Matthew D. Ryan's Blog, page 20

Required Reading for the Fantasy Buff

I’m going to do something different today and just give a list of books I think should be required reading for a fantasy buff or a fantasy author. I’ll also give a few brief reasons why I believe such books belong on the list.

 

J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit (children’s) and The Lord of the Rings (adult) – come on, it’s Tolkien.
C.S. Lewis’ The Chronicles of Narnia (children’s) – another famous author. Christian literature that provides an example of how a religion or specific philosophy can influence a piece of literature.
Kenneth Grahame’s The Wind in the Willows (children’s) – talking animals. Haven’t read it in a while, but it’s a classic.
4.      Richard Adams’ Watership Down (children’s) – talking animals (rabbits) perfected. The first real book I ever read.
Patricia A. McKillip’s The Riddlemaster of Hed – another childhood favorite. Not sure why I put this on the list, though.
Margaret Weiss and Tracey Hickman’s Dragonlance Chronicles – classic AD&D style adventure featuring a bad guy everyone loves (Raistlin Majere).
Robert Jordan’s (and Brandon Sanderson’s) Wheel of Time – okay, only the first book should be required because the series is too long to demand of anyone, but it provides a good example of a giant series that I personally found rewarding.
Brandon Sanderson’s Mistborn Series – provides insights on how to make a distinctive magic system.

 

Well, that’s eight. I think they are all deserving. Anyone have any they would like to add?

Movie Review: Thor: The Darkworld (2013) (4 Stars)

Chris Hemsworth reprises his role as Thor in Thor: The Dark World. Although I never reviewed it for this blog (the blog didn’t exist at the time), I saw the original Thor movie when it came out; it was okay, maybe three and half stars or so. I definitely think this second movie is an improvement over the first. It stars Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman (as Jane Foster), Anthony Hopkins (as Odin), and Tom Hiddleston (as Loki). Loki has become one of my favorite characters of the franchise. Tom Hiddleston does a remarkable job at bringing the character to life.

 

Anyway, the story begins with a sort-of prologue that sets the stage. Millenia ago, the Dark Elves existed in a reality before this universe. Then, this universe came into being (how, the movie doesn’t tell us). The Dark Elves, being creatures of darkness, hated the light and this universe it had produced, so their king, Malekith, decided to destroy it with the power of the aether, a dark force of boundless energy. Fortunately, for us, the Asgardians, led by Odin’s father, stopped it. They stole the aether from the Dark Elves and, after destroying the Dark Elf army, buried it where it would hopefully never be found. Fast forward to the modern day and planet Earth. Jane Foster, in the midst of studying a scientific anomaly, is pulled into the place where the Aether resides. Of course, it winds up being absorbed by her body. Now that it has been released, somewhere in far off space, Malekith is revived and he renews his plot to destroy the universe with the remnants of his Dark Elf army. All he needs for ultimate victory is the Aether, which is contained in Jane Foster’s body. Once again, Thor must rise to the challenge and confront unspeakable evil to save us all from doom.

 

Strengths: I’ve already mentioned that I love Loki. Tom Hiddleston does a wonderful job. Chris Hemsworth did a great job, too. As did Anthony Hopkins and Natalie Portman. The story was engaging and interesting. The special effects were superb. There were a number of well-timed humorous lines. Weaknesses: this is a minor one, but I feel inclined to point  it out: they kind of took a shot at America in one so-called “clever line” which I didn’t appreciate, although I’m sure some people will. The ending was a bit confusing. I’m still not sure how Thor defeated Malekith, or rather, why things he did worked the way they did. Finally, and this is the most important weakness, I really don’t like mixing the science fiction with the Norse mythology. I mean, really, a sci-fi adventure where Dark Elves are the bad guys? I hear elf, dark or otherwise, and I think Tolkien or D&D or whatever. Also, the science in the science fiction was bad and confusing. I still don’t know what the Nine Realms are. Are they nine planets? Nine solar systems? Nine Galaxies? You get a view of them at the end and they look like planets … so in the entire universe, there are only nine planets that are habitable? Add to that all the gravimetric and other scientific-sounding gobblydegook, and it gets an F in basic science. But it’s based on a Marvel Comic, so I suppose you really can’t hold that last bit against them much.

 

Anyway, I’ll give Thor: The Darkworld four stars out of five.

Book Review: King of Thorns (Mark Lawrence)

King of Thorns by Mark Lawrence continues telling the story of Jorg Ancrath that the book Prince of Thorns began. You can read my review of Prince of Thorns here. Anyway, King of Thorns starts some four years later. Jorg is now eighteen and is king of his captured kingdom, Renar. As the story begins, his castle is about to be besieged by an army led by the Prince of Arrow, a well-regarded, “well-meaning” conqueror who wishes to bring order and stability to the hundred kingdoms. He’s brought an overwhelming force to accomplish the task: 20,000 troops to defeat Jorg’s 1000 behind castle walls.

 

The entire book consists of the story of that day and a series of flashbacks to important events that occurred in Jorg’s life that impinge on the present … most of these happening when he was fourteen (after he’d won himself that castle from his uncle). The central theme of the book revolves around a magical box that Jorg keeps at his side at all times. Part of him wants to open the box, and part of him knows he shouldn’t. That box holds a piece of his memories—a group of memories so horrific and painful he had a wizard take them from him and place them in the box, because he, Jorg Ancrath, could not deal with the horror of them. What memory does the box contain? What secret is so terrible it threatens to destroy a young man like Jorg Ancrath, a young man who has seen and committed more atrocities than most men experience in their entire lives? The only way to truly answer those questions is for Jorg to open the box and regain his memories. But, as it was at his order that the memories were incarcerated in the first place, is that really a wise decision? Once done, it cannot be undone. Much like Pandora …

 

Strengths: the writing was excellent, the story creative, and the plot engaging. I normally prefer to have “good” characters to root for, but Jorg is fun in his own way and is starting to grow on me. Besides, it looks like Mr. Lawrence is using Jorg’s basically evil side to show growth and change in the character as he matures into someone a little less cruel and ruthless. We’ll see where it goes. Weaknesses: other than the evil nature of Jorg (which I mentioned in my previous review), the only weakness I can think of is the large number of Brothers in Jorg’s company. I really can’t keep any of them (or very few of them) straight. It’s too confusing.

 

Anyway, I’ll give Mark Lawrence’s King of Thorns four and a half stars out of five.

Old Movie Review: Pacific Rim (2013)

Pacific Rim is the latest film directed by Guillermo Del Toro who is known for other fantastical movies like Pan’s Labyrinth and the Hellboy series. Pacific Rim is a sci-fi story set in the not-too-distant future. It tells the story of a time when the Earth is being besieged by gargantuan creatures from another dimension called Kaijus. Of the actors involved in the film, the only one I recognized was Ron Perlman who had a minor, supporting role. All the others were new faces to me.

 

Anyway, the story begins with an introductory preamble that describes the first assault on planet Earth by the first Kaiju. One lone creature destroys three cities and nearly exhausts the U.S. military. But it was dead and defeated, and life moved on. Then, six months later, another appeared. And another after that. Realizing that more drastic measures must be taken, the countries of the globe unite to build a series of weapons to use against the Kaijus: massive robots called Jaegers that stand as tall as buildings and required but two people to pilot through a neural link. The main character, Raleigh Beckett, played by Charlie Hunnam, is one of the first Jaeger pilots. He is teamed up with his brother, Yancy, and they are sent out to destroy an impending Kaiju. In the ensuing battle, Raleigh’s brother is killed, leaving him devastated and barely able to destroy the horrid creature. Once the battle is over, he leaves the service and begins a life in construction. Someone has devised a new method of defense: an enormous coastal wall will be built to protect humanity from the Kaijus in the sea. Then, his old commander, Stacker Pentecost (played by Idris Elba), comes looking for him with an opportunity to get back in the action. Can Raleigh overcome the trauma of his brother’s death and once again rise to the occasion? You’ll have to watch the movie to find out.

 

Strengths: the acting was good, the storyline was engaging, and the special effects were superb. I recall no logical loopholes nor do I remember any other kind of glaring flaw. It was a good smash-em-up movie. Basically, if you like watching humongous creatures getting in fistfights in the middle of cities, you’ll like this movie because there was plenty of that. But there was also a decent storyline about handling personal difficulties and overcoming trauma. Weaknesses: I can think of no huge weaknesses, although there were one or two quotes that came direct from Star Wars. That said, it was an enjoyable movie, just not fantastic. It lacked something. Maybe I’m just outgrowing smash-em-up movies.

 

Overall, I’ll give Pacific Rim three and a half stars out of five.

Taking a Break

In the interest of preserving my sanity, I’ve decided to take a brief break from blogging. I’m taking the next week, maybe even two, off. So, check back on November 11th or 15th or so. I will get back to it, but at the moment, I’m suffering from burnout.

Fantasy Literature: World Building: On Scope (part II)

Dealing with multiple worlds for world building is usually more the purview of science fiction than it is the purview of fantasy literature. It is almost a given in any science fiction novel that several different planets will be visited. Each one of these worlds must be built to make the novel an enjoyable read. It is rarer to deal with more than one planet in fantasy literature, unless it is a kind of split-off parallel world existing in the same space as ours as a kind of fairy land. Usually, in fantasy literature, there is no need for multiple worlds (planets) in different locations in space, particularly since transportation between such worlds becomes problematic. One must normally rely on magic to get from planet A to planet B. And once you do that, it is difficult to see how planet B will be understood as anything but a split-off parallel world much like the aforementioned fairy land. As a result of that, fantasy world building is usually limited to one planet and multiple dimensions, because in an odd sort of way, different dimensions actually seem closer to us than different planets—at least from the point of view of fantasy literature.

 

Still, for every rule there is an exception. A previous commenter on this blog pointed out to me that Brandon Sanderson is setting all his novels in the same universe. Each world he writes about exists in the same dimension. He even has a character, a story-teller/bard/what-have-you by the name of Hoid who shows up in each one of his books. I don’t know where he’s going with that, but it is kind of cool. Particularly since he deals with religious themes, with gods ruling humans, sometimes dying, and evil always on the rise. I suspect Hoid is an agent of, or perhaps even the avatar of, the one Supreme Being of the whole cosmos. A kind of god’s God. But that is Brandon Sanderson, and he’s the first writer I’ve heard of to connect his novels in such a way. And it is worth pointing out that as far as each individual fantasy novel is concerned (so far), it takes place only on the world in which it is set. So far, none of his The Way of Kings characters intermix with his Mistborn characters or anything like that. At least, not yet. Although Sanderson’s idea connects all his work into a single inter-related body, it can only take him so far. He might write well and fast, but the universe is an awfully big place with billions of galaxies, let alone who knows how many planets. Although his idea is original, clever, and genuinely really cool, he can only carry it through so far. There is just too much out there to encapsulate his vision fully. Maybe he’ll write about a dozen or two dozen worlds in his career. Two dozen worlds does not a universe make. The scope is just too vast to be manageable. Still, Sanderson is a brilliant writer and he may pull it off in ways I can’t foresee.

 

If you take anything away from this post, it should be the importance of scope. World building, be it a single world, multiple dimensions, or even an entire universe, is always a limited project. The real world parallels to it are always far more vast and complicated than the writer’s ultimate accomplishment. As I said, there’s just too much there to fully encapsulate. The trick is to give enough to give an impression of completeness without overwhelming the reader.

Fantasy Literature: World Building: On Scope (part I)

Well, it’s time for another post on world building in fantasy literature. The concern today is scope. What are you going to build? A fantasy world? A fantasy universe? Or an entire fantasy multiverse?

 

Back in the day, when I played AD&D a lot more, Gary Gygax introduced me to that neat little word: “multiverse.” Apparently, the word was coined by William James in 1895, so it’s not Gygax’s personal baby. Still, that one word sums up what I want to talk about today. We all know what the universe is: look into space and it’s that thing that goes on and on. But are there other universes? Or planes of reality? Is there a Hell or a Heaven? Or anything in between? The present science of real-life Earth can only verify the existence of the one universe we experience. But in a fantasy world, one in which you have embarked on a quest of world building, there may very well be a vast and complicated multiverse consisting of many different planes of reality. The different planes can intrude in the story in a variety of ways. One, they can be just present as a kind of back drop for the story, referenced only in myths and conversation. That is how Hell and Heaven and Limbo (or their respective parallels) and similar such things are normally dealt with throughout much of a typical work in fantasy literature. Occasionally, though, characters may actually physically find their way into said planes. At such a point, world building for said places must commence.

 

But this raises a question: How much world building should the author do? Or better yet: How much world building can an author do? Let’s begin with a fantasy world. They are usually (though not always) conceived to be parallels of our own; i.e. some kind of planet spinning away in space, but a planet on which magic works. It is the author’s responsibility to develop that world and make it an intriguing place for the reader. It should never be said that world building a single fantasy world is somehow too limiting. If you recognize that an entire world parallels in scope all that there is on our world, you will understand that a single world can easily produce enough material to keep authors and readers fascinated for years to come. Just consider the huge variety that exists on planet Earth. There are seven continents. There are hundreds of nations and a plethora of cultures. The environment is rich in detail and full of surprises. If you add in the hallmark characteristics of fantasy literature—a magic system, strange and wonderful creatures, and what-have-you—you will have created a milieu of astounding proportions. Something that can (and has) provided material for innumerable writers involved with world building. One world is plenty. By itself, Earth proves it. As do such fantasy worlds created by gaming companies like say, The Forgotten Realms or Krynn. Such places have provided endless hours of entertainment and have never grown stale.

 

However, just because there is no need to include another world or plane, doesn’t mean the author doing the world building shouldn’t include such. But those developments are for my next post on the subject.

Infinity Blade: Redemption (Brandon Sanderson)

Infinity Blade: Redemption is the second Infinity Blade novella written by Brandon Sanderson. From what I can tell, the novellas are being written in tandem with the computer apps, of which there are three: Infinity Blade I, Infinity Blade II, and Infinity Blade III. I have Infinity Blade I for my Apple Ipad. I’ve played it a few times, but have never completed it. It’s an interesting approach: having interspersed novellas to cover background story material between the release of each version of the app. It does have one drawback, though: I, as a reader, do not get a full story or even succession of stories out it. The first Infinity Blade novella covers material in between apps I and II. This second novella covers material between apps II and III. That was kind of annoying going in, because I had become somewhat invested in the characters and to start reading without having played app II was somewhat disorienting. Still, it was a fun novella. Unfortunately, the series will be completed by app III. So, the cliffhanger ending that I got at the end of this novella will have to suffice for me as I have no intention of playing the app.

 

Anyway, this novella continues the story of Siris and Isa in their quest to defeat the evil God-King and free the people of his land. That was the original quest, anyway, but by this stage in the game things have changed a bit: Siris finds himself imprisoned with the God King. They are locked in a perpetual struggle in a chamber neither one can escape; they take turns (not by agreement though) killing each other, until finally, Isa manages to set them free. Now, Siris finds his quest transformed. It was the famous Worker of Secrets whom Siris sought out as a potential ally against the God-King who imprisoned the two Deathless, leaving them to their hellish struggle against one another. Now, two years later, Siris must seek him out again, but not as ally, instead as foe. This novella details that quest, a quest that may find him making alliance with that Deathless he was once sworn to destroy: the God-King himself.

 

Strengths: It was written by Brandon Sanderson, so it’s got to be good! Well, it is. The characters were well fleshed out and believable. The pacing was great. The twists were good. And there was more backstory dropped in to explain how the world in question (apparently Earth) came to be the way it was. There were also hints dropped to tie the series to the ancient Egyptian gods. All in all it was a blast. Weaknesses: well, you are missing a good chunk of story if you are not playing the Infinity Blade apps (like me). It’s kind of annoying actually. And it certainly detracted from my enjoyment. If I had known that going in, I probably would never have even read the first novella. I would have skipped it: I’m not much into computer games, anymore.

 

Anyway, I’ll give Brandon Sanderson’s Infinity Blade: Redemption four and a half stars out of five if you are playing the games; otherwise, that is too much of a handicap and it warrants only three and a half stars out of five.

Horror Literature versus Fantasy Literature

I’ve been on something of a horror literature kick lately. Well, to be more specific, I’ve been on something of a H.P. Lovecraft kick lately. I have an entire book of his short stories, including two novellas. The book is simply called: The Dream Cycle of H.P. Lovecraft: Dreams of Terror and Death. At this moment, I have but one more short story to read, and then I’ll be done. Of course, I’m going to go back and reread some of the short stories and review them for this blog; I’ve already started that process, but I’m going to complete it. Anyway, for much of my life, the bulk of my literary diet has been fantasy. One of the first series of books I ever read were The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. Prior to that, I think was Watership Down which I think I read for the first time when I was about eight. I’ve been reading ever since. And most of it has been fantasy.

 

As a result of my fantasy diet, I’ve been exposed to all sorts of horrors in literature: undead warriors, dark magic, death, chaos, blood … you name it. I’ve seen it all. Because of that, special effects don’t faze me one bit. A witch casting a spell … is that supposed to frighten me? Come on! I’ve seen it a million times before. The first time I read Bram Stoker’s Dracula, I read it as a fantasy novel. I thought it was okay, but pretty tame by modern standards. Last year, I read it again for about the fifth time and I walked away knowing I had just read a masterpiece. You can read that review here. I don’t get frightened by horror stories (I’ve read too much fantasy for that), but I do appreciate them more, now—as my review of Dracula will attest to. Fantasy stories are full of adventure and action. As a result of such, sometimes horrible things happen, or at the very least, are expected to happen should the hero fail. The horror of such events is usually derivative of the events themselves. In a horror story, the horror is more ambient and all-pervading. There is an appropriate mood and tone that carries the sinister appeal of the story. There is also a greater probability of death on the hero’s part in a horror story. And if done well, that can be a plus.

 

It is worth pointing out, that by horror I mean horror literature not film. Rarely does a horror film live up to something even approaching the magnificence of the novel, Dracula. Most of the time, horror movies are just blood baths. I wouldn’t even want to put them in the same category. Then again, my experience with horror is fairly limited. I’ve read Dracula and a few Lovecraft stories; but I liked the same thing about both: that ever-present atmosphere of dread and doom. And that, I think, is the distinguishing feature that separates Horror from Fantasy.

Old Movie Review: Cool Air (2006) (H. P. Lovecraft)

Cool Air is a film based on the short story of the same name written by H.P. Lovecraft. I have never read the short story so I can’t say for sure what liberties were taken with the script; although it seems likely that it did take a number, if for no other reason than that the film is set in modern times.

 

The film tells the story of Charlie Baxter, a struggling screenwriter, who takes up residence in an apartment in a large townhouse near Malibu. From the outset, it is apparent that he is surrounded by strange characters. The quirky landlady and her autistic daughter run the house; the man across the hall from him is strangely reticent as a matter of course; and the mysterious doctor living upstairs remains sequestered in her room pretty much all the time. The combined cast give a strangely compelling aura of mystery to the setting. Struggling from writer’s block, Charlie seeks inspiration from the strangeness of his own surroundings. He begins a tale in which a “mad doctor” plays a prominent role. Then, he suffers a heart attack and, crawling upstairs, is saved by the doctor’s timely intervention. When he comes to, however, he must grapple with the unwitting truth of the mad doctor in real life as the inhabitants of the house begin to reveal their secrets one by one.

 

There is a lot of narration in this film. I found that a refreshing change from the usual cinematic experience. This was one-half movie, one-half Lovecraft reading. And the voice it was done in, a low, tired, and worn voice, fit the film perfectly.

 

Strengths: overall the movie was good. The narration, as noted above, added to the mystery and intrigue. There were no logical flaws, and no loose ends. The acting was decent, and the setting … strangely innocuous. It was a great juxtaposition for the macabre events it told. Weaknesses: well, it was a low-budget film, so the special effects were somewhat lacking. They were okay, just not up to the full-blown Hollywood standard. But special effects alone don’t make a movie. This one easily made up for it with a good tale to tell and a number of clever touches. I particularly liked the bit at the end where the movie claimed it was the work of Charlie Baxter and his return to screen writing. Anyway, other than being limited in special effects, I have no other serious complaints regarding the film.

 

Ultimately, I will give four stars out of five to Cool Air.