Next year, we have two big fantasy films releasing, a rarity in an industry that tends to forget about high fantasy. One is Brave, a celebrated return to original storytelling from Pixar, and the other is The Hobbit, a toothless adaptation from creatively-bankrupt Hollywood. Obviously, Brave is the superior film, being a completely, utterly original story by the best film studio that has never, and will never, make a bad movie.
A few of you seem to think that these movies are completely different, and require no real comparison. Sometimes, two vaguely similar films can co-exist. That is bulls**t. As they are two fantasy films, it is my duty, as a film critic, to address which one will be the better film.
Brave has a bear.
Just look at how massive this bear is! Figuring that the heroine is around five and a half feet tall, that bear must be at least twenty fucking feet tall. That is the tallest goddamned bear you've ever seen. Wait, no it isn't. Because if you've ever seen a bear that tall, it would be rending the flesh from your spine, if it didn't just swallow you whole. The Hobbit has no bears. The Hobbit has...
Jesus, look at those things! They're so small! Did someone crash a fake beard truck into an elementary school? And what's up with that beardless one? Did they cut off his beard because he looks like a damn goof? These things make the weirdest-looking X-Men look like a girl with Heterochromia iridum (one eye green, the other happy face) going down on you while you watch Brave, a.k.a. the best blowjob ever. People this small have no place in high fantasy.
Brave stars a hot-ass Scottish readhead
Look at that girl. Her hair's all crazy over the place. She can get it. Plus, she is so badass, she's hunting that giant bear. She looks like she fucks like a stallion, then punches you in the face if you're even a remotely not amazing lover. She would never punch me, by the way. By comparison, The Hobbit has a bunch of bearded Englishmen, or Scotsman, or something like that.
Brave is still mysterious
What's Brave about? I don't know! That's the beauty of it! Though the movie releases only a scant year from now, we still know only the barest of details about the plot. Pixar has wisely decided to not divulge too many plot details, for fear of spoiling the film. The Hobbit, on the other hand, already has a novelization published, and it has been published for some years! Also, the novelization seems to needlessly compress both Hobbit films into one book. Why not just go skywriting and tell us that the little dude helps kill the dragon, or whatever. I don't even care about it, now that I know how it ends!
Dragons: not as cool as you'd think, really
People won't shut the fuck up about Smog, the dragon at the end of The Hobbit. You know what? Dragons are overrated! They've been doing the same crap for hundreds of years of story telling! "Oooh, look at meee, I'm a draagon. I'm gonna spit fire and eat some women." You know who else spits fire and eats women? Donald Glover. And he's a regular person. Also, he doesn't eat women, so much as perform cunnilingus on them. Proficiently, no doubt. Anyway, the point I'm making is that dragons aren't as cool as Donald Glover. Also, not as cool as the rad-ass bear in Brave. Scientists may have lots of future study in the larger bear vs. dragon argument overt the coming decades, but for now, it's obvious that Brave's bear beats Smog. Also, why is he named after pollution? Some kind of stupid environmental message? Way to shoehorn that in, Peter Jackson! Take your hippie crap, and fuck off back to New Zealand.
Who needs a Lord of the Rings remake anyway?
That shit just came out. Way to scrape the barrel, Hollywood.
Then again, The Hobbit has Sir Ian McKellan
Ok, advantage The Hobbit on this one.
Many thanks to Xzyliac for starting the awesome conversation that got this article rolling. If someone deserves to "win" the Internet, it is you.
can cause it. You can fix it by adding *.disqus.com to your whitelists.