The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (Book, 1954)

Introduction:
Growing up, one of the best movies I had ever watched was Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. I had always wanted to read the original book, but it never really happened until last year (As of the time of writing), and wow. Let me tell you, I was incredibly surprised by the story. Here, ladies and gentlemen, is my review of The Fellowship of the Ring, the first book in the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

How it Settings:
Lord of the Rings is very beautiful sounding. The settings are described, mostly, in great detail, specially in the earlier parts of the story, while the main characters are in the Shire. As the story progresses, there's less local narrative, but there's plenty of 'over there stands a mountain, and next to it a river' which are irrelevant to the story it tells. Even though the book is incredibly detailed, sometimes details are lost in the sea of words, leading to feelings of places being disjointed, which happened to me far too often. I found myself rereading some lines, other times finding myself lost in the places he described, as some connections between everything are either minimal, or drowned in large paragraphs. I understand that writing changes throughout the years, but even for old stories, the narrative related directly to the settings and locations seem to be uneven and sometimes just unbalanced, as places like the Shire have directions such as 'beyond the river', but other places completely lack details.

How it Characters:
When it comes to characters, they are two dimensional for the most part, there to serve an archetype. This is not to say that some characters, Aragorn and Sam primarily, are very deep in their execution, but Frodo, for example, lacks much in the way of personality, resembling more a silent protagonist for the reader to 'replace' in their minds. Not only that, but the narrative sometimes introduces characters name-first, not explaining who that character is, or where they came from or anything. Beyond that, there's a particular character included that just screams 'Deus Ex Machina', existing to save the characters from certain events that occurred. This character never appears again after the few chapters he helps the main characters in, and is only mentioned once (Not explained) later on in the book.

How it Plot:
The plot is a classic case of 'magical item that must be taken to a distant destination and along the way the heroes traverse various locations each with a final confrontation of sorts'. This is not a bad thing, mind you, it's just a pretty generic story, accompanied by a few cliches that this story might've been the original birther of them. There's not a lot to say about the plot beyond that, mind you, as the story is pretty straightforward and doesn't deviate from the previously stated.

Verdict and Conclusion:

Okay, so, even though there's a lot of not-necessarily-good stuff about the story, this is a solid 3 and a half out of 5, because what's there is amazing. When Tolkien hits the spot, there's no one that can match him, but that doesn't mean there aren't flaws to this story. Those Flaws don't make this a bad story in any way, as it's still one of the best stories I've read, but I genuinely couldn't help but point out the mistakes. Anyone who reads the story can see the positives, however, as they're massive. And there you have it, a solid right above the middle for Tolkien's first Lord of the Rings book.

Cube (Movie, 1997)

Introduction:
Despite what anyone might think, I'm not super into horror films. Oftentimes, horror films take me out of the horror because of stupid characters, confusing locations, or just downright not interesting villains. Enter Cube, a 1997 Canadian Horror/Sci-Fi film that delivers something very unique, and very engaging. The setting is a maze filled in identical cube-shaped rooms riddled with traps. A simple setting, but one the film pulls off properly, and the actors sell their characters very convincingly. But, how well does the film does it job? Here we go.

How it Looks:
The thing about the Cube is that, well, there's really not a lot of diversity when it comes to the setting. The behind-the-scenes guys reused the same cube, changing the panels on the wall to have different colors, and that's about it. The traps look good, even after all these years, and the moment there's a break in the not-so-monotonous cube also looks good. And, that's about it, really. Everything looks good, mostly because there's very little to look at, when it comes to things that aren't the actors.

How it Sounds:
Just like in the 'How it Looks' category, the sounds are simple and minimalist, leading to a simple judgement: It sounds great, in it's simplicity. The actors sometimes seem to have different quality in the mikes they use, but this might just be a glitch on my computer. The mechanical whirls and the grumbling of the cube sound deep and satisfying. All in all, it sounds great.

How it Stories:
This is where the review goes down, but just a bit. The movie relies on exposition between the characters to guide the story, in order to make sure the setting doesn't change, and that the movie's focus doesn't deviate. It's not necessarily bad to explains things via characters, but the exposition and character interactions are a bit convoluted in the manner that it is shown, mostly because of the fact that there's just no narration or external explanation, sort of like a show-don't-tell. Despite it being a Horror film, it spends far too much time talking math, which might be a turn-off for some people. I personally liked the story, though the change-ups for the final scenes felt forced and out of nowhere, specially since the movie tries it's best to not bog itself down with the tedious parts of the characters' journey, but this makes it hard to keep track of how long the characters have been stuck in the Cube, which is counterproductive when the characters start behaving a bit more irritable and crazy. I don't blame this on how it stories, but on the limitations of the medium, as a book or a TV Series might have been arguably better suited to tell this story in a more convincing fashion.

Verdict and Conclusion:
At the end of the day, Cube is a hidden gem of a movie that should be watched by any fan of Sci-Fi or Horror. It does feel clunky when it comes to it's story-telling, and how some of the characters rationalize certain things, but that's a flaw most horror films carry with them- A staple of the genre, if you will. However, the movie gets 4 stars out of 5, losing that one star for the exposition of the characters which, though a necessity, it still could've been shuffled around to be a bit more logical, or better constructed. I'll always suggest this movie for people to watch, though.

The Mist (Movie, 2007)

The Mist (2007)

Introduction:
The Mist is a horror movie based on a Stephen King novel of the same name, and as it's expected of Stephen King, this story really does a good job of being a Stephen King movie. Not only that, but with an awesome cast composed of the best underrated actors in the industry, this movie has everything going for it. But, is it worth watching? Read on to find out, or skip to the very end for my verdict. Also, beware spoilers down below. I'll try to avoid them, but hey, this is an eleven year old movie, so you've been warned.

How it Looks:
At first glance, this doesn't seem like a very good movie. The way it opens up, it really doesn't seem very interesting. But once the story starts going, this movie takes off beautifully. The titular mist rolls in beautifully, creating the most eerie scenario, something along the lines of Silent Hill, but done better. And once what's inside the mist is revealed... Well, let's just say the movie sold it perfectly. As a horror movie, the (SPOILERS) monsters inside the mist look amazing: realistic to an extreme, but extremely alien, as well. The tentacles couldn't look more realistic, the insects and spider monsters gave me the creeps (Even though I love bugs), and the gigantic monster at the end, with his upper body being half-covered by mist, it just did a fantastic job at showing it off without really showing off. Props to the people that made the visual for this movie, they did a phenomenal job that stands the test of time. Eleven years, and this movie still looks better than even some stuff that came out this year!

How it Sounds:
In the manner of sounds, there's two categories: Sound Effects, and actual music. The music in this movie, if there even is any, is not really impressive. No piece stuck out to me, to the point that I don't have any memory of there even being music. That said, the ambiance and the sound effects were top notch, to say the least. Every monster and every bite felt like it had life in it and weight behind it, the bullets that were fired sounded heavy and deadly, and every silent moment really gave off an incredibly creepy vibe, like something could be lurking just around the corner. The sound department really did a fantastic job of letting you know it's there, except when it's not. No Hanz Zimmers iconic music here, but that might just be for the benefit of the movie.

How it Stories:
The story of The Mist is very simple, like most Stephen King novels are. It follows a (Very good) cast as they struggle through the scenario set before them, in this case, being surrounded by monster-infested Mist. The plot is paper thin, the atheistic perspective that all Stephen King novels have is there, and the character motivations feels absent and plot-driven at times, making the story the definite low point of the movie. Characters will go from one end of the spectrum to another without really any indication to what the point of it was, there's a few 'plot lines' that are left either unanswered or simply became irrelevant, and there's a bunch of characters that could have been completely removed without affecting the story in the slightest (Specially in the first half of the movie). Though most of the cast was amazing, it felt wasted on this story, except for three characters whose stories were more fleshed out, but even then, the way they do certain things could've been shifted around to make more sense, such as the killing of a character being uncharacteristic within the context that was given to us. The only real shocker in the story, as well as the moment that really made this movie iconic, was the ending, which I won't spoil. But, the plot ends beautifully, almost melancholy, touching on a possibility that is never explored, and really letting the main character's actor shine through. I get goosebumps just from thinking about it. This final scene is the real reason to see this movie, as it's one of the best final scenes of all time (And that's saying something.)

Verdict and Conclusion:
The Mist is a movie that stands the test of time, but not because of it's plot. Paper-thin characters and equally thin plot line is hidden behind terrifying set pieces that chill you to the bone, and that's exactly what this movie wants you to feel. It's strengths lie within it's antagonists, like the best horror movies out there: Gritty, deadly, and completely alien. This movie's lack of overt jump-scares, it's reliance on the monsters' terror to truly scare the viewer, and it's desire to flesh out only two of their characters works for the movie, but it's badly contrasted by it's plot and the rest of the cast, which I've already mentioned before. In the end, I'll always recommend this movie to anyone who likes a solid, midway horror film that relies more on it's monster than on it's plot, and I'll DEFINITELY recommend it to any up-and-coming writer, for that amazing, unpredictable ending. Seriously, this movie's ending makes even the characters worth enduring. It gets a solid 4 out of 5 stars from me, with a big, old 'NOPE' to the Monsters, specially the Spiders.

Borderlands (Video Game, 2009)

Introduction:
Borderlands is arguably one of the less popular First Person Shooters out there, created by a company that hasn't really been very popular, per se. Once you get into the game, though, it's a pretty interesting FPS/RPG mixer with some equally interesting characters and plot, with a party-focused gaming system that I've never actually tried. Published in 2009, Borderlands became an icon in the gaming industry, spawning the perfect sequel, and an less-than-surprising pre-sequel. For this review, I'll be talking about the core game, not counting DLC or expansions, and I won't be reviewing the multiplayer aspects of the game, as I've never played the game with other people. Either way, let's get into the Review.

How it Looks:
Borderlands graphics are stylish, and though they've started to grow old, they were pretty gorgeous for their time. The characters are each as unique as the next, including the main characters, and the powers and abilities of each of them. The guns look good, as they usually do, but after a few guns collected, you start to notice that, though there's a few guns that stand out, the majority of them are going to end up being repetitive, with particular guns using the same parts over and over, with very slight variations to their look. Just like the guns, the world has very few places that look genuinely different, with the majority of it being colored in a drab brown. Though this is understandable, as the story takes place in a desert world, it does get boring and repetitive after a while, specially since you get to spend a long time in Fyrestone. The game doesn't really do anything super revolutionary with it's graphics, but it does look good, and the enemy characters do, if you like seeing the same character reused over-and-over again with next to no alterations beyond name.

How it Sounds:
Borderlands sounds good, but it's not all that great. No song, bar the intro song, stood out to me as interesting, even all the way to the final battle, which has... I honestly don't remember. Either way, the sound design isn't particularly stand-out-ish, as anything beyond the game's intro song is pretty standard. The monsters and enemies sound alright, the general sounds for the guns and grenades are alright. Honestly? This game sounds alright. That's about it.

How it Plays:
Borderland's strength is it's gameplay, and that's about it. It mixes an RPG loot-collecting system with a hectic First-Person Shooter play style that, unfortunately, it doesn't take advantage of. The RPG systems are too straightforward and alter the characters in too simple a way to seem like you're genuinely progressing. Often times, you pick up the same weapon repeatedly, in spite of the game's apparent randomly generated loot. You'll most probably end up with a boss-specific weapon for the majority of the game, or until the next boss drops a weapon. The FPS aspects are unforgiving at times, as enemies take far too little damage in comparison to the damage they deliver. I suspect that the multiplayer aspects of the game makes it better, but I can't say for sure. As an additional note, the bosses in the game range from incredibly easy (Where you can hide behind cover and fire at them from away) to impossibly hard (Bosses that can move through the same terrain as you, leading to your demise.) The final boss of the game is specially disappointing, as I defeated it far too easily.

How it Stories:
Unfortunately, Borderlands is not very exciting when it comes to story. It's a search quest after another, intertwined with go kill x amount of people or monsters in x place until the next marker comes along. This is a pattern that flies throughout the entire game, leading up to a final confrontation that honestly, leaves a lot to be desired. The reason I mention quests, is because that's the way Borderlands delivers it's story, and if you're not paying attention, you'll probably miss a lot of the story. And, leading up to the final boss, you'll be so out of tune from the quests, you'll probably end up forgetting what that giant, one-eyed creature is. Or, you know, what you were supposed to be doing that entire time, story wise. Borderland's story fails to deliver, and as a result, whatever positive the rest of the game might have, the story fails to bring it all together appropriately. In the end, it could have done so much more, but failed to do so.

Verdict and Conclusion:

Don't let all my negative points deceive you, as the game is genuinely fun, in short bursts.  There's little point to picking a specific character, beyond what their Action Skills do. Regardless, Borderlands is a very ambitious take on the FPS genre, specially as it attempted to mix RPG elements with it's FPS elements, creating a formula that would become incredibly popular a long time later. Needless to say, Borderlands gets a solid three stars from me, for it's interesting mechanics, but it loses those two additional stars mostly due to it's inability to optimize those same elements to it's advantage.