUCKING SPOILERS! DO NOT READ BEYOND THIS POINT UNLESS YOU'VE SEEN IT!



I absolutely love the way this film treats the story so far, in particular the plot threads set forth by The Force Awakens, to put it bluntly, much like Luke does with his old lightsaber, it takes one look at them and chuck's 'em right off a cliff! In any other situation, I would probably not like that, but in this particular instance, it's done so well, and I like the result so much, that I cannot help but see this as the best one, see, much like Empire did way back when, this movie gave us a couple of plot twists that we really should've seen coming, but in doing so turned the entire universe on its head in a lot of ways.

But Last Jedi did all that, 37 years AFTER Empire had already done it, and in the internet age where such a thing should've been impossible! I can't really elaborate without going into detail, so let's.

The two big questions being asked by the fandom at large, were "Who are Rey's parents?" and "Who is Supreme Leader Snoke? The answer to both ends up being the same, no Snoke isn't Rey's father. The answer to both is ultimately, "it doesn't matter" Snoke, it turned out, was a red-herring. He shows up for a couple of scenes and then gets unceremoniously killed off for Kylo Ren to assume his mantle of Supreme Leader. As for Rey's parents, yeah they're no one important, a couple of junkers who sold her for beer money. they've been dead for ages, they don't matter.

This film is a statement of intent to take Star Wars in a new direction, the main theme of the movie seems to be one of moving on, another quite meta plotline for the franchise, indeed, if Star Wars is to keep going for the long-haul (and it will) it's going to have to move on and let go of certain things, as Kylo Ren himself says "it's time to let old things die" and to this end The Last Jedi takes some very rewarding chances. The movie itself is an entertaining ride from start to finish but more than that it's a masterclass in character writing, I had a feeling about this from The Force Awakens but Rey is now unquestionably my favourite Star Wars protagonist. Mark Hamill gives the best performance he's ever given as an old and jaded Luke Skywalker, who refuses to couch the idea that the Jedi should continue to exist, until Yoda turns up as a puppet force-ghost and tells him to get over himself and his old way of doing things. Assuring Luke that the Jedi religion couldn't have given Rey anything she didn't have already. Eventually Luke shows up for one of the best climaxes in the franchise before passing on and becoming one with the force, Luke Skywalker is dead.


Carrie Fisher gets a huge part this time around and I'm glad she does as this is the last time we'll ever get to see her as Leia, and I loved the way she used the force to keep herself alive in the vacuum of space and pull herself back aboard her ship, I'm glad we got to see her use the force once. But unlike its predecessor, this movie very much belongs to the younger cast several named characters, like Admiral Ackbar are just killed off-screen

Adam Driver comes into his own as Kylo Ren and soon does away with (and destroys) his totally-not-Darth-Vader mask, making as clear a statement as any that he's done invoking nostalgia and ready to be his own villain now, the same can be said of the rest of the cast too.

Rey's surprise origins as no one special made the Star Wars universe feel so much bigger to me, for the first time in this franchise, not everything has to be connected, not everyone has to be special by birthright, there are no big dumb prophecies and you don't have to be a fucking Skywalker to be strong in the force.

I could gush about this all day, but Star Wars: The Last Jedi sets up for the franchise to continue in the long-run, by bravely moving on from some of the old things that while beloved, were definitely something of an anchor. The Force Awakens may have been comfortable, familiar and a great throwback. but The Last Jedi made Star Wars feel new, unpredictable and exciting again, it is a legitimately great work of cinema that just happens to also be Star Wars. It made me feel like a little kid again with anticipation, and I couldn't love it enough for that. The Last Jedi is the best Star Wars movie, come, the fuck at me!


Also, that lightspeed kamikaze, holy shit!

So, TL:DR, here's the order

10: Star Wars: The Clone Wars

9.  Episode II: Attack of the Clones

8. Episode I: The Phantom Menace

7 Episode III: Revenge of the Sith

6. Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

5. Episode VII: The Force Awakens

4.Episode IV: A New Hope  

3. Episode VI: Return of the Jedi

2. Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back

1. Episode VIII: The Last Jedi

I don't expect a lot of people to agree with everything, but hopefully you'll have got something out of this. I don't know if I'll post again for a while, this was an undertaking, Happy Life Day 

Review: Star Wars: Episode VIII: The Last Jedi (spoiler-free)

Okay, so. Spoiler-free review let's talk Star Wars.

From the moment Lucasfilm was signed over to Disney in 2012, there were a lot of emotions running high throughout the Star Wars fandom, as the house of Mouse had greenlit the long-hoped-for Episode VII without as much as waiting for the ink to dry on the page. three years later, J.J. Abrams brought us Star Wars: Episode VII The Force Awakens and yeah, it was pretty good, not the best a new Star Wars could've been, more a "greatest hits" fan-film for the original trilogy, but since the prequel trilogy that preceded this was, shall we say, polarizing at best. I think The Force Awakens was everything it really needed to be, and did its job of establishing the new main characters and the starting points for their respective arcs with a familiar-feeling adventure. (possible full-review MAYBE coming in the form of a ranking list I may or may not write, I promise nothing.) 

So, Awakens is done, the stage is set for these new characters to shine on their own. and director Rian Johnson is tasked with taking this new trilogy and it's characters to new places, and making a Star Wars film that has to do more than just pay lip service to those that came before it, while continuing the plot-threads put forward by Abrams.

To be blunt, he has hit it right out of the fucking park!

I am aware that many will disagree with me on this, and I understand why, but I absolutely love The Last Jedi for many of the same reasons I expect some will hate it, it is unquestionably a Star Wars film while at the same time being a very different animal when compared to everything that has come before it. the treatment of the mysteries put forth in the last one made the universe feel so much bigger to me, and while The Force Awakens played it mostly safe, The Last Jedi does everything but. 

the cast all bring their A-game, Mark Hamill is great every time he's on-screen as is the late Carrie Fisher, who gets a much bigger part than I was expecting. Daisy Ridley, John Boyega and Oscar Issac are fast cementing themselves as the new "big three" of the Star Wars universe and Adam Driver, who I wasn't sure about last time, really comes into his own, I am fully on-board with Kylo Ren as a character now.

The story is what I will expect will divide most people, as mentioned, in stark contrast to The Force Awakens and its somewhat fan-filmy, safe attitude, there are risks aplenty taken here. but for now suffice it to say, that the part you hated? Yeah I fucking loved that bit (probably.) 

The soundtrack is still great and familiar, although it felt a little underused in places. and the sheer amount of story packed into this film was easily enough for at least one of those two-part finales that studios seem so keen on doing these days, the criticisms I do have are that because of this, some characters are a little underutilized and feel like they get lost in the shuffle. But it all culminates in one of the best climaxes in the franchise and an epilogue that leaves me very excited for Episode IX and also for Rian Johnson's upcoming trilogy.

Speaking of...is it too late to get Rian Johnson to direct Episode IX? No disrespect to JJ Abrams but I just don't see him living up to this. 

actually y'know what? I will do a ranking list for Star Wars, after all, I was gonna talk spoilers after this review, but I'll do it there instead.

In Summary The Last Jedi is a familiar, yet refreshingly different take on the universe, I love it for the same reasons some of you will hate it, and I think you should definitely see this one without being spoiled if you can. 

Game Review: Middle-Earth: Shadow of War

I write this shortly after having lost a save file of the game in question to a power-cut that lasted less than a second, but regardless, corrupted and deleted my save file, however, it was at around 80% completion with the main story finished, so I think I've got all I need, in mourning as I am for the countless hours I lost which I now have nothing to show for, which is probably why I'm writing this review to be honest, anyway. 

Video games generally tend to get on with other types of media rather like a hornet's nest would typically get on with a sensitive body part. Most people know it's a bad idea, but some mad bastard's always willing to try anyway because many people are excited to see the attempt and will pay money for the experience, and so the cycle continues. (see, most movies based on video games...or don't) However, J.R.R Tolkien's universe has, in my opinion, been a consistent exception to that rule. I count The Two Towers on PS2 as one of my favourite games on the console. War in the North on the PS3, while not exactly counted among my favourites, was still a solid game, especially if you had a friend to play it on co-op with.

I was skeptical a few years ago when Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor was released, as it wasn't adapting any story, but going with an interquel ala Star Wars: The Force Unleashed. and yeah, the story was generic and uninteresting at best, with some interesting bits of lore strewn in, but the real meat of the game was in the Nemesis system. I could tell you stories of rivalries I had with specific Uruks, but I couldn't remember a lot of the actual story. but it was enough fun that I was really looking forward to the sequel.

So, how does the sequel compare?

Shadow of War strikes me as a game somewhat at odds with itself. the various interlocking storylines are all presented with equal weight, but only one of them has a satisfying ending, (I assume you're supposed to take the rest as substories,) and even that ending feels tacked on, as does the entirety of Act IV immediately thereafter. Which seems to exist solely to gate off a "true ending" behind tedious repetitive gameplay to make the microtransactions for premium currency with which to buy shortcuts more appealing.

Well since I've mentioned them now, let's get this out of the way. Yes, it is possible to achieve 100% completion without spending a penny on premium currency, I got to about 80% before my save file was lost. it's not even that unrealistic a goal depending on how tolerant of grinding and repetitive quests you are. That, however, is the thing, it is a bloody hell of a grind if you want the "true ending" which I'm told is basically just a cutscene anyway so there's no pressure on you to do it unless you really want that platinum trophy.  As I said the entire Shadow wars act feels tacked on and unnecessary, you could take the boss fight in Mordor before then as the ending to the game and it would make exactly as much sense. But this game costs a lot of money up-front, and to not play all of it seems like a huge waste. 

As it happens, personally, I don't mind a game being grind-heavy now and then, it gives my hands and eyes something to do while I'm listening to podcasts and stuff. Although if I need other outside stimuli to keep from getting bored, then that means it gets boring. the game definitely feels lesser because of the fourth act, which, is essentially tedious filler, at the end of which is a cutscene which is already on Youtube anyway.

Before that point, it's not terribly grind-heavy, with that said I was taking my time with it and doing the odd online vendetta quest when I felt like it, which are quite engaging until you've done them enough. So maybe I just levelled enough anyway. But if I can do that without getting bored, then the gameplay has got to be good right?

So let's talk gameplay, if you liked Shadow of Mordor then pretty much everything from that is back in this one, there are a few tweaks here and there though. For example, you now have to choose between ability upgrades. You can unlock them all, but for each ability, you can only have one upgrade active at a time. This means you will have to choose whether draining an enemy will restore Elf-Shot or dominate them, as it can no longer do both at once. I'm not particularly upset by this as you can switch at any time and I always felt end-game Talion was pretty Overpowered anyway, and this does feel a bit more balanced to me. 

The combat is the same as last time, the old faithful "Arkham with swords" combat that flows seemlessly between attacks and counters and mercifully doesn't lock you into an animation as other games might. (though sometimes the game does leave me questioning the extent to which your Wraith companion can interact with the physical world, it's pretty vague and inconsistent there.)

The map is huge this time around with four major maps to explore, each with their own orc army for you to contend with. 

the nemesis system is back in full-force, with a few differences from Shadow of Mordor, one that I noticed, in particular, is that there is no longer any way to guarantee the death of an enemy captain, or survival for that matter. in Mordor I eventually figured out that the way to make sure a captain didn't come back would be to take off their head, otherwise they'd be back, regardless of the method of execution or the impossibility of their survival, whether you burned them to a crisp, impaled them through the skull or shot them through the eye-socket, if he has a head, he ain't dead.

This time around though, even decapitation is no guarantee, I distinctly recall an Olog captain tracking me down and explicitly reminding me that when last we met I took his head off. saying something vague about Talion's "grave-walker magic" rubbing off on him and being immortal or something, an interesting concept, which was never brought up again because he stayed dead the second time. I also saw returns from an orc I had cut clean in half, simply stating that his "boys" had put him back together. I then proceeded to cut an arm and a leg off this same captain, impale him through the back, and then I stood there watching him lie motionless for a minute or two just for good measure, and he still came back later!

Conversely, the first captain to come back for more, Flogg the Tyrant of Cirith Ungol who later became Flogg Lockjaw because his face was disfigured in one of our many fights, died from me scratching him on the chest with my sword, and then just never came back, I was expecting him to, I wandered around Cirith Ungol waiting for an ambush that never came.

From that, you can take it that I enjoy the nemesis system quite a bit, more so in fact that the main story, but I should talk a bit more about that. The game seems simultaneously obsessed with, and dismissive of the lore of Middle-Earth. there are countless collectibles to build on the world scattered throughout the game. Well, not countless, around 200 if that maybe? in the form of Gondorian artifacts, giving you little bits of exposition on Gondorian society, Elvish words to open doors for a set of legendary gear, and Shelob memories. 

and that's where I come to the game being also dismissive of the lore when it feels like it, first of all, there are two "one" rings now. But we all knew that was coming when it was mentioned at the end of the last one. and also Shelob, who, as you've probably heard, can turn into a woman in this game. Apparently female characters in video games simply are not allowed to be ugly even if one is a giant fucking spider! 

In case you were wondering, no, unless I am very much mistaken, nowhere in Tolkien's work is it suggested that Shelob was capable of shape-shifting, as far as I understand, before manifesting in Middle-Earth she chose the form of a spider and was stuck with it. but whatever, she's fine. Having played the game I can say, she's utilised more as a plot device than a central character. She gives the player a grand total of four missions I think, and apart from a cutscene or two and the collectible memories you don't really hear from her again after that. 

Graphically the game is pretty much on the same level of Shadow of Mordor, or at least I didn't notice much of an upgrade, the best of the visuals comes from the scenery, which is great. I don't wish to spoil but you get to explore Minas Morgul (that city where the evil beam shot into the sky in Return of the King) as well as Cirith Ungol (Shelob-town) and a few more locations I don't remember seeing in the films. Minas Tirith and Osgiliath are also on the map but I don't think you can go there, at least I never managed it, I presume they're saving that for the DLC. 

All-in-all Middle-Earth: Shadow of War is a really fun game, I put a lot of hours into it and never got bored, even if the grinding for resources necessitated by the presence of loot boxes put a damper on it. That the game managed to be so good in spite of that though makes me wonder what could have been without it. I don't normally give numerical scores to things because my opinion is normally a little less decisive than that but this is a definite 8/10 the two points lost are for flimsy story-structure and unnecessary grinding filler. I'd still fully recommend the game, I'll probably be playing it again to try and get that progress back.

8/10: 

a great time, you should play it.