Favorite Characters from Fantasy Novels.

The following is an incomplete list of some of my favorite characters from fantasy literature. Be warned! Characters from George R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice & Fire series may be overrepresented.

Tyrion Lannister (from A Song of Ice & Fire series by George R.R. Martin) - A real-world dwarf (that is, he has dwarfism) in a fantasy setting, Tyrion is the ultimate underdog. Born into a family that is ruthless, powerful, and wealthy, Tyrion's only chance for survival in a world that is just as ruthless is to make sure his family--the Lannisters--stay in power. It's a sucky situation and his own family distrusts him, but every one else in the novels reviles him because he is a Lannister (even though Tyrion isn't like other Lannisters). Fortunately for Tyrion, he is very clever and usually is one step ahead of everyone who wants him dead--including some members of his own family.

Vladimir Taltos (from the Vlad Taltos novels by Steven Brust) - A sarcastic human is a world of snobby elves, Vlad seems to attract trouble. He has a knack for saying wrong things at very inappropriate times. Fortunately, he's an assassin and a witch. And a sorcerer. And he has four or five extremely powerful allies. Sometimes that's enough to get him out of trouble. Other times, it doesn't really help much.

Croaker (from the Black Company books by Glen Cook) - Croaker, a surgeon, belongs to the Black Company, an infamous mercenary organization. Croaker is jaded, weary, and has an unhealthy obssession with a evil goddess. Early on, the Company works for the goddess. But they eventually betray her. This, of course, leads to Croaker becoming the goddess' lover(?). Well, anyway, Croaker is an interesting character and his exploits are . . . complicated.

FitzChivalry Farseer (from the Farseer Trilogy by Robin Hobb) - Another assassin on my list. And the bastard son of a prince to boot! Fitz is recruited by his grandfather--King Shrewd--to become the king's assassin. Coupled with his natural magical skills, Fitz becomes one dangerous dude. But not as dangerous as his uncle Regal, the king's youngest and meanest son. Fitz may be a good assassin but he loses his head and becomes a brawler in physical combat. So his adopted father, Burrich, teaches Fitz to use the ax as his melee weapon. I dunno, I knda like how this breaks the stereotype of the sword-wielding, calm-and-cool-in-battle protagonist.

Samwise Gamgee (from The Lord of the Rings Trilogy by Tolkien) - The hero of the epic series is Sam. He does what he does not out of obligation or because it is his destiny or whatever. He does it simply because it is the right thing to do (and he is loyal to Frodo). That's my take, anyhow. One of the interesting things about Sam is that he is never--never--tempted to use the ring for his own pursuits. On occassion he uses it because he must. However, he not only doesn't think twice about using it for his own ends, the thought never enters his mind. That's pretty durn cool in a series where every other character--from elven queens to human kings to vile goblins to noble wizards is tempted. Not Sam.

Jon Snow (from A Song of Ice & Fire series by George R.R. Martin) - A bastard son of a pwerful lord, Jon has no place in his father's house so he joins the Nightswatch on his fifteenth birthday. The Nightswatch is a group of men that guards the Seven Kingdoms' northern border--the Wall--from wildmen, wights, and the ice demons known as the Others. They take an oath to do so for life. A good man, Jon still battles his temper and his cockiness. His adventures on both sides of the Wall (adventures political, social, and moral) both begin to define him as a man and define his legacy. His surprising successes and his demoralizing failures are fascinating to read.

There are more great characters I could list. These are but a few. But, hey, I don't have all night!

I'm a passionate centrist--no, really!

People who know me mistakenly think I'm far-right on the political scale. They think this because I rail against the left all the time. Let me clear up my politics for you folks (I'll try and use small words for those of you who are residents of Salt Lake City):

I'm basically a centrist with conservative leanings--center-right, if you prefer. The reason I come off as far-right is because I attack the American left at every opportunity. Why do I attack the left and not the far-right? Because the left is trying to destroy my country (they don't think they are destroying America but they are). The far-right--by any reasonable measure--is not a danger to this country.

One way to judge the left and right is to look at whom they embrace--not just associate, but embrace and praise and honor. The Democratic Party at their convention in 2004 gave the seat of honor--the seat next to former President Carter--to Michael Moore, for Heaven's sake. There is nothing even close to that on the right. The right along with the Republican Party distance themselves from the kooks. That nut who wrote that anti-Clinton book (the one that accused the Clintons of murder during their time in Arkansas) in the '90s was immediately cutoff from the right and the Republican Party. Michael Moore--who accuses President Bush of the same atrocities--gets to sit next to a former president at the Democratic National Convention.

Folks, I don't attack the extreme right because they aren't dangerous. They are isolated and cutoff from mainstream conservatism. However, the radical left--from the global warming crowd to the abortion-in-demand gang to the Bush lied, soldiers died idiots--are right in the middle of things not just on the mainstream left but in the heart of the Democratic Party.

The left in endangering my country. My passionate centrism demands that they be the focus of my attacks. Woof, woof.

Director Throwdown II

In my first director throwdown, Andrew Adamson (Shrek, Shrek II, and The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe) went up against Brad Bird (The Iron Giant, The Incredibles, and Ratatoulle). The consensus of those who responded to that blog entry is that Brad Bird is the better director. I didn't say where I came down in the original post, but I'll say now: I, too, prefer Brad Bird (though I love both).

So now we move on to Director Throwdown II: David Fincher vs Christopher Nolan!

Why this match-up? Because I feel both directors make movies with a similar feel: gritty, dark, and both seem to love directing movies about psychologically disturbed men. Also, each have five or six directorial credits and that helps when comparing.

David Fincher's major directorial debut was on Alien 3 in 1992. While many folks don't regard Alien 3 highly, don't be to harsh on Fincher for this one: he was thrust into the role of director at the last minute and he had to endure studio interference in the plot from the beginning. After Alien 3, Fincher directed Se7en, The Game, Fight Club, The Panic Room, and most recently Zodiac.

Christopher Nolan's movies are at least as eclectic as Fincher's: Beginning with 1998's The Following and continuing with Memento, Insomnia, Batman Begins, and The Prestige.

So it boils down to this:

Fincher's Alien 3 (in context), Se7en, The Game, Fight Club, The Panic Room, and Zodiac.

versus

Chistopher Nolan's The Following, Memento, Insomnia, Batman Begins, and The Prestige.

Get. It. On!