Originally posted at DeTocqueville.US: http://www.detocqueville.us/2010/08/why-the-electoral-college-works/

I suppose it should come as no surprise given their love of centralized control, that many liberals have been recently calling for a national, popular election for president rather than the current Electoral College system.  But this recent trend is a great example of how little people understand the Constitution as well as how little respect for it the Left really has.

Six states have already passed measures that would bypass the constitutionally-mandated Electoral College system.  Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick had this to say when he signed the measure into law earlier this week:

“I am proud to join other states in this effort to bring more voters and more states into the presidential campaign process,” the Democratic governor said in a statement. “Voter participation in all 50 states is critical to the strength of our democracy and the national popular vote movement will bring more voters into the fold and ensure that every vote counts.”

from http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/08/mass_governor_p.html

There are several fallacies in Gov. Patrick’s statement, but let’s first examine why the Electoral College exists before we get into those problems.

One of the key issues at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 was how to maintain the balance between the big-population states and the small-population states.  The Great Compromise was the solution to this in the Legislative branch.  This created a bicameral legislature composed of a House of Representatives that would be based on population (thus pleasing large states like Virginia and New York) and a Senate with two members appointed from each state regardless of size (thus pleasing small states like Georgia and Rhode Island).  It should be clear why such a compromise was necessary (as well as why the debate prior to this was so heated and took so long).  The large states didn’t want their citizens deprived of influence by being lumped together with the same representatives as a small state, but the small states didn’t want to join into a union that would roll over all of their concerns by majority rule.

This illustrates two of the foundation principles of the Constitution: majority rule with minority rights and federalism.  What many people may not understand is that the Electoral College also protects these very same principles by ensuring that the president was not chosen by a popular vote but by an Electoral College.  The members of the Electoral College are chosen by the state legislatures, and the numbers correspond to the number of Senators and Representatives each state has in Congress.

It should be pointed out that according to the Constitution:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

This means that technically, these states are well within their rights to decide to throw their electors to the national popular vote winner, but constitutionality does not mean this is a good thing to do.  So to illustrate that let’s look at the problems with Gov. Patrick’s statement.

First, he says that “this [is an] effort to bring more voters and more states into the presidential campaign process.”  This statement is historically inaccurate; the Electoral College system, in fact, ensures that presidential candidates cannot ignore small states.  I know some of us in large states (I’m in Texas) lament the amount of attention lavished on Iowa and New Hampshire during the presidential primary season.  However, a popular vote model (even with the facade of the Electoral College) would encourage candidates to ignore low-population states in favor of area of high-population density.  The effect of this would be the opposite of what Gov. Patrick states.

Second, he says “the national popular vote movement will bring more voters into the fold and ensure that every vote counts.”  Again, this is fallacious on several levels.  As stated above, the Electoral College system avoids marginalizing the concerns of small states (there’s that protection of minority rights), but still gives each state representation based on population with the number of electoral votes per state (there’s majority rule).  Thus, each vote still counts and areas of the country that aren’t California and New York are still considered, are still important.  The Electoral College system already does what Gov. Patrick claims a national system would do.

Finally, let’s look at the method by which these six states are trying to “bring more voters into the fold and ensure that every vote counts,” because it is here that the great lie to this national popular vote “movement” can be found.  These states have decided that they will pledge their electors to support the winner of the popular vote.  The effect of this is not to give each vote equal measure, but to actually disenfranchise voters in those states.  For example, if Candidate A receives more of the popular vote nationally, but Candidate B receives more of the popular vote in the state, Massachusetts’s electors would go not to the candidate that her voters chose (Candidate B) but to Candidate A.

How does disregarding the voters in your state “ensure that every vote counts”?!  This is ridiculous sophistry, and Gov. Patrick (as well as the other governors who signed similar measures) has done his fellow citizens a great disservice: he has taken their voice and shackled it to the national sentiment, regardless of how they vote.

If these states and others really wanted a popular-vote system that actually represented their voters, they would pledge their electors in a proportional model, not this sham.  Instead they show their true intentions by disenfranchising voters while claiming to do the opposite.  We already have a model that does what they claim to do; let’s let it work for us.

August 5, 2007
Review – A Princess of Mars
Filed under: Literature, SciFi/Fantasy — duane @ 7:26 am

Edgar Rice Burroughs is better known outside of scifi and fantasy circles as the creator of Tarzan, but like many writers during the pulp era, he wrote in several different genres. In scifi, his principle contribution has been Barsoom novels, which contributed to a genre of pulp fiction known as “sword and planet” stories. While these type of stories are often called science fiction, they have more in common with fantasy; what little science they contain is very fuzzy and is basically magic in scientific trappings.

Science, however, is not the focus of Barsoom novels. They are pure adventure, set in a Mars that is as fantastical as Middle Earth. Just as Middle Earth is a fantasy version of ancient Europe, so Barsoom is a fantasy version of Mars. That’s not a problem, however, if you approach the novels appropriately. If you’re expecting Kim Stanley Robinson, you will be disappointed. But if you want to experience a fast moving adventure story, then The Martian Tales Trilogy will not disappoint.

This particular volume that I’m reviewing contains the first three of Burrough’s Barsoom novels: A Princess of Mars (serialized in 1912 and published as a novel in 1917), The Gods of Mars (1913/1918), and The Warlord of Mars (1913-14/1919). It was published by Barnes & Noble, and runs about $9.95. This is perfect, because given how fast these novels read, I could move on to the next right after.

All three novels focus on John Carter and are told from his perspective. Burrough’s sets the first two novels up with introductions, explaining how he obtained the manuscripts from his Uncle Jack, as John Carter is known by his earthly family, and then begin with the first-person narration of Carter.

Burrough’s Carter is basically a demi-god of sorts. He is ageless, always appearing about 30 years of age, and while he claims Virginia as his home (where he is claimed as family by the Carter family), he has no memory of his childhood. A Princess of Mars begins after the American Civil War. Carter and a friend have gone to Arizona to make their fortune in gold. Carter’s friend ends up killed by Apaches, and Carter himself barely escapes into a cave. While in the cave, Carter is struck by paralysis, while the pursuing Apaches are scared away by some unknown fear. Carter, struggling to move, ends up out of his body (which remains in the cave). He goes outside, and focusing on the planet Mars, finds himself transported almost instantly through space to arrive on the Mars.
Carter’s advent on Mars, as well as his (lack of) backstory, begin to set up the fantastical elements of the novel. No explanation is ever really attempted (the cave may have had some mystical element, but this is unclear), and it’s not really the point anyway; the point is to get Carter to Mars as easily as possible.

Once upon Mars, called Barsoom by the native peoples, Carter almost immediately encounters his first Martians, the green men, who are ten-feet tall with four arms and tusks. It is here that Carter discovers that because of the lesser gravity of Mars, he is able to perform superhuman leaps and has superhuman strength. These abilities work to his advantage with the green men, and he is able to win a certain position among them; although he is a prisoner, his actions against two of the greens elevates him to the position of chieftain among this green-man tribe, the Tharks.

Carter’s time with the green men results in the formation of several important relationships that influence the rest of the novels. First, his feats of strength gain him the respect of Tars Tarkus, a powerful chieftain of the Tharks. He also comes into contact with Dejah Thoris, the incomparably beautiful princess of Helium. The people of Helium are more like Carter, but their skin is a light copper, and Burroughs refers to them as the red men of Mars. Carter is pretty much smitten with Dejah from the first, and his relationship with her becomes his primary motivation through the rest of the novels. Another relationship that Carter establishes while with the Tharks is that with Woola. Woola is a calot, basically a ten-legged creature with a large, frog-like mouth that contains three rows of teeth; the calot takes the place of the dog on Barsoom.

During this part of the novel, several of Carter’s character traits are revealed. Burroughs manages to avoid making Carter a totally perfect (and therefore boring) character. Although Carter is noble, he has devoted so much of his time to the warrior profession that he lacks an understanding of women. This lack of understanding threatens his burgeoning relationship with Dejah a few times, and it is only through conversation with Sola, a green woman who was charged with Carter’s care. We also see Carter’s more caring side with animals, especially with Whoola, whom he wins the undying affection of through his kind treatment; Carter also manages to tame the wild thoats (like eight-legged, ferocious horses) through kindness. Prior to Carter’s arrival, the Tharks were accustomed to using violence to get the thoats obedience, but Carter demonstrates that through kindness, perfect obedience can be won.

Once the basic relationships are established, the story moves on. Carter must first free Dejah and Sola from the Tharks, whose jeddak (supreme ruler) is consider horrible even by green-men standards, and then from Zodanga, a country of red-men who are rivals to Helium. Zodanga, taking advantage of the Heliumatic Navy’s search for Dejah, attacked Helium and comes close to victory before Carter is able to turn the tide against them. Carter is (naturally) successful, and he and Dejah are married. Carter remains on Barsoom for ten years, and Dejah becomes “pregnant” with their child (the people of Barsoom actually hatch from eggs). All would be wonderful, except that the atmosphere factory that keeps Mars alive stops working. Carter is able to save the day (using knowledge he learned earlier in the novel), but ends up back on Earth after collapsing from lack of air. He then spends the next ten years on Earth before being able to return to Barsoom at the beginning of the next novel, The Gods of Mars.

Like many adventure novels, A Princess of Mars has certain morals or themes that are often touched upon. Carter is an outsider to Barsoomian culture, and as such he doesn’t take for granted their traditions and customs. While among the Tharks, Carter is able to teach them that the softer virtues of love and kindness are not signs of weakness. This is especially true in his training of the thoats, and in his discovery of the relationship between Sola and Tars Tarkas. His extension of friendship to Tars Tarkas also has a profound impact upon the Thark, who realizes that the red men of Helium do not have to be his enemies; this racial theme is continued in even more detail in the next two novels. Carter inspires Tars Tarkas to unite many hordes of the green men, used to fighting amongst themselves, to attack Zodanga and thus save Helium. While this enlightenment only permanently extends to the Tharks (the other green hordes being concerned only with plunder), it is a great achievement, and Tars Tarkas becomes a friend of the red men of Helium.

These virtues that Carter preaches are not just words, however. Carter is primarily a man of action, and thus his ideals of friendship, nobility, love, and kindness are given strength because of his actions. It is by what he does that people come to believe that he says. I think that may be one of the strongest themes of A Princess of Mars, as well as the other two books: show what you believe by what you do. The moralizing may be a bit heavy handed at times, but given the rollicking good adventure story, that can be forgiven.
All in all, A Princess of Mars may not hold up well today as science fiction, but it continues to be a good fantasy-adventure story, so long as you don’t take it, or yourself, too seriously.

I’ll continue this review of The Martian Trilogy with Part II: The Gods of Mars, and Part III: The Warlord of Mars.

My wife, Jen, and I recently watched a couple of DiCaprio movies that we had gotten in from NetFlix. Normally I would post a review of each of these movies separately, but since I’m not sure that I’ll actually watch these again anytime soon, I thought I would just get some of my thoughts down about each movie.

The first one we watched was Catch Me if You Can, which is based on the real-life Frank Abegnale, Jr., a teenager-turned-con-artist and forger. I have actually seen the real episode of To Tell the Truth that the movie opens with, so it was kinda cool to see it briefly with DiCaprio. The story is even more amazing given that it’s based on a true on; sure, there were certain liberties that were taken with it, but the idea of a teenager successfully impersonating an airline pilot, a doctor, and a lawyer, all while forging checks was really interesting.

A key part of the movie is the relationship between Frank and his father; while this was made up for the movie, it was crucial from a story-telling perspective because it helps to set up the relationship between Frank and Hanratty. The conversations between them on Christmas keep Frank a teenager who really misses his family. Family is his primary motivation; he runs away because of the divorce of his parents, and he sticks with Hanratty at the end because of the death of his father.

I really enjoyed the movie and would highly recommend it for people that haven’t seen it yet.

Next we watched The Aviator, directed by Martin Scorcese. This was a big movie when it came out, but Jen and I didn’t get around to watching it until now. Now, I have to admit, it was probably a mistake to watch this movie right after something else. The Aviator is nothing if not very long, and after having sat through one movie, we should have either stuck with something light, or just called it a night. That said, I will say that while I enjoyed this movie about the legendary Howard Hughes (whom I had only seen protrayed in film in The Rocketeer), I did feel that it was a little too long in the middle. The early part of the movie, concentrating on Hughes’ Hell’s Angels, as well as his relationship with Katharine Hepburn (Cate Blanchett), was very interesting. The final parts of the film, which focused on Juan Trippe (Alec Baldwin) of Pan American Airlines attempts to keep TWA out of the international airline business and the flying of the Spruce Goose, was also very interesting. However, while I understand why it was so important, the middle part, focusing on Hughes’ OCD, often lost my interest. I may feel better about it if I watch it again, but that’s how I felt at the time.

Another minor quibble I had was about Cate Blanchett’s Katharine Hepburn. I have been a big Kate Hepburn fan since middle school, when I saw her in movies like Bringing Up Baby and The Philadelphia Story. Interestingly enough, these two movies span much of Hughes’ and Hepburn’s relationship as portrayed in the film, during her “Box Office Poison” days. I felt that in the early seens, she appeared older than she should have; one of the reasons I loved her in Bringing Up Baby is that she was so cute (not something you often hear about her). Blanchett is a wonderful actress, but there were times I felt that I was watching someone do a Katharine Hepburn impersonation; that could be just because it’s been done so many times before, I don’t know.

I do believe that The Aviator deserves all of the praise that it got at its release; for the most part, my problems with it are small ones, and probably easily explained. As I said before, I’ll probably have to watch it again.

That’s all for now; I’ve got several other reviews I need to get to, and I’ve decided to add even more to my plate by watching the remake of The Fog, and recording a movie later on called The Warrior. Oh, and Olivia D’Abo’s cute. That has nothing to do with anything, except that as I type this I’m watching the end of Conan the Destroyer, which while inferior to Conan the Barbarian, is still a movie I enjoy.

I have always had a love/hate relationship with the SciFi Channel. For a sf/fantasy fan like myself, the concept is awesome. Unfortunately, throughout the years the execution has often left a lot to be desired. While one would think I would watch the channel a lot, the truth is I don’t. I haven’t cared for most of their original series, and even those with a premise I liked (such as Eureka) I just haven’t been that compelled to watch. And for every step they take forward, they always take at least one back. For example, it’s cool that they’re showing the new Doctor Who, but then they also show ECW wrestling, which has, as far as I can tell, no connection to scifi, fantasy, or horror.

With that said, one of the things I love about the SciFi Channel is one that I should probably hate: original SciFi Channel movies. These come in two types: mediocre movies that are neither good nor bad, and therefore are incredibly boring (such as Dark Prince: The True Story of Dracula, which I was going to review after this one, but just wasn’t interesting enough), or they are so incredibly bad that, as the cliché goes, they circle back around to good again. Thus, every Saturday and Sunday (when I remember), I check out the program guide for potentially bad scifi, fantasy, or horror movies.

Bloodsuckers, also known as Vampire Wars: Battle for the Universe, is one of these movies. It was written and directed by Matthew Hastings, who, it turns out, also wrote and directed another gem of the scifi trash heap, Decoys (about a sorority of aliens that kill the frat boys they mate with). This movie has all the familiar trappings of a made-for-SciFi-channel movie: relatively unknown cast, cliché-ridden dialogue and story, mostly crappy CGI effects, and TV-style cinematography (ie. lots of closeups, very few long establishing shots) shot onto video. Because these are intended as DVD releases, they are often shot in standard widescreen format (1.85:1), as opposed to TV (1.33:1); of course, this is mostly wasted because so many of the shots are close-ups or two/three shots.

The concept of the movie could have been pretty cool. I love vampires, and I love outer space; putting the two together could have been a chocolate-in-my-peanut-putter moment. Of course, this is a SciFi Channel original, so it isn’t. The basic premise of the film, established through a voice-over narration by main character Damian (not a vampire, btw, despite the name) is that as humans expanded out into space, they discovered that most intelligent life in the universe is vampiric in nature. Like a lot of modern vampire movies, they make a big deal of the fact that these aren’t supernatural vampires, and all the garlic/holy water stuff is useless. When humans came into contact with these vampires, the Vampire Wars began. For the most part, these wars are over, but the vampires are still a menace. This is where Damian and his fellow crew members come in: they are part of Vampire Sanitation, or VSan, paramilitary vampire hunters under the control of the Company, which contracts with the government to provide this service.
Damian is new to this VSan crew, and as can be expected, has many cliche-ridden moments with his commanding office, Captain Churchill, and the other members of the crew:
·    Rosa – stereotypical tough lesbian chick
·    Roman – stereotypical tough redneck dude, friends with Rosa
·    Quintana – stereotypical good vampire chick, loves goth/dominatrix wear, antagonistic relationship to Rosa and Roman
That’s it. Five people on a spaceship with no back up are supposed to clean out vampires from various planets. I know that the Vampire Wars (despite the DVD box title) are supposed to be over, but you’d think they might at least hire a few more people to round out the crew, but that would have required a bigger budget (both in the movie and in real life).
Damian’s first mission with the VSan crew provides even more exposition about the vampires. Apparently there are many different types of vampires. This an interesting, if not entirely original idea. Despite the fact that there are supposed to be all these different types, we only ever see three of them: the Vorhees, the Leatherfaces, and some worm-type vampire that infects a host. You may notice the names of those first two vampire types: they’re allusions to Friday the 13th and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Other film allusions include a “final frontier” (Star Trek) reference in the opening narration, the Kenobi System (which contains a Tatooine-like planet), and a line from The Princess Bride.

The cliches continue throughout the first mission. As the crew search for the Vorhees, Churchill tells Damian never to hesitate when attacking vampires. In the ensuing battle, what does Damian do? He hesitates to stab a Vorhee through the heart and has to be saved by Churchill.

After the defeat of the Vorhees, the crew then gets a distress call from Fiona, a cute blonde trapped in a mining colony that has been attacked by another group of vampires. They easily rescue Fiona (wearing the Cardigan-of-the-Future!), but then encounter the Leatherfaces. Although dumber and more primitive than the Vorhees, they travel in very large packs. Churchill and Damian end up over their heads, and in one of the more confusingly inept and uninteresting scenes, Churchill ends up “killed” by the Leatherfaces. Predictably, Rosa and Roman blame Damian for Churchill’s loss, and give him a lot of attitude back on the ship, while Quintana sides with Damian. They escape from the planet with Fiona, and head off to another planet while they wait for orders.
This would be a good time to discuss one of the annoying little quirks of this film: the music. While I’m sure there must have been actual incidental music (although there may not have been; I can’t remember any), much of the music is generic radio stuff, bland pop and rock type stuff. The thing about it is that they all have lyrics to them. I don’t know if anyone else feels the same way, but I’m usually against music in movies having lyrics. On the one had, they tend to distract from the action going on, as I find myself trying to understand the lyrics. On the other hand, if they actually have anything to do with the film, they usually come off extremely cheesy or cliche. Two examples of this are, funnily enough, both by Queen: Flash Gordon and Highlander. Now, in Flash Gordon, Queen’s music is effective because it adds to the cheesiness of what is supposed to be an over-the-top cheese-fest. In Highlander, I find it less effective, although since it’s Queen, I tend to have a fondness for it; it works well for the opening, but I’m not as big a fan of it during the romantic scenes, when the music will swell toward a lyric.

In Bloodsuckers, however, the music seems to have been picked just for the general sound of it, not the lyrics; they’re usually not very understandable, and the music tends to just stop without warning, as if it wasn’t really written for this movie. Furthermore, it doesn’t ever add anything to the movie. Maybe if they had just gone for some pounding, instrumental rock for the action scenes, it would have been cool, although admittedly it wouldn’t have made the film any better overall.

Anyways, I bring the music up because while on the ship, Damian has what seems to have been intended to be a slightly romantic moment with Fiona while they’re on-route to the next planet. Sappy pop comes on as she climbs up a ladder, having shed her Cardigan-of-the-Future, revealing that she’s basically just a Space-College-Chick in a strappy midrift-bearing tank and very low-rise do-you-like-my-pelvis-bones cargo pants. This scene is very short, and despite the attempt of the music, fails to produce any romantic spark between the characters. She basically just thanks him for saving her, he asks her a few questions about the incident, in which you can tell he’s a little suspicious of our Space-College-Chick, but that’s it.

Once on the planet, they ditch Fiona, and Rosa and Roman attempt to enter a Company bar, only to find out that their ID cards don’t work. This part was a little confusing, because it appears that Damian essentially fired them to get them to continue to work for him. I didn’t really get this part. It’s slightly plausible; I guess the point is that without their Company standing, Rosa and Roman would have nowhere else to go, but I still think it’s a little convoluted. After convincing them to come back to work, the crew leave the planet, but almost immediately after another vampire attack forces them to return.
This attack introduces us to another species of vampire, and I’m guessing Hastings had seen or heard about Slither, because these vampires are not human-based, but worms that infect a host and spit venom. This reveals the worst CG in the film, as the worms are animated when they attack the crew. After most of the worms are destroyed, Quintana is able to get one to talk to her in what sounds like a mixture of French and Huttese (from Star Wars). This reveals part the big conspiracy of the film: there was a saboteur who lowered the planet’s defenses, in the same way that the defenses were lowered on the mining planet.

The saboteur should be obvious by now, if it wasn’t obvious before hand: it turns out that Cardigan-wearing Space-College-Girl is a terrorist. Just in case we missed the connection, the movie changes view-points for the first time, where it is reveals that Fiona is part of Cosmosis, a terrorist organization that believes that humans don’t have the right to drive the vampires from existence, that humans have exploited the planets they’ve colonized, and that we should try and work together with the vampires to learn more from one another; all your basic, generic liberal-environmentalist crap. In another “twist”, it turns out that Cosmosis is working with the Vorhees, led by (cue music): Michael Ironside – Vampire! Cosmosis has allied with them in order to show humans the error of their ways and blah-di-blah-di-blah.

The Vorhees plan is to lure Damian to a planet in the Kenobi System (the aforementioned Tatooine-like planet), to capture him, turn him into a vampire, and therefore learn human creativity and ingenuity, which is what defeated them in the Vampire Wars. Damian and crew totally fall for the bait, and on their way to the Kenobi System the crew has several bonding moments. Quintana takes it upon herself to get “Captain” Damian to “relax”; she enters his room all goth-dominatrix to the tune of more bad music. Now, when I saw this scene, I figured it could go two ways. Either Damian would suggest that she means sex, when she really doesn’t, or she really means sex; Hastings avoids the potentially comical-though-cliche misunderstanding, and just goes for the sex. After all, what is a direct-to-tv/DVD movie without a little sex? Actual sex between them is out of the question, however, because at climax Quintana would go into a bloodlust and kill Damian. Fortunately for Damian, Quintana is suggesting “tantric” (read “telepathic”) sex, and we’re “treated” to a pretty dumb scene in which Damian imagines himself having sex with his wife. This leads to a misunderstanding with Rosa, however, who hears this and thinks Quintana and Damian are getting it on; this is all patched up, however, once Damian explains.

Once at their destination, the Damian, Rosa, and Quintana head out, leaving Roman with the ship; as they leave, he quips, “Have fun storming the castle!” (ala The Princess Bride). Soon after, however, their ship is destroyed by a drone, and once again the music cues in. This time, the music is sad, and my wife Jen (who was only kinda paying attention) asked if someone died. When I said, “No,” she replied, “They should only play sad music if someone dies.”

Anyways, the whole crew ends up in the vampire lair, where they meet not only the vampires, but also the Cosmosis humans led by Fiona. The plan is revealed, Damian is separated from the group, and in one of the most anti-dramatic scenes, it is revealed that Churchill was not dead after all, but, “Dum dum dum!” – turned to a vampire, and the plan to lure Damian was all his idea. As the cliche’s continue, Damian and Churchill have to fight (but not before Fiona is killed by Michael Ironside – Vampire!), they fight, Fiona’s Cosmosis friends figure out that they really need to side with the good guys, and they lead the crew to rescue Damian. Of course the good guys when, but not before Michael Ironside – Vampire! is killed in another extremely anticlimatic moment. The crew, plus the only surviving member of Cosmosis, take one of the other ships, and we have the feel good speech by Damian that should end the movie.

However, the movie doesn’t quite end there. For some reason, Hastings thought, rather than end the movie here, we need to get Rosa into the whole “vampire telepathic sex” thing, and so we actually end the movie with the ship flying away, and Rosa going, “Oh, Quintana!” and role credits.

There were so many things wrong with Bloodsuckers, but as I mentioned before, this movie ended up being somewhat entertaining in how bad it was. It really could have been an okay movie. The basic idea of vampires-in-space was pretty cool, and although the CG effects on the worm vampires were pretty bad, the space ships looked alright (except for one brief scene). A movie like this has a couple of places it could go. It could have been a cool action flick, but there’s not that much fighting, and it’s all pretty bland. It could have been really campy and silly, but the actors are too wooden to pull that off. Even Michael Ironside – Vampire! couldn’t pull of the stilted dialogue. The movie just failed on so many levels.

I definitely can’t recommend ever putting more than $1 down on this movie. If you catch for free on SciFi and you’ve got the two hours to kill, then it’s okay. If it makes it to the dollar bin at Wal-Mart or a dollar store, then maybe go ahead. But definitely don’t rent it, and most definitely don’t buy it; I didn’t even waste harddrive space on it after I watched it.

I’ve talked about Harry Potter before, so it should be no secret that I’m a big fan. It’s also no secret that that last book in the series, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, was going to be a good book. We know by now that Rowling is a good writer, that she has created interesting characters, and that the story-line is compelling. And the majority of people already know if they’re interested in Harry Potter or not; while some people may have been waiting for the series to end before reading it, and others may pick it up later, a review of Deathly Hallows is not likely to inspire anyone to read it. I’m therefore just going to make a few comments about it, and save any potential spoilers for a larger article on the series as a whole.

First, Rowling continues to develop her characters throughout the book. One of the things that always impressed me about the books is that Harry Potter, the Boy Who Lived, is remarkable because he’s not perfect. A lot of Christians often objected to Harry Potter because they felt that Harry’s faults would end up encouraging kids to break the rules. I’ve always thought this is a short-sighted viewpoint. His rule-breaking does not come without consequences. Harry and his friends often make mistakes, some which come close to costing them their lives, and some which cost them the lives of friends. But that’s part of what makes him a more real character. The books wouldn’t be as strong as they are if Harry did not have his faults. The inspirational part is that Harry overcomes these to accomplish what he accomplishes.

Second, Rowling paces her book very realistically. Harry’s mission to find the Horcruxes goes anything but smoothly. Because Harry, Ron, and Hermione aren’t perfect, they struggle with indecision, fear, and frustration. They struggle, they argue, they get on each other’s nerves. They’re relationship with each other is realistic, because, as frustrating as it sometimes can be, they act like high-schoolers, rather than little adults.

And even the adults in the story also act realistically, with perhaps a little more wisdom, but still imperfectly. One of the greatest things about this book is what we learn about Dumbledore. Despite his death at the end of book 6, Dumbledore continues to be a major character, and much of the book revolves around his secrets. Harry, Ron, and Hermione continually struggle with the fact that Dumbledore, a keeper of secrets, hasn’t really told them anything. This brings us to one of the central themes of the book: doubt and faith. Harry struggles with as his image of Dumbledore changes. Ron and Hermione struggle as their faith in Harry wavers, and, as we’ve seen throughout the novels, Harry’s faith in himself to accomplish what he must.

Finally, the ending of the book was, for me, extremely satisfactory. While I knew that I would enjoy the book as a whole, the ending was something that I always worried about. After all this build up, would it work? I was very happy with it, and felt that it wrapped things up very well.

I’ll put some more thoughts into a larger article as a whole, when I’ll be free to discuss the details of the plot without worrying about giving things away. If you haven’t read Harry Potter yet, now would definitely be a good time. There’s even an audio version read by Stephen Fry for those of you who prefer audio books. I loved this book, and felt it was a fitting end to the series as a whole.

Feb 25, 2009 – Just as a quick comment on my own remarks as I read through them a year and a half later.  There are some out there who don’t see J.K. Rowling as a good writer (Rym on the Geek Nights podcast has stated so several times), so I wanted to clarify how I approach Rowling as a writer.  I haven’t done any indepth literary analysis of the Harry Potter books, and I won’t have time in the forseeable future.  When I say here that Rowling is a good writer, I’m not trying to place her in any sort of pantheon with Dickens, Hawthorne, Poe, Hemingway or any of the other great writers of English-language literature.  I put her in the category of those writers who are good, in the sense that they are competent and create compelling fiction.  For a lot of us writers, achieving that would be plenty.  If I were to sit down and attempt the literary analysis mentioned above, I’m sure I could tear her works apart.  But that’s hardly the point of them, and I feel that approaching them that way would be disigenuous.  – Duane