After the last update, I kind of lost my will to continue this project. Why? Because I was just about worn out. This is really one of the most horrible books I have ever read. So, I took myself off the hook, blog-wise, for a little over a month. I wasn't even going to come back; Lord knows I've ended up abandoning blogs before. Then, I saw a certain film that somehow convinced me to return. It's called Parasite Eve.
As the title of this update should tell you, it is not the world's best film. In fact, if I had to classify it, I'd say it's "so okay it's average". The basic idea of the story is that mitochondria are sentient, powerful, and about to revolt and try to destroy humanity. It's best known here in the States for the Playstation 1 game that was based on it. Also called Parasite Eve, this game was what defined the word "horror" for me. It was the single scariest thing I'd ever seen, and remains at #2 on that list to this day. Even then I knew it was a stupid concept, but it was so ridiculously well-done that I could ignore that. Even the movie, which certainly isn't anything to write home about, managed to get me into the story. Granted, it's J-Horror, so I couldn't understand half of it, but it still manages to be an okay flick.
That one element, execution, is what can save a stupid story from being a bad experience. And, let's face it, Johnstone's scenario is really stupid at the end of the day. The difference between Out of the Ashes and Parasite Eve...or, heck, Battle Royale (which I love, but is in no way a work of art) is that Johnstone doesn't have the faintest idea of how to pull this one off. For example, look at how he treats the villains of the novel. Let's compare it to Battle Royale this time (the villains of Parasite Eve are a collection of sentient microscopic organisms; there's not much chance for character development). The longest-lasting and most dangerous villains in Battle Royale are Mitsuko Soma and Kazuo Kiriyama. The author devotes several sections of the novel to developing these two and setting them up as legitimate threats. Throughout the novel, it's hinted at that these two are the most dangerous enemies our heroes will have, and we even get to use them as viewpoint characters several times. You can understand why they do what they do, and what led them to it. Indeed, the amazing level of character development is one of the reasons why I love that novel so much.
Now, look at the villain of Out of the Ashes, Hilton Logan. We're first introduced to his character when one of his opponents is complaining about him. Okay, I can accept that. We don't go through, say, the Harry Potter books following Lord Voldemort. No, Rowling hints and implies his great evil and power, and by the time we meet him, we can be genuinely creeped out by him, and genuinely cheer for the people fighting him. However, until we meet Logan later in the book, all we ever hear about him is that he is A) An evl librul, and B) That he somehow banned private ownership of guns in the USA. Not exactly Caligula, is he? When we meet him again, he seems even less evil. In fact, he seems downright heroic. In the middle of a crisis, when his nation had descended into anarchy and chaos, he stepped up, took command, and began a fight to restore some kind of order to the world. That takes some major guts; you're standing up to several dozen literal warlords, and you're winning. In any other series, Logan would be the hero here. Instead, the "real hero" of the piece spends his entire meeting with Logan trying to provoke the man. And we're expected to root for him. Finally, when Ben meets the military men in the last update, we discover that, for some reason, Logan is planning to enslave every non-Caucasian American in North and South America, at least. Where did that come out from? Where was that foreshadowed, or indicated in the slightest way? And why, suddenly, is the military leadership supporting this?
Undeveloped and out-of-nowhere villains aren't even the chiefest of Johnstone's sins. His "heroic" Author Avatar is almost a sociopath, your political party almost always determines your moral status, there's no continuity between chapters, the series is the poster child for Disposable-Woman syndrome, and the list goes on and on!
And those are not even necessarily all bad things! Take, for example, the "Raines almost a sociopath" point. That's not necessarily a damning character trait. Look at Roland from Stephen King's The Dark Tower series. He begins the story as a cold, heartless character, who is willing to let a child he cares about die if it'll help him reach his goals. Over the course of the novels, as he picks up friends and continues his travels, he learns to open his heart again and care about people. It's a truly touching bit of character development. This is highlighted in the final book of the series, when Roland offers to let Mordred, his evil and insane child, live, in exchange for sparing Roland's friend and companion Oy. Mordred, of course, refuses and kills Oy in a terrible way. Following Roland's victory, he buries and mourns Oy, and I admit that, when reading this, many manly tears were shed.
Raines, of course, never gets this kind of development. In fact, any development he gets in a given book disappears at the start of the next book. All that changes is that he gets older, and that the amount of territory his side holds fluctuates.
I think I'll end it there, before I end up ranting into the late of night. I'll probably have the next update up tomorrow, unless I suddenly lose my drive. Until then, adios, and may all your reading be good.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment