Team Edward or Team Jacob: Some choices are tough

Edward or Jacob?
Jack or Locke?
Packers or Favre?
The thousands of Orcs who were just doing their job or those pesky Hobbits who were literally hell-bent on destroying a nice-looking piece of jewelry?
Once in awhile, life forces people to choose sides, even if making such a decision isn’t easy or clear.
The most obvious example in which people have to choose sides is the whole Team Edward or Team Jacob debate stirred up by the “Twilight” films and books. I’ll proclaim I’m above reading those books, as I can’t imagine devoting any of my schedule to doing so, but when it comes to films I’ll admit that taking two hours out of my schedule for a good laugh isn’t below me
The first two films in the “Twilight” series are great entertainment in that they can suck a person in quickly, just by watching a minute or so. My wife, Jenny, fell victim this way when I noticed the first film was on Showtime and I teased her that she wanted to watch it. When I tried to change the channel, she wouldn’t allow me, forcing me to watch it a second time. (The first time I did so was to review it for The Gazette. For the record, I gave it passing marks, but barely).
Since the second film was available to rent, she tricked me into renting it, simply by asking me if I were for Team Edward or Team Jacob. Jacob only had a minor role in the first film, so I chose Edward. She was all about Jacob, and this clash of opinions, which I’m always a fan of when it occurs, caused me to pick it up at the video store.
It was just as cheesy as the first film, with special effects so bad they made the ones in the 1970s television show “Buck Rogers in the 25th Century” look like “Avatar” by comparison. But the story, much like the shows on Telemundo and some of the dying soap operas on American television, is told in such a way people not only want to see what’s next, they develop a need to see the next development.
The same applies to the other examples I provided at the top of this column. Fans of “Lost,” many who have probably been lost for the last four years while watching this show, are now learning they have to choose between Jack Shepherd, the man of science, and John Locke, the man of faith. The show, in its final season, has made it seem as though Shepherd is the correct choice, but a big part of me believes the writers are going to turn it around at the end to show the man of faith is the right one.
The Packers or Brett Favre debate is one of loyalty vs. fandom. Does one commit to the team he or she has been loyal to since birth, or does one stick with the person he or she has followed fervently since 1992? I went with Favre in the debate, because the Packers will be there the rest of my life while Favre’s football playing years are probably limited (I say probably because, well, you never know with him).
With my “Lord of the Rings” example, people assume the Orcs are evil and don’t even deserve consideration, but they only did what they were created to do, which was to be evil. I guess the Hobbits had a right to fight back, but they probably could have lived the rest of their lives in the corner of their world without much disruption from the Orcs. Then again, the Orcs may have murdered them in their sleep, played football with their carcasses and then eaten them for breakfast.
People who make wrong choices are sometimes unwilling to admit it. No one likes to admit he or she is wrong, and when there is no definite answer, people don’t necessarily have to, even if others make more convincing arguments for an opposing side. That’s why I’ll never like a Hobbit again.