Essay: Video games - dangerous or not?

I wrote this short essay as a homework for my English class about two weeks ago. I thought I could share it on my blog ...

 

 

Thanks to the evolution of technology and the accessibility of the Internet, video games have become more and more popular in the last years. However, what many people consider harmless fun, many others believe to be dangerous. Which effects might a game have on a person?

 

People of my generation may remember throwing bananas during high speed car chases in Super Mario Kart or taking part in Zelda's exciting adventures. Or who hasn't caught and exchanged some Pokémon with other kids in the schoolyard? And who didn't show some kick-ass moves and become the champion in Street Fighter II? If you have played a video game at least one time in your life and then claimed you didn't have a good time with it, you would be lying.

 

Video games allow the player to enter in a world that has been living somewhere in a corner of their imagination. This could be a wondrous place with elves and wizards or in a galaxy far, far away. You not only have the opportunity to be part of the hero's adventure - you become the hero. The One that has to overcome many obstacles and face dangers in order to find a hidden treasure or to rescue a princess imprisoned by a terrifying monster. Thanks to the magic of video games, dreams turn into reality, which can be experienced on a computer, a Play Station, a Nintento Wii and on many other devices - a simulated reality of course. But isn't there a thin line between reality and imagination?

 

Due to the standards of modern technology, video games have become more and more sophisticated both technically and artistically, exhibiting a remarkably good simulation of real environments. Is it possible that video games can blur someone's sense of reality at that point? At times, we all have heard in the news that murderers or young people who have run amok were often associated with playing video games. Is it a medium that provokes a person to harm or even kill other people?

 

It is common knowledge that passionate players can easily spend hours in front of the computer or the TV playing their favourite games. As a consequence, they subconsciously adapt an unhealthy lifestyle. They lock themselves in their bedrooms for the rest of the day, they practise no sports and occasionally eat, mostly fast food, while they are playing. In the case of children, they begin to neglect important tasks such as doing their homework, learning for school and pursuing other hobbies. Whether you are a child or an adult, both cases can lead to a state that might become dangerous, too: addiction.

 

I do believe that video games have psychological effects similar to alcohol, drugs or pornography. I think a glass of good whisky or reading an erotic novel are allowed every once a while. There is nothing wrong with small pleasures, as long as they are consumed moderately. It could turn into a problem if the doses get bigger and the thirst insatiable. What happens with too much alcohol, for instance, is that it changes a person's behaviour. This can show aspects of aggressiviness and social anxiety, which ultimately leads to isolation. In my opinion, it isn't much different with video games.

 

Furthermore, we have only to observe how our society has evolved in the last twenty years to see the undeniable fact that violence, in a subtle manner, has managed to take over the world of the media in more than just video games - movies, advertisings, press, news etc. Everything needs to be filled with more action and excitement. In addition to that, it is almost impossible to avoid these things, because due to the breakthrough of the internet, we have access to literally everything. Things that not even parents are able to control. Through the internet, their children might e.g. play games that would normally be age-restricted. I believe that an early exposure to violent films, ugly scenes portrayed on the news, etc. have a deep impact on younger minds. They might interpret it the wrong way, because they are not able to understand these things at that age.

 

With regard to the elaborated points above, I conclude that the question, if video games are dangerous, cannot be answered with a resounding yes or no. There are many other aspects we must consider as well such as in which circumstances we live in our society. I think the main point is not only how video games (and other media) affect us, but how we absorb them. And this depends on each person and how she or he deals with it. The world we live in nowadays is like a huge swamp in a mist, where we can easily get lost. And if we happen to step in a hole that slowly absorbs us, we must find a way to get out of it on our own ...

 

 

What do you think about this topic? Are video games considered to be dangerous?

 

 

source: picture from thegospelcoalition.org

 

 

 

Movie Review: "THE HOBBIT: An Unexpected Journey", directed by Peter Jackson

Since The Return of The King came out in 2003, it has been my dream that Peter Jackson would take me back to Middle-Earth one day with adapting J.R.R. Tolkien's novel The Hobbit for the big screen. After the nerve-wracking process of the movie's production (MGM's financial issues, production delays etc.), this dream finally became reality: Yesterday, on the 10th of December of 2012, thanks to my beloved sister who works at Warner Bros., I attended the Swiss premiere of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. I couldn't hide my excitement when we took our seats (I squeaked like a 5-year old girl). When the lights went out, the first notes of Howard Shore's score emerged and the title appeared in golden letters on the Screen, the journey began ...

170 minutes later, I walked out of the theatre with an immense feeling of satisfaction and the impression that I had been part of an exceptional adventure. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey offers everything what every die-hard fan of Tolkien and the previous Lord of the Rings film trilogy wants to see.

You immediately feel carried back to Middle-Earth from the very beginning of the movie. Seeing the Shire again with its green hills and trees, the small folks and Bag End put a huge smile on my face and also everytime 'old new faces' from the previous movies did their appearance (such as Ian McKellen as Gandalf, Hugo Weaving as Elrond, Cate Blanchett as Galadriel). Furthermore, we discover magnificient corners of New Zealand we haven't seen before, beautifully captured in wide scenic landscape shots, and we experience new exciting, action-filled battle sequences.

 

There are of course the new elements of the story, starting with the characters that are being introduced, among them are the 13 dwarves of the company: the wise Balin (Ken Stott), the ferocious Dwalin (Graham McTavish), the feisty Bifur (William Kircher), the endearing Bofur (James Nesbitt), the enormous Bombur (Stephen Hunter), the young and handsome Fili (Dean O'Gorman), the other handsome (and sexy) Kili (Aidan Turner), the polite Ori (Adam Brown), Dori (Mark Hadlow), Nori (Jed Brophy), Oin (John Callen), Gloin (Peter Hambleton)  and the leader of the company, Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage). If you're not able to distinguish each dwarf from the other at the end of the movie, don't feel bad about yourself, because I can't neither. The entire dwarf cast is fantastic, each one is special on their own and it's hard to pick only one favourite. Being an important character, I especially love Richard Armitage's portrayal of the fearless and respected Dwarf prince Thorin Oakenshield and his struggle to succeed in his mission to regain the lost Dwarven Kingdom Erebor.

I've been looking forward to see Sylvester McCoy as the distracted and odd wizard Radagast the Brown. He is exactly how I have imagined him when I read the book (The Fellowship of the Ring). He could have come off as a ridiculous and annoying character (like Jar Jar Binks was in the Star Wars prequels), but McCoy manages to walk the fine line perfectly without being over the top. He immediately became one of my favourite characters.
Ian McKellen reprising his role as Gandalf! It's such a delight to see him again, especially as Gandalf the Grey. Compared to the one we saw in FotR, this Gandalf has at times a very laid-back side, which is very entertaining to watch. Of course, he also cares for the company and remains a responsible guardian of Middle-Earth. Ian McKellen is simply excellent.
And there is Andy Serkis as Gollum... what an actor! Thanks to the latest standards of motion capture technology, Andy Serkis is able to deliver a performance that is fully palpable, his  mask gets close to digital make-up, you can see every small mouvement of his facial expressions -  in The Hobbit, the 'CGI barrier' seems to have vanished. I saw an actor acting. At this point, it's the last chance for the Academy to finally acknowledge Serkis' work.
Finally, there is Martin Freeman as young Bilbo Baggins. Peter Jackson couldn't have found a better actor that would fit this part ... Freeman literally owns this role, his performance captures the audience the moment he delivers his very first line. He plays Bilbo how he is supposed to be played. Freeman portrays the hobbit's evolution during his journey very well, first being a carefree and conservative hobbit and then slowly growing into a courageous and respectable person. 

Howard Shore has fulfilled all my expectations in regard to the score. He managed to reach the same level and epic dimensions of his work for The Lord of the Rings. It's like he has never left Middle-Earth.   The music has fantastic new melodies, especially the themes related to the Dwarven culture. It's a delight to hear some returning themes from the previous trilogy as well, he succeeded in using the right amount of them, with, and I really hate to say that, only one exception at the end of the movie. Overall, an Oscar nomination for Best Original Score should be secured.
Regarding the technical aspects, the movie as a whole looks absolutely gorgeous. Weapons, costumes, production design, cinematography ... everyone behind the camera put the same passion and dedication in their work like they did in The Lord of the Rings. The special effects are eye-popping and the 3D works very well. I can't say much about the 48 fps because the theatre wasn't equipped for it (but I'm eager to see how it looks like). The movie has good chances to be nominated in the 'small' categories.

Now comes the burning question we all ask to ourselves ...

Is The Hobbit as good as The Lord of the Rings?

 

Indeed,  there are some aspects that The Hobbit can't compete with LotR, there are notably small difficulties with the fluidity of the rhythm at some moments, mostly during the first 40 minutes of the movie, but they didn't really distracted me from enjoying it.

Some average moviegoers probably would criticize the fact that there are too many familiar characteristics from LotR that are being shown. It is true that they are a lot of déja-vu moments in The Hobbit (which is very pleasing to watch for the fans), but you can't really blame Peter Jackson for that, because both stories (The Hobbit and FotR) begin in the same place and they follow similar paths and events.

 

Otherwise, it is wrong to make a direct comparison of The Hobbit and the LotR (... but how can you not, we pratically have the same crew who worked on LotR ...). It is important to consider that both are completely different in their tone. Those who have read both, The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit have noticed this aspect.
Once you read the first chapter of The Hobbit, you would say it has been written for children. It is in fact more gentle, innocent, lighter, funnier ... Peter Jackson managed to reflect these qualities. His adaption comes closer to what we would call a 'typical fantasy movie'. The Lord of the Rings is more realistic, sophisticated, bigger, darker and is dealing with more complex, moral and philosophical issues (and let's not forget that The Hobbit was published in 1937 and LotR almost 20 years later).

 

If you separate The Hobbit from the LotR trilogy and consider it as a movie on its own, it is quite spectacular and a unique cinematic experience. It has some really great and epic moments that have the same quality we encounter in The Lord of the Rings. What I love is how Peter Jackson actually sticks very faithfully to the book (that is the advantage when you make a trilogy out of a book of approximately 320 pages). I particularly was glad that he incorporated the apprendices from RotK.

 

Let's put it that way: If you stick to much to the expectation that The Hobbit will be as epic as The Lord of the Rings, you might won't enjoy the movie as much as you should. If you bear this in mind, I think you will have more pleasure to watch the movie for the second time.


To conclude, I am very happy how The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey turned out. It is fun to watch, it is very entertaining, it has an outstanding cast (notably Martin Freeman, Andy Serkis, Richard Armitage, Sylvester McCoy and Ian McKellen of course), a fantastic score by Howard Shore, impressive visual effects and unforgettable moments. You have the feeling to be part of this adventure, this movie is a gift for every Tolkien fan. I can't wait to watch it again (and in 48 fps) and I am already anticipating the sequel, The Desolation of Smaug, which is due to come out on December 13 of 2013.

What do you think of The Hobbit - An Unexpected Journey?
Leave your comment below!


source: pictures belong to Warner Bros.