RIP Christopher Lee

Hello Chaos fanatics! I know I've been away a bit, but its my busy season at work and it has been virtually non-stop. I even haven't been able to paint as much either... However, I am putting the finishing touches on a few things and I'll be showing them soon (by middle of next week).

I was at work this morning when I saw the news on Facebook about the passing of legendary actor Christopher Lee. Geez- it's been a rough year for that, first Nimoy, now Lee. However, neither could have many complaints- both lived long and full lives and accomplished so much as actors. Both have certainly made indelible contributions to geekdom (or nerddom or whatever you want to call it).

Unlike Nimoy, who was typecast as Spock, Lee played a variety of roles; while most were of the villainous variety, each role was quite different. So he could go from playing a snarling Dracula to a suave James Bond villain to a Sith Lord, to a mad scientist, and, finally, a white wizard with ease- and while his distinctive voice was the same, his demeanor and acting differed greatly.

Just as an example, look at the last two huge characters he played- Saruman and Darth Tyranus. On paper, both are similar. They are both traitors to their orders, they are both "masters" of their arts, they have joined with a "dark lord", they plan to plunge their respective worlds into war- yes, they have many such similarities. Any actor playing both roles might be tempted to play them similarly, since they are indeed rather close. Lee, on the other hand, played both quite differently:

Lee's Saruman had a semi-crazed look in his eyes; it was almost as if communicating with Sauron was warping him completely-  stealing his very sanity. In Fellowship, after consulting the Palantir, Saruman sits, clutching a book- half crazed, half terrified- communing with Sauron is breaking him. The Orc comes in and then Saruman says, almost fearfully, "We have work to do". In Two Towers, when he sends his Urak Hai to war, his speech is practically genocidal, and quite unhinged ("To WAAAAAAAARRRR!!"). When his end comes in Return of the King, he is wild, wantonly attacking Gandalf, his face a mix of fear, hate, and yes, self-pity. His abuse of Wormtounge has consequences that he never would have dreamed of- stabbed in the back by his stooge. The shock on Lee's face is priceless. The cur has bit the hand of his master.

Meanwhile, his portrayal of Darth Tyranus is very different. In Attack of the Clones, this former Jedi turned Sith is a master of being calm, cool, and collected. His every utterance is of an even tenor, designed to sow confusion as to his true purpose (his whole scene with Obi Wan- what incredible misdirection). Tyranus is in command, no matter the situation, and is seemingly always a few steps ahead of the hapless Jedi. His utter disdain for Obi Wan and Anakin borders on humorous contempt ("Surely you can do better"). His battle with Yoda in AOTC is legendary, with Lee being the coldly evil Sith while Yoda is a whirling dervish of justice. But again, Tyranus plays Yoda, manipulating his emotions (knowing he'll save the Jedi over finishing Tyranus). However, in Revenge of the Sith, the tables are turned, and it was Tyranus who was being played. Lee's face says it all in that final scene- he looks at Palpatine, realizing the betrayal while also, you get the impression that he is also thinking that he should have seen it coming. And his refusal to beg for his life just adds to the character (the story goes that Lucas wanted Tyranus to beg, and Lee said his character wouldn't do that).

Lee was terrific in nearly everything he did, whether its The Wicker Man or Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. He brought a weight (gravitas) to just about every role, and even bad movies were made better by his presence. I certainly haven't seen all his films (well over 200). I know I'll be drawn back to LOTR and SW over the next few days, but maybe I'll try to see one that I haven't seen yet.

Until next time...

A Nerd Confessional

Hey there everybody! Old Man Chaos is here with another posting from the Eye of Terror. This one is, I think, a bit unusual, but it is something I'd like to do more frequently (when I have the time, that is). So, away we go...

I am, as my wife says, a Nerd. There. I said it. I am a very large nerd. I have been involved with many nerd activities. Warhammer 40K? That makes me Nerd #1, for sure. But, there's more. I love video games. I have been playing video games since the Atari 2600. I was playing video games before they were "cool" (which did not happen till Playstation One in 1995- before that, people played games, but they weren't widespread or a BIG part of culture till then). I owned so many game systems (NES, SNES, Genesis, Sega CD, Turbografix, and much much more).

Does anyone recognize this one?

As I kid, I saw my world through video games. I loved Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Final Fantasy, Sonic, Castlevania, Mega Man, etc. I was skilled at video games (I had no skills in traditional sports), and they transported me to so many places. Sad, but nerd true, I have video game music on my ipod. To this day, I play games.

Nostalgia for the 8 and 16 bit days aside, I believe the pinnacle for gaming was the XBox 360 and Wii days of the mid 2000s. Those were a great few years to be a gamer- the games that came out then were simply amazing- Mass Effect, Fallout, Bioshock, Mario Galaxy, Twilight Princess, House of the Dead Overkill... plus xbox arcade and virtual console... wow. I must admit, my gaming has slowed down since I got married, but I do own a Wii U (Mario Kart is just fantastic multi-player fun), and I would like to get an XBox One at some point.

I was also, for a very long time, a comic book addict (I think 40K supplanted it, ultimately)- I got into comics in 1989 when I saw the movie Batman- which inspired me to buy a few Batman books, including the trade of A Death in the Family. I started with Bats, but I went to Spiderman, X-Men, and others. I was going comic book shopping once a week, buying tons of issues.

I was there for the comic book explosion and ultimate implosion in the 90s. I had like a billion X-Force 1 bagged, of course. I was there for Death of Superman, and more importantly for me, Knightfall (still a fav). I was there for Morrison's incredible (and unsurpassed) JLA run (that was in college for me by that point). On the Marvel side, my favs were Age of Apocalypse and Infinity Gauntlet. But, I was also there for the messes, like the Clone Saga and Onslaught.

I stopped in 1999/2000 for the most part, as I simply couldn't keep up with all the crossovers and "events" anymore. Ugh. That killed it for me. I briefly returned in 2005 (Thanks to Bats again, as Batman Begins made me go back), just in time for Grant Morrison start his Batman run (which I never finished), and I picked up Civil War. After that, too many damn crossovers reminded me why I stopped, and so I quit cold turkey. Now, I once in a while buy a trade or something. I recently got the Infinity Gauntlet Omnibus- what a pleasure to read. Of course, I use the Internet to monitor major comic developments (Thor is a woman? Puh-lease- Publicity stunt.), but I don't buy anymore. I do still love comic movies, of course.

Speaking of, my third "Nerd love" is movies. I think film is a powerful medium if used correctly. I don't see every movie. Many would bore me or just be unappealing. The movies that I love are sci-fi. Well-done horror* films. Comic movies. Tarantino (he's his own mixed up genre). My love of movies come from my parents, who loved watching movies in their down time.

Growing up when I did (1980s), my parents exposed me to "classics". Star Wars (saw Jedi in the theater). Star Trek (Trek III being the first Trek I saw in theaters). Alien. The Godfather (my Italian father's Bible). The Black Hole. Jaws. Young Frankenstein. My mother took me to see Ghostbusters and Monster Squad. I also saw older sci-fi, like Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1950s), War of the Worlds (1950s), Godzilla (the FIRST one, thank you). My mother loved classic horror- I saw Dracula with Legosi, Frankenstein, Invisible Man, all those Universals.

My passion for good movies has continued, almost undiminished. On my own, I "found" other films. For a while I was into seriously into horror- but again, the classics- Texas Chainsaw, Evil Dead, Halloween 1-3 (yes, 3), and Romero's Dead trilogy. I was always into sci-fi, of course- I didn't get to Terminator until I was in high school though. I liked Jurassic Park but didn't love it for some reason. Independence Day- now that was a movie! I also got into action films, like Die Hard. In college, I saw a ton of history-related films- Patton, Dr. Strangelove, The Great Dictator, Saving Private Ryan, etc. In the 2000s, we had a great run- Lord of the Rings (which were a revelation), Nolan's Batman (similarly, a revolution in comic films), solid sci-fi like Children of Men and the War of the Worlds remake.

I have seen many movies with my wife- we do date nights by going out to dinner and a movie. Sometimes we see what she wants (Twilight. Yes- love makes you do strange things). Sometimes its what I want (Watchmen). My wife loves the Marvel films (she loved GotG), so that's great news for me. We see Oscar bait in the winter (like American Hustle, which was excellent). Most recently, we saw American Sniper- a fantastic anti-war film masquerading as a gung-ho war film (idiots on BOTH sides are having knee-jerk reactions without really "seeing" the movie). We are totally looking forward to Avengers 2 this summer, and the new Star Wars, naturally.

So- what was this article, anyways? An exercise in nostalgia? Hoping to just get readers thinking about their own nerd experiences? Putting readers to sleep? Maybe all of the above. This site, Corners of Chaos, will always be Warhammer 40K focused, but I would like to do other things. Perhaps reviews of some of my favorite movies or classic comic stories. So, this was my first step- and I hope that I will be able to do more on this blog... Or just go back to 40K, as my next project beckons to me... Harlequins are certainly tempting me...

Until Next Time...

Movie Review: The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies

Hey there Chaos fans and fanatics! We here at the Eye of Terror hope that you all had a great holiday and that you got plenty of Chaos-goodies in your stockings or under your tree or whatever. I know I sure did- my wonderful (and understanding) wife got me the Sector Imperialis battleboard! Wow! This thing is huge and very nicely detailed. I'm so excited that I have already started to paint them! My wife is the best (or an enabler, depends on how one views the plastic crack habit that is 40K). In addition to that, I have been working on several projects, some of which I will show on this site later this week.

At any rate, my wife and I saw Hobbit 3 just over a week ago, so I decided I'd do a small-ish review. So, without further ado:

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

As my long time readers may remember, I love the original Lord of the Rings movies. Each of those films are both personal and epic, filled with action, emotion, and character. These three movies elevated "fantasy" films to an art form. The LoTR trilogy is without peer. I suppose, one day, I should review them on this site--- if only I had the time!

As my long time readers will also remember, I have been less than satisfied with The Hobbit films. I thought that Unexpected Journey was just awful (see review HERE). Total lack of characterization, tension, respect, filled with stupid CGI battle scenes- yikes. Though it had some good points, UJ was a letdown in nearly every respect. I have very rarely emerged from a movie so completely disappointed. A year later, Desolation of Smaug hit theaters (see my review HERE). While still not as good as LoTR, it was light years ahead of UJ- it felt much closer to the feel of LoTR, and Smaug himself was a fantastic creation, a worthy addition to the entire Middle Earth Saga. The movie had a bigger theme, had some good character beats, and felt like a more fulfilling experience. I left the theater excited for the 3rd part. Would Five Armies manage to keep up the momentum built up by
DoS?

Well, the answer is sadly mixed. Five Armies starts out promisingly enough- Smaug takes his frustration out on Laketown, with only Bard standing in his way. It is a fantastic scene, and Bard come across as both brave and desperate to stop the murderous dragon. The confrontation makes for a thrilling start to the film, but the movie never builds on it, unfortunately. Nothing that follows is quite as exciting or well done as the incineration of Laketown, which hurts the remaining two hours of film time. The remaining film is entertaining, but never rises to such heights as DoS or the rest of LoTR.

While the movie moves much faster than UJ, it has similar problems. Bilbo is pretty much a side character, which seems to defeat the entire purpose of the series. Martin Freedman does the best he can, but the focus is placed on others, and thus Peter Jackson himself seems to forget it was the 4 Hobbits which made LoTR, not the action scenes or special effects. Gandalf is similarly relegated to the sidelines, though his rescue from the Necromancer is thrilling (the only part that comes close to the battle with Smaug)- its great to see the White Council in action, and Jackson is smart enough to barely hint at Saruman's eventual fall rather than telegraphing it (sadly, Jackson poorly telegraphs everything else that will lead to LoTR).

The weakness is again the Dwarves. None have been developed well at all. Balin (my favorite from the other two, acting as the conscience of Thorin) barely gets any time. Killi is still in love with Tauriel (absurdly, in my opinion, and the resolution to that tries to be dramatic but just feels unearned). The other Dwarves are still just bodies. They add nothing to the proceedings. Ironically, a new Dwarf King, Dain, introduced in the midst of the "Battle", has more verve and character than the Dwarves we have been with since the start, and that must tell you something.

The only Dwarf developed at all is Thorin, and here is where the film truly goes awry. DoS built up the theme of greed as a corrupting influence. Now that Thorin has reclaimed his kingdom, what will he do next? The answer is that he suddenly becomes a greedy, selfish, and paranoid nutjob. And why? No, its not a moral failing- its only "Dragon-Sickness". Ugh. So suddenly Thorin isn't responsible for his own actions, and he just as suddenly recovers from his "Dragon-Sickness" just in time to save the day. Cartoonish and convenient, exactly the opposite of his development in UJ and DoS. Thus, when his heroic moment and sacrifice comes, it again feels odd and unearned. I think it would have been better to tone down his "Dragon-sickness" and instead build up his fears of losing his Kingdom again- walking a fine line between legitimate concern and selfishness.

Legolas and Tauriel do fine here, and Legolas' arc seems to be what I thought earlier- he awakens to the needs of all Middle Earth, not just his kingdom and his father. Thranduil fares worse though. His selfishness hits new heights (which is fine), but toward the end he suddenly reverses himself and becomes nice, even sending Legolas on a mission to find Aragorn (talk about telegraphing- not only did I groan, but it makes no plot or character sense to have Thranduil change so suddenly and without good enough reason).

Bard and the people of Laketown get the shaft as well. After defeating the dragon, Bard becomes the leader of Laketown's survivors. Luke Evans does well: he's a family man put in a tough situation. Where can his people go? How will they survive? Don't the Dwarves owe all the people some help? Bard becomes a reluctant warrior, willing to fight to keep his people safe. He is a welcome addition to the story, even if there are shades of Aragorn in his character. Sadly, once the "Battle" is finished, the movie suddenly forgets Bard and his people- what happens to them now? Do the Dwarves, Elves, and Men make an accord? Who knows? Once the "Battle" ends, Jackson decides to run back to the Shire as quickly as possible, seemingly afraid of having too many endings...

Which brings me to the end. Once Azog is killed the battle comes to a sudden end (almost inexplicably abrupt, the more I think of it). The movie swiftly concludes with Gandalf and Bilbo going back to the Shire. Their relationship, which was so warm in LoTR, is virtually non-existent here. Again, Jackson telegraphs the influence of the ring too much, and Gandalf seems VERY suspicious. Huh? Then why the hell does he wait DECADES to do something about it? The worst of it is, though, the film ends with LoTR Bilbo (Ian Holm) greeting Gandalf just before the birthday party in Fellowship. But because Gandalf and Bilbo had little to no relationship develop in the Hobbit trilogy, this ending just feels hollow and reminds you that LoTR are such better films.

Despite my many complaints, there are certainly things to recommend the film. The movie moves quickly, with very little drag, which makes it better than UJ immediately. The actors do their best, even the sidelined Martin Freedman (seriously, it is not his fault). The action pieces are fairly well done. While there is a ton of CGI, you expect it in the larger battles, and it works, with the action not being cartoonish (as it was in UJ)- plus the "Battle" has some stakes, which helps. Watching a Dwarf army go to war is interesting and unexpected in its execution- and I loved it when Daine's dwarves formed a phalanx against the charging Orcs! The single combat between Thorin and Azog is good (though it reminded me of Batman Begins. Seriously- watch and you'll see the resemblance, trust me).

Overall, "Battle" was a fun time at the theater, but as part of the Middle Earth saga, I expect more than that. Way more. So, since I liked it more than Unexpected Journey but less than Desolation of Smaug, I'll give it 2 1/2 Marks of Chaos out of 4.

So, The Hobbit trilogy is now closed, and it was a decidedly mixed bag, at best. It's too bad, because I love LoTR so much that I'd love to spend more time in Middle Earth. Unfortunately, The Hobbit trilogy ultimately forgot so much of what made LoTR so good: the big and the small, the grandiose and the subtle, the personal and the historic- those in combinations made LoTR shine, and the Hobbit lacked so much of it.

Ah well. I think I'll fire up the LoTR blu rays to make me feel better. Now THERE'S a saga well told...

"I wish none of this had happened".

"So do all who see such times, but that is not for them to decide. All we can decide is what to do with the time that is given to us". 

Until next time!

  

Movie Review: The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

Hey there, my fellow followers of the Ruinous Powers. Old Man Chaos is back with a (somewhat brief) review of The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug, which I shall just call Hobbit DOS just for short). Shall we begin?

OK. Let me be honest. I was very disappointed with Hobbit 1. As a guy who loved Lord of The Rings trilogy, seeing them as the pinnacle of what film-making could accomplish in terms of story, characterization, and special effects, it is understandable that my expectations were quite high for the adaptation of The Hobbit. Now, I knew that there was no way it could live up to LOTR (how could it, it's a single story, lighter in tone), but I was unprepared for just how bad Hobbit UJ turned out to be. I hated it. I have never felt so dejected about a movie (even, believe it or not, Episode I)- I left the theater not wanting to see it again (I saw each of the LOTR movies multiple times in the theater). My original review is HERE - it captures my disappointment and bitterness quite well. A few weeks ago, they released Hobbit UJ Extended Edition, and I decided to pick it up and give it another try. It was telling that the extended cut is only like 10 minutes more footage. At any rate, upon watching it, my opinion remained largely unchanged. My complaints about Hobbit UJ remained, despite my giving it a second chance. At this point, I felt little desire to see Hobbit DOS.


However, last week some reviews began to appear on line. Although they varied in their enthusiasm, the consensus seemed to be that Hobbit DOS was a great improvement over the first. Now, I was torn. I wanted this movie to be good. Perhaps Hobbit UJ was just a fluke. Maybe it was just "ring-rust" that Jackson and company had to work through. Or... was Hobbit DOS destined to fail? Were the reviewers just so elated that Hobbit DOS wasn't the train-wreck that the first was, that they let their positive hyperbole get the better of them? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me...

Bilbo wasn't too happy with the first movie either

Luckily, that was not the case. Hobbit DOS was pretty darn good. Now, it at no point reached the stately, graceful power of the LOTR movies. However, it was a really good, fun, action packed, and at times contemplative film. Gone were the inane attempts at humor, the slap-stick, the fart/bleach jokes, the "forced" moments that meandered and moved along at a snails pace. Instead, we have a  movie that has a mission, and pretty much sticks to it throughout. The characters- even a few of those 13 dwarves, are developed a bit more, while new characters add some much needed depth and contrast. The action is almost constant, with many deeds of daring do, and the stakes are getting higher. Finally, there is a theme emerging here, which I did not expect, which the dragon Smaug ties into perfectly- how greed destroys you from within.

Let's take a few things in turn. First, the action sequences are plainly better. In Hobbit UJ, the few action scenes there were simply were stupid. The fight in the Goblin kingdom was the height of it- no danger, no menace, with a compete disregard for the gritty semi-realism that made LOTR so powerful. In DOS, the action scenes are frantic, with injuries occurring and at all times there is a real threat. From the Mirkwood spiders to the barrel chase to the confrontation with Smaug, their journey is fraught with risk and danger. The action scenes (mostly) mean something to the plot, and characters change as a result of these perils. There's one or two bits that echo UJ, but those are few, and the rest more than makes up for those deficiencies. 

Now, about the characters. Bilbo certainly shines in the first part and the last part (admittedly he gets a little lost in the shuffle in the middle section). Bilbo is clearly becoming braver, more shrewd. He saves the dwarves single- handed in more than one instance. His confrontation with the Mirkwood spiders was a real highlight for me, and his "escape plan" in the barrels is amusing and cunning all at once. Then, at the end, his "confrontation" with Smaug is just wonderful (more on that later). However, Jackson carefully posits the question- is Bilbo getting braver, or is it the ring already manipulating him? A great moral shading here, and well handled.

Some of the dwarves are also given more to do. Thorin, of course, is a strong presence here, being brave but also facing impossible odds- it hangs heavily upon him. His decision to abandon an injured comrade is both sad but very believable. However, Jackson again adds some shading here- is Thorin doing right by his people, or is it "personal"? Does he want to restore his homeland for his people, or does he simply want to be king again, whatever the cost?

The new characters get plenty, and are indeed essential to the theme that Jackson seems to be working on here. The first is Thranduil, the king of the wood elves. His elf king is all but detached from the world, and this is due to an underlying selfishness- the troubles of the world are not for him to get involved in. He simply wants to carry on as he has been. His son, Legolas (back from LOTR in a big role, as it turns out) generally agrees with his father, but his views are tested by Tauriel (well-played by Evangeline Lilly) a female elf that realizes the need to help others and begs Legolas to look beyond to the rest of the world (thus, Legolas will have a transforming arc, which is quite interesting). Finally, there's the people of Laketown, notably Bard, an honest man who has a great doubt gnawing at him; and the greedy and corpulent "Master of Laketown", who decides to aid the dwarves for selfish reasons. All these new roles are preformed very well, adding some great new characters to Jackson's cinematic universe. Lee Pace in particular is great as Thranduil- selfish, uncaring, and short-sighted. He is a great contrast to the wise Elrond and the inspiring Galadriel and the actor plays him very well.

Now, let's get to the titular dragon and the theme of the movie (indeed- the whole Hobbit trilogy?). If it plays out as it looks to, Gandalf is aware that Sauron is trying to return (in the form of the mysterious Necromancer- who is realized by a brilliant special effect). Now, Gandalf goes to investigate this Necromancer- and his fears are realized. What is allowing Sauron to make his return? Greed and selfishness. At the end of DOS it hit me how many of the characters are motivated by greed or entirely selfish needs: Thurandril and (initially) Legolas, Thorin, the "Master of Laketown", the people of Laketown, and, of course, Smaug. These are contrasted by characters who act to help others, who want to aid those in need, including Bilbo, Balin, Tauriel, Bard, and of course, Gandalf (he sees farther than all the others, admittedly, but he is motivated to help all of Middle Earth).

This shot has more thematic importance than might be guessed at first glance

Greed and selfishness have driven the "free peoples of Middle Earth" apart. Insular, self-serving, and indifferent to the needs of others, most of the kingdoms of Middle Earth have put their heads in the sand, unwilling or unable to acknowledge the growing threats and work together to form a solution. This moral failing allows Sauron to begin working toward his return. If they peoples of Middle Earth are busy being suspicious and angry at one another, how can they possibly join hands to stop Sauron?

And, tying all this together is Smaug. Voiced (and played, via motion capture) with superb skill by Benedict Cumberbatch (he's still NOT Khan), Smaug is the brilliantly realized (both in technical and in character terms) epitome of the evil of greed- scary, fearsome, and neigh unstoppable. As a greedy dragon, Smaug wants all the gold he can get (why does he want/need it? Who knows? It makes no sense, which is exactly the problem with insatiable greed), thus he has driven out the dwarves of Erebor and has stayed with his gold for decades, never leaving the Lonely Mountain. He is powerful, vicious, slightly slothful, greedy, and very condescending while being supremely intelligent. He has all this great and terrible power, but all he wants is to guard his hoard.  Smaug is the ugly side of such greed and selfishness, his flames filled with hate and jealousy at those who would wrest his wealth from him, and Thorin has similar feelings- does Thorin want Smaug out to reclaim the kingdom for his people, or does he simply want the wealth and power of Erebor for himself?

As Sauron returns, Smaug would be a natural ally, one who would burn all of civilization just for more gold, while scaring the people of Middle Earth into submission, making Sauron's job easier. Thus, greed becomes a force for even greater evil. Each of the characters is going to have to make a choice- help others or let greed and self-interest have sway. As Bilbo says at the end of the movie- "What have we done?" fits the mood and theme of the film perfectly. I commend Jackson and co for expounding on this so well- after UJ I didn't think he had it in him. Luckily, I was wrong.

There are, of course, flaws in the film that certainly keep it from LOTR status. There's a bit too much going on at times, the screen is a bit too busy for its own good- and you can't get a good fix at what's happening. There is also a lot of padding, with some bits that simply could have been cut- I'm tired of the Orcs mindlessly chasing the Dwarves for the umpteenth time. I also felt that the dwarf battle with Smaug was a bit too much, as it was apparent they couldn't win and as the "battle" went longer the energy of the scene dissipated. Finally, since the Hobbit is such a smaller book, its insane that there are 3 almost 3 hour movies to come from that one book, and you can just feel how they are adding stuff just to fill that run time. There are still issues with having too many dwarves, and there's the occasional bit that just doesn't ring true. Could Tauriel really "love" a dwarf? I'd prefer to think that she is just fascinated by this outsider, rather than "in love", which smacks of studio demographic testing.

Overall, The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug is superior in every way to its predecessor. The action, the stakes, the characterization, and most importantly, a bigger theme are all well done. IF this had been the way The Hobbit: The Unexpected Journey had been handled, this doubt about the Hobbit trilogy would never have come to pass. The quality of DOS makes UJ all the more maddening- how did they make such a poor film, and follow it up by such a strong one. The best I can say about DOS is that I left the theater happy, and I may see it in theaters again. At the very least, I will be looking forward to seeing it on DVD, and I am hopeful now about the third Hobbit movie, concluding the trilogy. If it is as good as this one, I'll be thrilled. I guess two out of three ain't bad. I give it 3 out of 4 Marks of Chaos

Until Next Time!!

The Grand Unvieling: The Heldrake

Hey there Chaos fanatics! How's your holiday week going? Was Santa good to you? Did you get some 40K goodies in your stocking? I sure did- I got 2 boxes of the new Raptors, Khorne Bezerkers, a Warpsmith, and a Dark Apostle. The new Raptors are fantastic models. I love the new jump packs, and the models can be posed very dynamically. I also love the Wapsmith- the pictures did not do this model justice at all- lots of detail that just didn't come through in the photos.

I did indeed see The Hobbit. I will be writing my review shortly. I must say that I had very mixed feelings about it. There were parts that were amazing- parts that made me remember why I fell in love with LotR, and filled me with hope about The Hobbit, and there were parts when I wanted to just yell at the screen and say "Is this the same Peter Jackson who made the brilliant LotR movie?". Mixed feelings indeed... not something I wanted with The Hobbit at all, unfortunately. I'll review that movie soon.

So- I have just finished my Heldrake. Would you like to take a look? Hehe! I thought you might after all...

Since I already had a Hell Talon painted in my Death Guard scheme, so I decided to make the Heldrake a part of my new Khorne Bezerker army. Initially, I had been ambivalent about the Heldrake model when they first showed it in White Dwarf. Indeed, I still don't know how I would go about "Nurglefying" it. However, the dragon look ended up being a perfect fit with my Khorne Bezerkers.

The model goes together really, really easily. Like a dream, as a matter of fact. Despite the sheer size and vast amount of detail, the model is actually a good kit to build. The directions are really clear and straightforward- even newcomers could tackle it if they carefully follow the pictures/numbers. Once assembled, it is hard to not to be impressed with the model, as looking at it in person is way better than any magazine shot. The wings can be posed in several ways, making the Heldrake look very dynamic. The detail work is extraordinary, with tons of Chaos symbols, baroque rims, a tail that is both metal and flesh, and a dragon head that looks vicious.

The only downside, to me at least, is that conversions would be difficult, to say the least. There seems to be little room for massive conversions, which I am used to as a Chaos player. The only difference is the 2 guns (minor at best). Converting is more difficult as you have so much detail that conversions won't look (or be placed) right. A small quibble, but for a longtime Chaos modeler its a bit of a bigger issue. I did add to icons and a skull chain from the Chaos vehicle sprue.

Painting-wise, I did it in my typical World Eaters color scheme- a deep, dark red with plenty of brass trim-work. I also used what I did with the Maulerfiend- I used blues to represent daemon-warp energy inside the metal shell. This ties the two big beasts together in a further way. Looking at both models, I really like the synergy between the two. I know that I was not a fan of the models when they first appeared in the pages of White Dwarf, but after assembling and painting them, I really do like them now. I do wish that you could convert them a bit more, but... I can see ways of doing it with a Maulerfiend (I have ideas for my next one), but less so with the Heldrake. However, that said, I do like these two now, and they are a worthy addition to the forces of Chaos. They also look nice with the new Helbrute (which will always be a Dreadnought to me).

The other day I happened to be in the city, and as often happens, I wandered by the Games Workshop store there. I decided to ask some of my rules questions to the guy there. He answered a lot of my questions about the Maulerfiend and flyers. After his suggestions, I realized I simply should not have charged a Wraithlord. He's just too damn powerful. If my Mauler went after the War Walkers or something, that would have been very effective. Oh well- live and learn. He also clarified that the Heldrake CAN do a vector strike over something he passes over and then fire his gun at a different unit. That makes the Heldrake even more effective than I initially thought. The GW guy was very helpful and patient with my questions, and I do appreciate it.

So, with these new models ready and new strategic ideas learned, I can't wait to play my next game. I don't know when that will be exactly, but I can't wait to try out my new models and ideas. With the Heldrake done, I'll be working on some of the other stuff- the Raptors are first up for me- I'm so excited for them! The models are absolutely first rate. I also have a Land Raider and Possessed to work on too. I'll let you know as I get done with 'em.

I hope you've enjoyed the pics. Until next time, my friends...