![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Kristin Cashore, Graceling
WHOOSH! (That's the book galloping by).
I don't know why it took me over a week to finish: possibly because much of last week I spent in a bit of a funk being tired and depressed and preoccupied and consequently was falling asleep over my book at night and not getting much reading done. But that's by the by.
It was thoroughly enjoyable. Likeable (why is LJ spellcheck balking on that word?) characters, a very intriguing system of magic/special powers, a believable romance. I was mildly underimpressed, based on the advance buzz on it. Much of the YA sf community seemed to be gushing about it, but it left me with a feeling that I wanted more, which is what I mean when I say it galloped by. The action felt rushed. The main climax (overcoming the Big Bad) was just "zap" and it was done. I'm usually grateful when a fantasy is a stand-alone and the first book in a series isn't all about establishing the characters and setting and creating a lot of suspense for the next two, but with this book I would have maybe liked a little more of that and less breathless action that once or twice left me flipping back through going "what just happened?" I liked it enough that I think I'll read the next one, except that I think I've read people saying that the next one isn't as good... Anyway. It was fun. I definitely liked it a lot; I just didn't love it.
WHOOSH! (That's the book galloping by).
I don't know why it took me over a week to finish: possibly because much of last week I spent in a bit of a funk being tired and depressed and preoccupied and consequently was falling asleep over my book at night and not getting much reading done. But that's by the by.
It was thoroughly enjoyable. Likeable (why is LJ spellcheck balking on that word?) characters, a very intriguing system of magic/special powers, a believable romance. I was mildly underimpressed, based on the advance buzz on it. Much of the YA sf community seemed to be gushing about it, but it left me with a feeling that I wanted more, which is what I mean when I say it galloped by. The action felt rushed. The main climax (overcoming the Big Bad) was just "zap" and it was done. I'm usually grateful when a fantasy is a stand-alone and the first book in a series isn't all about establishing the characters and setting and creating a lot of suspense for the next two, but with this book I would have maybe liked a little more of that and less breathless action that once or twice left me flipping back through going "what just happened?" I liked it enough that I think I'll read the next one, except that I think I've read people saying that the next one isn't as good... Anyway. It was fun. I definitely liked it a lot; I just didn't love it.
Hilary Mantel, Wolf Hall
MMMMmmmm. So good.
I am sorry to finish it, because I have been immersed in the period and in the characters, especially the character of Thomas Cromwell. It's one of those books where it's so great knowing that you have it sitting on your bedside table to read every night. I loved the very tight point of view - you quickly notice that any time there's a dangling "he" it refers to Cromwell. Most of it is very much inside his head. And it's a fascinating head to be inside, intelligent and cunning and observant. I am aware that some people read this as a white-wash of Cromwell, as a counter to the popular image of Thomas More. It's a long time since I saw A Man For All Seasons, or Anne of a Thousand Days, for that matter, and I've never bothered with The Tudors, and don't know enough about the period to be able to argue for one side or the other. I liked this Thomas Cromwell a lot. I'm glad there's to be a sequel, as I want to read more (though in another way, I'm not sure I do...)
I have to thank my friend![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
lidocafe for giving Wolf Hall to me for Christmas, because I loved it, and could never have finished it in a week from the library, and have enjoyed the luxury of savouring it.
I don't know what I'm going to read next.
MMMMmmmm. So good.
I am sorry to finish it, because I have been immersed in the period and in the characters, especially the character of Thomas Cromwell. It's one of those books where it's so great knowing that you have it sitting on your bedside table to read every night. I loved the very tight point of view - you quickly notice that any time there's a dangling "he" it refers to Cromwell. Most of it is very much inside his head. And it's a fascinating head to be inside, intelligent and cunning and observant. I am aware that some people read this as a white-wash of Cromwell, as a counter to the popular image of Thomas More. It's a long time since I saw A Man For All Seasons, or Anne of a Thousand Days, for that matter, and I've never bothered with The Tudors, and don't know enough about the period to be able to argue for one side or the other. I liked this Thomas Cromwell a lot. I'm glad there's to be a sequel, as I want to read more (though in another way, I'm not sure I do...)
I have to thank my friend
lidocafe for giving Wolf Hall to me for Christmas, because I loved it, and could never have finished it in a week from the library, and have enjoyed the luxury of savouring it.I don't know what I'm going to read next.
Tags:
Her Fearful Symmetry, Audrey Niffenegger
I mostly loved this, even though it sagged a bit in the middle. Some people seem to hate it because it's not The Time Traveller's Wife. Well, it's not. But it is a graceful, odd, faintly sad novel, populated by characters who are more subtle and have more complex motives than you might first suspect. It has the same kind of matter-of-fact fantasy; I'm not sure whether you'd call it magic realism, or a ghost story. One of the main characters is a ghost (and that's not a spoiler - she dies in the first chapter). I loved the world Niffenegger creates: the old house on the edge of a cemetery, full of the lonely and the slightly odd. There's something of the Moomins in characters like Martin, the obsessive/compulsive, trapped in his apartment, or the twins, Julia and Valentina, who when first we meet them sleep curled up together, dress exactly alike, seem to think each other's thoughts and dream each other's dreams. I haven't decided yet what I think The Fearful Symmetry is about - different kinds of love, obsession, power. I'm going to want to reread it, and it's one of those books that you immediately want to talk about with someone who has read it.
I mostly loved this, even though it sagged a bit in the middle. Some people seem to hate it because it's not The Time Traveller's Wife. Well, it's not. But it is a graceful, odd, faintly sad novel, populated by characters who are more subtle and have more complex motives than you might first suspect. It has the same kind of matter-of-fact fantasy; I'm not sure whether you'd call it magic realism, or a ghost story. One of the main characters is a ghost (and that's not a spoiler - she dies in the first chapter). I loved the world Niffenegger creates: the old house on the edge of a cemetery, full of the lonely and the slightly odd. There's something of the Moomins in characters like Martin, the obsessive/compulsive, trapped in his apartment, or the twins, Julia and Valentina, who when first we meet them sleep curled up together, dress exactly alike, seem to think each other's thoughts and dream each other's dreams. I haven't decided yet what I think The Fearful Symmetry is about - different kinds of love, obsession, power. I'm going to want to reread it, and it's one of those books that you immediately want to talk about with someone who has read it.
Tags:
I had popcorn and two pints of beer for dinner last night, because lidocafe and I went to see a movie, and then debriefed it (and of course discussed many other things) at a quite nice pub afterwards.
Those of you who have read and loved the book of The Time Traveller's Wife, as both lidocafe and I had, can be reassured that it's not a travesty. It is a respectful adaptation, trimming the book to its main storyline. The two leads are lovely, and we were also both particularly impressed with the children who played Claire as a child and Alba, Henry and Claire's daughter.
Although it captures the romantic core story of the book, it misses the novel's complexity. We lose the sense of how devastating Henry's condition is to him - in some ways it is treated almost like a joke or a novelty, not the real curse that it is. Some of the time paradoxes seemed more blatant - I don't remember if this was something that I just didn't notice in the book or if some of the changes made things worse. Obviously, the movie also loses the rich layers of intertextuality: art, poetry and music are both essential elements in the novel that are mentioned but not developed in the movie. On the other hand, the faithfulness of the adaptation makes the movie lose some identity or even coherence of its own as a movie; lidocafe makes the point in her own comment on it that those who had not read the book, as we had, might have found it confusing.
I am not sorry I saw it - it was a pleasant way to spend an evening. I did not feel that it was in any way a violation of the book; if anything, it reminded me what a lovely experience reading it had been and made me want to read it again. I'm not sure whether to recommend it to anyone who has NOT read the original, however - you might find the movie confusing and silly, and I would hate it to put you off reading the novel.
lidocafe and I went to see a movie, and then debriefed it (and of course discussed many other things) at a quite nice pub afterwards.Those of you who have read and loved the book of The Time Traveller's Wife, as both lidocafe and I had, can be reassured that it's not a travesty. It is a respectful adaptation, trimming the book to its main storyline. The two leads are lovely, and we were also both particularly impressed with the children who played Claire as a child and Alba, Henry and Claire's daughter.
Although it captures the romantic core story of the book, it misses the novel's complexity. We lose the sense of how devastating Henry's condition is to him - in some ways it is treated almost like a joke or a novelty, not the real curse that it is. Some of the time paradoxes seemed more blatant - I don't remember if this was something that I just didn't notice in the book or if some of the changes made things worse. Obviously, the movie also loses the rich layers of intertextuality: art, poetry and music are both essential elements in the novel that are mentioned but not developed in the movie. On the other hand, the faithfulness of the adaptation makes the movie lose some identity or even coherence of its own as a movie; lidocafe makes the point in her own comment on it that those who had not read the book, as we had, might have found it confusing.
I am not sorry I saw it - it was a pleasant way to spend an evening. I did not feel that it was in any way a violation of the book; if anything, it reminded me what a lovely experience reading it had been and made me want to read it again. I'm not sure whether to recommend it to anyone who has NOT read the original, however - you might find the movie confusing and silly, and I would hate it to put you off reading the novel.
Tags:
Victoria is sweltering under an unofficial heatwave; it's too hot to do much at all except loll about and read books, which is hardly a tough assignment. I'm trying to get a little bit of "home" work (sorting and clearing, getting my garden under control) done every day, but at the moment it's too warm to do anything except in the basement. Robinson keeps thinking he wants to go for a walk, but that's just reflex. When he gets up, he quickly lies down again, panting. Tabitha just lies serenely, somewhere cool.
Yesterday evening, I went to see the latest Harry Potter movie withlidocafe and a friend of hers. It was extremely well done, and I thought the art direction and photography was stunning. This was the first of the movies that I've seen in the theatre, believe it or not, and it was certainly worth it (not just because the theatre was air-conditioned). It was engrossing and entertaining; I consistently believe that the movies are better than the books, because they can encapsulate the essence of the plot and still portray something of what complexities of theme there are. Often, too, the skill of the actors makes up for Rowling's deficiencies in character. I think Snape, for example, is now inseparable from Alan Rickman's portrayal of him. It's interesting to consider that the early movies were out before the last books were finished, and to wonder how much of what people "see" in the books is in fact put there by the actors who portrayed the characters and by the set design and so on, and not from what Rowling herself tells us. She is very much the tell rather than show; we know that Harry is brave and noble because she tells us so, not so much from anything that arises from him as a character.
This enrichment of the imaginative affect of the material breaks down in Harry, because of Daniel Radcliffe's complete lack of energy or any kind of charisma as an actor. He has two expressions - wide-eyed and stoic, and wide-eyed and stricken. Occasionally, in his stoic mode, a lip twitches to tell us that he's reacting to something. I thought even Rupert Grint, who mugged his way through the earlier movies, was more natural. There is nothing happening behind Radcliffe's eyes - unlike Alan Rickman, who exhibits an equally stony exterior but who manages to express all that he is unable or unwilling to say through his eyes. Radcliffe's inadequacy as an actor must have been true in the earlier movies, but somehow seems to matter more in this one, perhaps because the young characters are supposed to be demonstrating more depth and maturity, and Radcliffe seems incapable of doing so.
One more remark about the adaptation of book to screen: being able to see Snape and Dumbledore in that crucial scene at the end lent somewhat less ambiguity than exists in the book. That's what I thought, anyway - and of course my opinion is coloured by having read the whole series and knowing what we learn in the end. I also thought that Snape yelling "I'm the Half-Blood Prince" at the end was far from adequate for anyone who had NOT read the books to understand what that was about.
Still - I did not find that the movie lagged at all for all the nearly three hours of it, and it was certainly an enjoyable summer confection.
Speaking of adaptations of book to screen - I was dreading Where The Wild Things Are but am feeling considerably more optimistic after viewing this featurette about it. Now I'm intrigued and looking forward to it.
Which is more than can be said for Alice in Wonderland, which I think looks dreadful.
Yesterday evening, I went to see the latest Harry Potter movie with
lidocafe and a friend of hers. It was extremely well done, and I thought the art direction and photography was stunning. This was the first of the movies that I've seen in the theatre, believe it or not, and it was certainly worth it (not just because the theatre was air-conditioned). It was engrossing and entertaining; I consistently believe that the movies are better than the books, because they can encapsulate the essence of the plot and still portray something of what complexities of theme there are. Often, too, the skill of the actors makes up for Rowling's deficiencies in character. I think Snape, for example, is now inseparable from Alan Rickman's portrayal of him. It's interesting to consider that the early movies were out before the last books were finished, and to wonder how much of what people "see" in the books is in fact put there by the actors who portrayed the characters and by the set design and so on, and not from what Rowling herself tells us. She is very much the tell rather than show; we know that Harry is brave and noble because she tells us so, not so much from anything that arises from him as a character.This enrichment of the imaginative affect of the material breaks down in Harry, because of Daniel Radcliffe's complete lack of energy or any kind of charisma as an actor. He has two expressions - wide-eyed and stoic, and wide-eyed and stricken. Occasionally, in his stoic mode, a lip twitches to tell us that he's reacting to something. I thought even Rupert Grint, who mugged his way through the earlier movies, was more natural. There is nothing happening behind Radcliffe's eyes - unlike Alan Rickman, who exhibits an equally stony exterior but who manages to express all that he is unable or unwilling to say through his eyes. Radcliffe's inadequacy as an actor must have been true in the earlier movies, but somehow seems to matter more in this one, perhaps because the young characters are supposed to be demonstrating more depth and maturity, and Radcliffe seems incapable of doing so.
One more remark about the adaptation of book to screen: being able to see Snape and Dumbledore in that crucial scene at the end lent somewhat less ambiguity than exists in the book. That's what I thought, anyway - and of course my opinion is coloured by having read the whole series and knowing what we learn in the end. I also thought that Snape yelling "I'm the Half-Blood Prince" at the end was far from adequate for anyone who had NOT read the books to understand what that was about.
Still - I did not find that the movie lagged at all for all the nearly three hours of it, and it was certainly an enjoyable summer confection.
Speaking of adaptations of book to screen - I was dreading Where The Wild Things Are but am feeling considerably more optimistic after viewing this featurette about it. Now I'm intrigued and looking forward to it.
Which is more than can be said for Alice in Wonderland, which I think looks dreadful.
Tags:
Of course, I didn't go to the movies while I was in Europe, but I did see three films while going to and fro, and I've been catching up with my "Zip" list now that I have so much free time. Some brief comments:
Doubt (seen on outgoing plane). This was a film of a stage play, and it shows, rather, though the performances were all very strong. Meryl Streep's was, I thought, a little mannered. Philip Seymour Hoffman was particularly good, but he always is. The issues in theplay movie were complex and unresolved in a very satisfactory way, and I would have liked to talk to someone about them afterwards.
Coraline (seen on return flight) Worth seeing for the "real" stop-motion animation, which is wonderful. I think I liked it somewhat better than the book (with which I was not wildly impressed), but I still found the story somewhat predictable and not wildly original.
The Edge of Love (also seen on return flight) I had never heard of this - the dramatization of relationships in Dylan Thomas' life, starring Kyra Knightly, Cillean Murphy and Sienna Miller (and someone whose name I forget playing DT). It was BBC, so perhaps had been made for television? Kyra sings! And rather well, too. Kyra acts! Better than I've seen her in anything since Bend it Like Beckham. It was a quality production all round, and a fascinating story, though it didn't leave me liking Dylan Thomas any more than I did already (except as a poet).
The Quantum of Solace I'm sorry. I came to the conclusion about halfway through this that I don't like Daniel Craig and I don't believe he is Bond. And I'm so effing tired of chase scenes that are so special-effects-ridden that you can't see who is doing what or which car is the one you care about. A little over halfway through, I fell asleep, which just shows you. Judi Dench was lovely, though.
Iris Speaking of Judi Dench... I had avoided this movie for years, for reasons that might be obvious to readers of my flist. However, it came up on my Zip list and I watched it and enjoyed it, more for Kate Winslet's fiercely intelligent portrayal of the young Iris Murdoch than anything else. I felt that it skimmed the surface, and I would have liked _more_ of Murdoch's writing and ideas at the beginning to that the loss later in her life was more apparent. But it was beautifully acted by all concerned and a very sensitive portrayal of the story and of the relationship between Iris and her husband.
The Power of Song A documentary about the life of Pete Seeger, who is one of my heroes. This was terrific, and not completely uncritical of Pete, though it was mostly about how wonderful he is. But it was clear, throughout, that having a "saint" as a husband and father is not ideal, no matter how much you can admire his character and his work. Great music, of course, and the advantage of watching such things alone is that you can sing along ;-)
Australia This had two potentially terrific movies in it, and if it had finished two-thirds of the way through I would have loved it and celebrated it as a thumping old-fashioned romp. However, it did not end two-thirds of the way through, and by the time it did I had not exactly lost interest but gotten a bit exhausted by everything that was being thrown at me. It was beautiful to watch, of course. Overall, it was a little better than I had thought it was going to be; at least I did not fall asleep!
Doubt (seen on outgoing plane). This was a film of a stage play, and it shows, rather, though the performances were all very strong. Meryl Streep's was, I thought, a little mannered. Philip Seymour Hoffman was particularly good, but he always is. The issues in the
Coraline (seen on return flight) Worth seeing for the "real" stop-motion animation, which is wonderful. I think I liked it somewhat better than the book (with which I was not wildly impressed), but I still found the story somewhat predictable and not wildly original.
The Edge of Love (also seen on return flight) I had never heard of this - the dramatization of relationships in Dylan Thomas' life, starring Kyra Knightly, Cillean Murphy and Sienna Miller (and someone whose name I forget playing DT). It was BBC, so perhaps had been made for television? Kyra sings! And rather well, too. Kyra acts! Better than I've seen her in anything since Bend it Like Beckham. It was a quality production all round, and a fascinating story, though it didn't leave me liking Dylan Thomas any more than I did already (except as a poet).
The Quantum of Solace I'm sorry. I came to the conclusion about halfway through this that I don't like Daniel Craig and I don't believe he is Bond. And I'm so effing tired of chase scenes that are so special-effects-ridden that you can't see who is doing what or which car is the one you care about. A little over halfway through, I fell asleep, which just shows you. Judi Dench was lovely, though.
Iris Speaking of Judi Dench... I had avoided this movie for years, for reasons that might be obvious to readers of my flist. However, it came up on my Zip list and I watched it and enjoyed it, more for Kate Winslet's fiercely intelligent portrayal of the young Iris Murdoch than anything else. I felt that it skimmed the surface, and I would have liked _more_ of Murdoch's writing and ideas at the beginning to that the loss later in her life was more apparent. But it was beautifully acted by all concerned and a very sensitive portrayal of the story and of the relationship between Iris and her husband.
The Power of Song A documentary about the life of Pete Seeger, who is one of my heroes. This was terrific, and not completely uncritical of Pete, though it was mostly about how wonderful he is. But it was clear, throughout, that having a "saint" as a husband and father is not ideal, no matter how much you can admire his character and his work. Great music, of course, and the advantage of watching such things alone is that you can sing along ;-)
Australia This had two potentially terrific movies in it, and if it had finished two-thirds of the way through I would have loved it and celebrated it as a thumping old-fashioned romp. However, it did not end two-thirds of the way through, and by the time it did I had not exactly lost interest but gotten a bit exhausted by everything that was being thrown at me. It was beautiful to watch, of course. Overall, it was a little better than I had thought it was going to be; at least I did not fall asleep!
Tags:
I have never found Brad Pitt attractive. I know we’re supposed to - he represents that brand of “all American” clean cut wholesome good looks that is the “ideal” for the rest of us - but there is something curiously bloated about his eyes and his lips that has always repelled me. And there is nothing going on behind his eyes. I would far rather sleep with Angeline Jolie, but that’s another story.
There’s another story buried somewhere in Brad Pitt’s curiously bloated star vehicle, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, one that is never allowed to surface, any more than any real character surfaces from under the immaculate CGI or makeup effects that propel the plot, and this applies equally to both Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett. There are hints of something about how time is fleeting and how we need to appreciate every moment of our lives. How it’s possible to have a love affair with life itself, no matter what fate hands you. How age doesn’t, or shouldn’t matter. But those are all different movies, not this one, though this one is trying desperately hard to be profound.
It’s all about how we’re meant to respond. We’re meant to think that Brad Pitt going from an octegenarian babyhood to a time-worn teenager is a brilliant acting job. He’s being touted for an Oscar, and if he wins it there’ll be no justice in this world. One of the things that is so profoundly wrong about this movie is that he doesn’t age, or change, at all under all that makeup. It’s always Brad Pitt, with that smug, curiously bloated, smile, looking out.
We’re meant to get caught up in the great Romance at the heart - the lovers living life in reverse who can only meet in the middle (where, of course, Cate Blanchett is maybe just past her prime, and has anyway had her leg crushed and can’t dance, but Brad is at the height of his gorgeosity). I would have been more moved if there had been the least bit of chemistry between the two stars. There is far more chemistry between Brad and the exquisite Tilda Swinton. The brief romance between those two gets the movie nowhere but at least provides us with a glimpse of some real feeling. The romance between Cate and Brad takes forever to get going and then is over too quickly. And the really profound and interesting period where Cate gets to look after the toddler and baby Brad is just another wasted opportunity.
We’re meant, I think, so see Benjamin’s life as some reflection of “America” itself, much as we were with Forrest Gump (no coincidence, then, that the screenwriter is the same). The movie, like Brad Pitt’s performance, is one of the front-runners for an Oscar (“run, Benjamin, run!”), and if it wins, which it could well, it will be because, like Brad Pitt, the movie reflects back to Americans how they want to see themselves. Homespun, folksey, noble, beautiful, tolerant. Empty-headed.
Apart from the failure at the core of this film, there were other annoyances. The bushman who comes out of nowhere, apparently having been an exhibit at a zoo, to stay conveniently in the all-purpose, all-race, oh-so-tolerant old-folks home where Brad is brought up, presumably there to make gnomic utterances and signal how tolerant everyone is (oh, look, there’s white Brad Pitt sitting at the back of the bus with the short black guy! I mean, wtf?).
There’s the fact that Benjamin and his ship-mates are in Russia when Pearl Harbour is bombed, without anyone apparently noticing that several years of World War 2 had been going on - IN RUSSIA !!! The setting allows some more nice CGI effects of snow and streets with neon writing in cyrillic alphabet and for Brad and Tilda Swinton to eat caviar and drink vodka. And the war, of course, allows more demonstration of how brave and patriotic and generally wonderful our American hero is. And not only Russia, but Paris and the ocean battles and all the other settings are CGI and as fake as the emotions we are supposed to feel while watching the film. And Brad refers to the exquisite Tilda Swinton as “plain.” Of course, she’s British; she couldn’t be beautiful.
There’s the fact that Cate Blanchett doesn’t walk like a dancer. I normally love Cate Blanchett, but her performance here is mannered, as if an accent and some pointy toes make up for the fact that she has no character. As she got older, her accent slipped once or twice into Katherine Hepburn. I found myself wishing for Kate to blast in and wake everyone up.
There are the heavy-handed symbols: the clock, that blasted hummingbird. (symbols of what, I’m not quite sure…) And the thunderstorm that seems to follow Brad around. And why the blazes does the movie end with Hurricane Katrina’s flood waters wooshing in??
Ultimately, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is a well-meaning, beautiful and empty-headed mess of a movie, and no doubt will make millions and win dozens of awards for its star.
Sigh.
There’s another story buried somewhere in Brad Pitt’s curiously bloated star vehicle, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, one that is never allowed to surface, any more than any real character surfaces from under the immaculate CGI or makeup effects that propel the plot, and this applies equally to both Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett. There are hints of something about how time is fleeting and how we need to appreciate every moment of our lives. How it’s possible to have a love affair with life itself, no matter what fate hands you. How age doesn’t, or shouldn’t matter. But those are all different movies, not this one, though this one is trying desperately hard to be profound.
It’s all about how we’re meant to respond. We’re meant to think that Brad Pitt going from an octegenarian babyhood to a time-worn teenager is a brilliant acting job. He’s being touted for an Oscar, and if he wins it there’ll be no justice in this world. One of the things that is so profoundly wrong about this movie is that he doesn’t age, or change, at all under all that makeup. It’s always Brad Pitt, with that smug, curiously bloated, smile, looking out.
We’re meant to get caught up in the great Romance at the heart - the lovers living life in reverse who can only meet in the middle (where, of course, Cate Blanchett is maybe just past her prime, and has anyway had her leg crushed and can’t dance, but Brad is at the height of his gorgeosity). I would have been more moved if there had been the least bit of chemistry between the two stars. There is far more chemistry between Brad and the exquisite Tilda Swinton. The brief romance between those two gets the movie nowhere but at least provides us with a glimpse of some real feeling. The romance between Cate and Brad takes forever to get going and then is over too quickly. And the really profound and interesting period where Cate gets to look after the toddler and baby Brad is just another wasted opportunity.
We’re meant, I think, so see Benjamin’s life as some reflection of “America” itself, much as we were with Forrest Gump (no coincidence, then, that the screenwriter is the same). The movie, like Brad Pitt’s performance, is one of the front-runners for an Oscar (“run, Benjamin, run!”), and if it wins, which it could well, it will be because, like Brad Pitt, the movie reflects back to Americans how they want to see themselves. Homespun, folksey, noble, beautiful, tolerant. Empty-headed.
Apart from the failure at the core of this film, there were other annoyances. The bushman who comes out of nowhere, apparently having been an exhibit at a zoo, to stay conveniently in the all-purpose, all-race, oh-so-tolerant old-folks home where Brad is brought up, presumably there to make gnomic utterances and signal how tolerant everyone is (oh, look, there’s white Brad Pitt sitting at the back of the bus with the short black guy! I mean, wtf?).
There’s the fact that Benjamin and his ship-mates are in Russia when Pearl Harbour is bombed, without anyone apparently noticing that several years of World War 2 had been going on - IN RUSSIA !!! The setting allows some more nice CGI effects of snow and streets with neon writing in cyrillic alphabet and for Brad and Tilda Swinton to eat caviar and drink vodka. And the war, of course, allows more demonstration of how brave and patriotic and generally wonderful our American hero is. And not only Russia, but Paris and the ocean battles and all the other settings are CGI and as fake as the emotions we are supposed to feel while watching the film. And Brad refers to the exquisite Tilda Swinton as “plain.” Of course, she’s British; she couldn’t be beautiful.
There’s the fact that Cate Blanchett doesn’t walk like a dancer. I normally love Cate Blanchett, but her performance here is mannered, as if an accent and some pointy toes make up for the fact that she has no character. As she got older, her accent slipped once or twice into Katherine Hepburn. I found myself wishing for Kate to blast in and wake everyone up.
There are the heavy-handed symbols: the clock, that blasted hummingbird. (symbols of what, I’m not quite sure…) And the thunderstorm that seems to follow Brad around. And why the blazes does the movie end with Hurricane Katrina’s flood waters wooshing in??
Ultimately, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is a well-meaning, beautiful and empty-headed mess of a movie, and no doubt will make millions and win dozens of awards for its star.
Sigh.
Rosemary Kirstein, The Steerswoman, The Outskirter's Secret, The Lost Steersman, and The Language of Power.
It waspapersky who first mentioned this series in her blog, and then I think sartorias referred to them, and then possibly truepenny. When writers whose works you admire write about how much they admire another writer, it's usually worth checking her out, and the chance definitely paid off in this case. I got them from the library, but I'm going to order the whole set from Amazon so that I can read them again.
When I grow up, I want to be a Steerswoman. No - wait - I think I already am. To some extent, anyway. In the world of this series, Steerswomen (and some Steersmen) are a group of itinerant ... questioners. Scholars, really. Their responsibility is adding to the collective knowledge of the world. One of their prime contributions is mapping - perhaps that was their first task - but they also record all the minutiae of the world around them: animal and plant life, and the customs of human societies. There is a custom - a law, really - that you must answer a Steerswoman's questions and she must answer yours. Unless, that is, you ever refuse to answer one of her questions, in which case she will place a Ban on you and no one of her order needs ever answer one of your questions again. Their place in this world is much like that of a mendicant priesthood - a town or village is usually glad to have one in their midst and will feed and house her in exchange for teaching and entertainment in the form of storytelling (she's like a kind of human Discovery Channel).
There is another specialized group in this world: Wizards. They keep themselves to themselves. They seem to tolerate the Steerswomen, and are tolerated by them but not liked.
Rowan, the Steerswoman protagonist, has found something and tries to find out what it is. Her questions come to the attention of the Wizards, who immediately pursue her and try to kill her. As she seeks answers, Rowan meets and befriends an Outskirter, Bel, who is a member of a loosely knit tribal group that lives literally on the edges, in the wilder, less hospitable areas of the world. Rowan and Bel travel together and are joined by Willam, who is a young man who wants to become a Wizard.
This sparse summary makes the series sound like one of those Extruded Fantasy Product Quest sequences that have people wandering randomly about a world looking for something while being hunted by Dark Riders. It really isn't. I can't say anything at all about what they discover without massive spoilers, and the process of discovery is what this sequence of novels is all about. It's really one unbroken story rather than a "series": each novel picks up almost immediately where the other left off.
Only Barbara Hambly, and perhaps Ursula Le Guin, have equally effectively conveyed the heart and mind of a scholar and the appeal of a scholar's life. The point of view is so tightly controlled that we find out the truth gradually, as Rowan does. Even now, at the end of the fourth book, when much has become clear, there are some mysteries yet to be solved. The world is detailed and internally consistent. The characters are well developed - so far, I have yet to meet anyone who is not interesting, and even the "villains" have complex motives. I love the relationship between Rowan, Bel and Willam, and can't wait to spend more time with them.
It is a delight to discover a new and compelling series when I thought I'd read everything worth reading. The best and worst thing about it is that it's not finished, and Kirstein doesn't seem to be a fast writer. This is a good thing in the sense that the quality of the work is stellar; she hasn't gotten sloppy as the series continues. In fact, if anything, the books get better as you continue through the sequence. But now I absolutely can't wait for the next one!
It was
papersky who first mentioned this series in her blog, and then I think sartorias referred to them, and then possibly truepenny. When writers whose works you admire write about how much they admire another writer, it's usually worth checking her out, and the chance definitely paid off in this case. I got them from the library, but I'm going to order the whole set from Amazon so that I can read them again.When I grow up, I want to be a Steerswoman. No - wait - I think I already am. To some extent, anyway. In the world of this series, Steerswomen (and some Steersmen) are a group of itinerant ... questioners. Scholars, really. Their responsibility is adding to the collective knowledge of the world. One of their prime contributions is mapping - perhaps that was their first task - but they also record all the minutiae of the world around them: animal and plant life, and the customs of human societies. There is a custom - a law, really - that you must answer a Steerswoman's questions and she must answer yours. Unless, that is, you ever refuse to answer one of her questions, in which case she will place a Ban on you and no one of her order needs ever answer one of your questions again. Their place in this world is much like that of a mendicant priesthood - a town or village is usually glad to have one in their midst and will feed and house her in exchange for teaching and entertainment in the form of storytelling (she's like a kind of human Discovery Channel).
There is another specialized group in this world: Wizards. They keep themselves to themselves. They seem to tolerate the Steerswomen, and are tolerated by them but not liked.
Rowan, the Steerswoman protagonist, has found something and tries to find out what it is. Her questions come to the attention of the Wizards, who immediately pursue her and try to kill her. As she seeks answers, Rowan meets and befriends an Outskirter, Bel, who is a member of a loosely knit tribal group that lives literally on the edges, in the wilder, less hospitable areas of the world. Rowan and Bel travel together and are joined by Willam, who is a young man who wants to become a Wizard.
This sparse summary makes the series sound like one of those Extruded Fantasy Product Quest sequences that have people wandering randomly about a world looking for something while being hunted by Dark Riders. It really isn't. I can't say anything at all about what they discover without massive spoilers, and the process of discovery is what this sequence of novels is all about. It's really one unbroken story rather than a "series": each novel picks up almost immediately where the other left off.
Only Barbara Hambly, and perhaps Ursula Le Guin, have equally effectively conveyed the heart and mind of a scholar and the appeal of a scholar's life. The point of view is so tightly controlled that we find out the truth gradually, as Rowan does. Even now, at the end of the fourth book, when much has become clear, there are some mysteries yet to be solved. The world is detailed and internally consistent. The characters are well developed - so far, I have yet to meet anyone who is not interesting, and even the "villains" have complex motives. I love the relationship between Rowan, Bel and Willam, and can't wait to spend more time with them.
It is a delight to discover a new and compelling series when I thought I'd read everything worth reading. The best and worst thing about it is that it's not finished, and Kirstein doesn't seem to be a fast writer. This is a good thing in the sense that the quality of the work is stellar; she hasn't gotten sloppy as the series continues. In fact, if anything, the books get better as you continue through the sequence. But now I absolutely can't wait for the next one!
A Mighty Heart
For a long time I was afraid to watch this movie; even the trailer made me cry. And, yes, I cried watching it, but it earned my tears in a way that I hadn't expected. It didn't go for the obvious, sentimental button pressing that it could have. Angelina Joli's performance was dignified and restrained, and did honour to the woman she was portraying. The story unfolded to some extent like a police procedural (and although I'm aware there was some criticism at the time of the way the local authorities handled the case, the overall impression here was that everyone cared deeply about it and worked very hard). I found the movie suspenseful, despite knowledge of the outcome, finding that suspense tinged with irony that is at the heart of the most effective tragedies.
Sweet Land
I came to this movie with quite high expectations, having read a review of it comparing it to the work of Terence Malick (whose Days of Heaven is one of the most beautiful movies I've ever seen). It was a very nice movie, but not in that league, nor as compelling as the review would have had me believe. In telling the story of an immigrant couple, the woman coming to the US as a mail-order bride, neither of them speaking good English and both encountering prejudice on the heels of WW1, yet also attempting to show the importance of Land and love of the Land, it had too many different messages to convey and weakened all of them. At its heart is a very tender love story, and I wish it had focussed on that. The framing story about the generations to follow was to some extent unnecessary and distracting. All the players were good - it was quite nice to see Alan Cumming playing a "normal" person, and John Heard plays a fairly sympathetic preacher-man. The two leads were attractive and interesting - again, this was pleasant viewing but by no means earth shattering.
The Dark Knight
This was, to coin a phrase, awesome. An exceptionally polished and - yes - even profound piece of filmmaking. Dark, violent, noisy, full of spectacle, but ultimately focussing on the heart of humankind and what it means to be good or evil and whether or not it is possible to fight the darkness underlying our societies. My friendlidocafe, with whom I viewed this at the theatre, wrote a long and thoughtful review that conveys more than I could in this brief discussion, and her knowledge of the comics adds more depth than I would be able to. I need to say though, that as good as Heath Ledger was, I don't think it was "his" movie. The depth and gravitas that the movie conveyed would not have been possible without the support of Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Gary Oldman and Aaron Eckhart. And of course there was Christian Bale. I love Christian Bale.
Rescue Dawn
And here he is again. In fact, I've seen three movies of his in the last month, all fine films, all graced with his intense, intelligent presence. And seeing three performances within a relatively limited time period highlighted his ability to inhabit a role, to lose his own ego within his presentation. For me, that is always the mark of the finest actor, when you can see the character from his eyes, when it is not simply a mask or a set of twitches. This movie was also an effective piece of film-making. I'm not sure I would have realized that it was Werner Herzog at the helm had I not known in advance, yet in hindsight I realize that its focus on Man in Nature is extremely Herzogian. Like A Mighty Heart, this is based on a true story, yet I found here that knowledge of the outcome did lessen the suspense somewhat. What was enjoyable was watching Bale's performance and his interplay with his fellow prisoners of war. Steve Zahn is a revelation, equally intense and compelling. Jeremy Davies is more a collection of twitches; we never really get a handle on what motivates him, unless it is that he has been broken by his time as a prisoner (his performance in Saving Private Ryan is far more affecting).
For a long time I was afraid to watch this movie; even the trailer made me cry. And, yes, I cried watching it, but it earned my tears in a way that I hadn't expected. It didn't go for the obvious, sentimental button pressing that it could have. Angelina Joli's performance was dignified and restrained, and did honour to the woman she was portraying. The story unfolded to some extent like a police procedural (and although I'm aware there was some criticism at the time of the way the local authorities handled the case, the overall impression here was that everyone cared deeply about it and worked very hard). I found the movie suspenseful, despite knowledge of the outcome, finding that suspense tinged with irony that is at the heart of the most effective tragedies.
Sweet Land
I came to this movie with quite high expectations, having read a review of it comparing it to the work of Terence Malick (whose Days of Heaven is one of the most beautiful movies I've ever seen). It was a very nice movie, but not in that league, nor as compelling as the review would have had me believe. In telling the story of an immigrant couple, the woman coming to the US as a mail-order bride, neither of them speaking good English and both encountering prejudice on the heels of WW1, yet also attempting to show the importance of Land and love of the Land, it had too many different messages to convey and weakened all of them. At its heart is a very tender love story, and I wish it had focussed on that. The framing story about the generations to follow was to some extent unnecessary and distracting. All the players were good - it was quite nice to see Alan Cumming playing a "normal" person, and John Heard plays a fairly sympathetic preacher-man. The two leads were attractive and interesting - again, this was pleasant viewing but by no means earth shattering.
The Dark Knight
This was, to coin a phrase, awesome. An exceptionally polished and - yes - even profound piece of filmmaking. Dark, violent, noisy, full of spectacle, but ultimately focussing on the heart of humankind and what it means to be good or evil and whether or not it is possible to fight the darkness underlying our societies. My friend
lidocafe, with whom I viewed this at the theatre, wrote a long and thoughtful review that conveys more than I could in this brief discussion, and her knowledge of the comics adds more depth than I would be able to. I need to say though, that as good as Heath Ledger was, I don't think it was "his" movie. The depth and gravitas that the movie conveyed would not have been possible without the support of Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Gary Oldman and Aaron Eckhart. And of course there was Christian Bale. I love Christian Bale.Rescue Dawn
And here he is again. In fact, I've seen three movies of his in the last month, all fine films, all graced with his intense, intelligent presence. And seeing three performances within a relatively limited time period highlighted his ability to inhabit a role, to lose his own ego within his presentation. For me, that is always the mark of the finest actor, when you can see the character from his eyes, when it is not simply a mask or a set of twitches. This movie was also an effective piece of film-making. I'm not sure I would have realized that it was Werner Herzog at the helm had I not known in advance, yet in hindsight I realize that its focus on Man in Nature is extremely Herzogian. Like A Mighty Heart, this is based on a true story, yet I found here that knowledge of the outcome did lessen the suspense somewhat. What was enjoyable was watching Bale's performance and his interplay with his fellow prisoners of war. Steve Zahn is a revelation, equally intense and compelling. Jeremy Davies is more a collection of twitches; we never really get a handle on what motivates him, unless it is that he has been broken by his time as a prisoner (his performance in Saving Private Ryan is far more affecting).
Tags:
Well, I do love Paris, but here I'm referring to the delightful film of that title. It's really a series of films, or perhaps a series of vignettes, all relating to love and all set in Paris, and they are all wonderful and the overall effect is extremely satisfying. Each vignette is directed by someone different and interesting, and the tone and style of the vignette very much reflects its director. There's a slightly surreal one set on a Metro platform directed by the Coen brothers and starring Steve Buscemi. Gus Van Sant directed one where one young man tries to pick up another. There's a vampire one not directed by Wes Craven although he appears in it and directs another delightful one set in the Pere Lachaisse cemetery and featuring the ghost of Oscar Wilde. There's a lovely one with Ben Gazzara and Gena Rowlands directed by Gerard Despardiu (and also featuring him) with both of them looking very old but somehow glowing, reminiscent slightly of the "oh yes, I remember it well" song in Gigi.
The acting is all terrific, and the cast is stellar - a constellation of "interesting" actors rather than "stars": Juliette Binoche, Natalie Portman, Maggie Gyllenhaal (speaking beautiful French), Nick Nolte (in an unexpected role), Willem Dafoe, Bob Hoskins, others whom I did not recognize. Some are funny, some are heartbreaking. The only form of love or attachment not included is one about a dog, and given the setting perhaps that's a minor omission!
Of course, part of the pleasure is the setting, and it will make you nostalgic for Paris. Each vignette features a different arrondisement or district, with the subject matter complementing the setting in some way.
I find myself thinking about many of the characters I met in that film and wondering what will happen next. That's the best kind of movie-going experience.
The acting is all terrific, and the cast is stellar - a constellation of "interesting" actors rather than "stars": Juliette Binoche, Natalie Portman, Maggie Gyllenhaal (speaking beautiful French), Nick Nolte (in an unexpected role), Willem Dafoe, Bob Hoskins, others whom I did not recognize. Some are funny, some are heartbreaking. The only form of love or attachment not included is one about a dog, and given the setting perhaps that's a minor omission!
Of course, part of the pleasure is the setting, and it will make you nostalgic for Paris. Each vignette features a different arrondisement or district, with the subject matter complementing the setting in some way.
I find myself thinking about many of the characters I met in that film and wondering what will happen next. That's the best kind of movie-going experience.
Tags:
Thank you, lady_schrapnell, because without your recommendation I might not have tried these books and I would have missed out on a treat. I also seem to remember sartorias raving about Forever Rose, so thank you, too.
I wish the Cassons lived next door to me because I love them. ( Read more... )
lady_schrapnell, because without your recommendation I might not have tried these books and I would have missed out on a treat. I also seem to remember sartorias raving about Forever Rose, so thank you, too.I wish the Cassons lived next door to me because I love them. ( Read more... )
Tags:
It can be a good thing to approach a movie with low expectations; often you are pleasantly surprised, as I was with this one. I ordered it from Zip with the notion that it was a Western (I like Westerns), and it had two of the most interesting actors working today in it (Russell Crowe and Christian Bale), so it certainly couldn't be all that bad.
It was considerably better than "not all that bad." I liked it a lot. I liked it better than Eastern Promises, which came with much more critical hoopla surrounding it. And the more I think about it, afterwards, the more I like it in retrospect. ( Read more... )
It was considerably better than "not all that bad." I liked it a lot. I liked it better than Eastern Promises, which came with much more critical hoopla surrounding it. And the more I think about it, afterwards, the more I like it in retrospect. ( Read more... )
Tags:
This astonishing YA novel has been around for some time (published by Oxford in 2005), but I only recently discovered it. It's the kind of book that you read quickly to find out what happens because the main plot is a rip-roaring adventure story, but then immediately want to go back and reread because it is so thoughtful and clever and twisty. ( Read more... )
Tags:
I can't imagine what it must have been like for Daniel Day Lewis to inhabit the role of Daniel Plainview for however long it took to film Paul Thomas Anderson's near-masterpiece, There Will Be Blood. Inhabit it he does. At first, listening to the cadences of a voice that some critics have likened to an imitation of the late John Huston, I thought "oh, this is just mannered," but gradually you realize that the character lives behind the actor's terrifying eyes, in turns glittering, manic, cold as a great white shark, and equally deadly. If Daniel Day Lewis did, in fact, base the voice on John Huston, you can't help thinking of the character Huston played in Chinatown, and the bleak vision of amoral capitalism presented in that movie. Or of Huston's own Treasure of the Sierra Madre, and Humphrey Bogart's obsessed, almost insane character.
Plainview has been likened to Satan, but I fear that he is all too human, representing a side of humanity, an aspect of American identity and aspirations that most of us would fear to touch or even come close to. The excesses of both capitalism and religion - the US's twin obsessions - are what are on show here, in a vision so black, so darkly humourous, that it recalls Beckett or Ionesco, or Kubrick.
What is almost another character in the movie is the remarkable score. Beginning like a hive of demented bees, and in turns atonal, dissonant, mesmerising or frantic, it jars, disrupts, sets on edge in the same way as Daniel Day Lewis' eyes contrast with his cultured, almost plummy voice. At peak moments, we suddenly hear Brahms violin concerto as yet another signal of the contrast between the romantic ideal of the American Way and the vicious, amoral behavior on the screen.
This is in many ways not a pleasant movie; it is sometimes difficult to watch. But it is risky, bold, confident filmmaking, by a director in complete control of his craft in partnership with an equally fearless actor.
Plainview has been likened to Satan, but I fear that he is all too human, representing a side of humanity, an aspect of American identity and aspirations that most of us would fear to touch or even come close to. The excesses of both capitalism and religion - the US's twin obsessions - are what are on show here, in a vision so black, so darkly humourous, that it recalls Beckett or Ionesco, or Kubrick.
What is almost another character in the movie is the remarkable score. Beginning like a hive of demented bees, and in turns atonal, dissonant, mesmerising or frantic, it jars, disrupts, sets on edge in the same way as Daniel Day Lewis' eyes contrast with his cultured, almost plummy voice. At peak moments, we suddenly hear Brahms violin concerto as yet another signal of the contrast between the romantic ideal of the American Way and the vicious, amoral behavior on the screen.
This is in many ways not a pleasant movie; it is sometimes difficult to watch. But it is risky, bold, confident filmmaking, by a director in complete control of his craft in partnership with an equally fearless actor.
Tags:
I don't think the adaptation of an overtly metafictional novel is ever completely successful, at least in the eyes of those familiar with the original. A movie that I personally consider to be one of the best adaptations of a novel, The English Patient, succeeds as a movie because it had the courage to BE a movie, to abandon any attempt to capture the essentially literariness of the source. ( Read more... )
My day yesterday was filled with event. lidocafe called me in the morning and asked me if I would like to go and see No Country For Old Men, which we had both been eagerly awaiting. Of course, I wanted to, but I was scheduled to go to an Early Music concert in the evening, and had work to do, dogs to walk, chores to do. So of course, I went. I remarked that going from this ultra violent movie to genteel singing and orchestral music would be a stark contrast, not from the sublime to the ridiculous, but from the "something" to the "something else"; in fact, it was from the sublime to the equally sublime.
No Country For Old Men was, to coin a phrase, "fucking awesome."
Now I can see that it might actually be possible to film The Road, but I want the Coen brothers to do it. Watching this movie was like watching the reading experience of reading The Road (if that makes any sense at all). It picked you up, sucked you in and didn't let go until the last second.
It is visually breathtaking, with its wide, gorgeous shots of sunrise, sunset, movement of clouds, lightning over prairie, but all slightly desaturated so that we know this is not some Romantic Western Epic.
There is no score. The silence is breathtaking, punctuated only by creaks, clicks, gasps of breath, explosions of gunfire and the stacatto thump of a cattleprod gun.
The cattle gun is used by one of the most terrifyingly impassive psychopathic killers in movie history. Played by a chilling Javier Bardem, he has a slightly autist air about him - detached, incapable of human empathy or understanding, but with his own peculiar standard of logic. He is Death.
Then there is Random Chance, in the figure of the Lewellyn Moss, played by Josh Brolin. He stumbles on a drug deal gone wrong and makes choices according to his own standards of behavior and logic which lead him inexorably into the path of Javier Bardem.
Then there is Good, represented by the wonderful Tommy Lee Jones. There is a line he speaks about "carrying the flame" which will resonate with all familiar with The Road. Jones' performance is, as always, wise, powerful, amused, laconic, tinged with sadness.
There is not a lot of dialogue, but what there is resonates with the music of Cormac McCarthy's words. I haven't read the book - now, I want to.
Brief intermission whilelidocafe and I stumbled, gasping, from the theatre, and met up with my friend kp, with whom we went for a somewhat rushed but tasty Chinese meal
After which, kp and I met our friend mkb at the Alix Goolden Hall, where we listened to a concert of a Baroque Orchestra with guest soloists - a soprano and a counter tenor - performing a Handel orchestral suite, some Handel arias and Pergolesi's Stabat Mater.
We do not often enough have the opportunity to hear a counter tenor singing live. His voice is unearthly, hauntingly beautiful. With him singing the alto line, the opening verse of the Stabat Mater was so exquisite I almost broke in half.
It was lovely.
I'm amazed I slept at all, after both those experiences.
lidocafe called me in the morning and asked me if I would like to go and see No Country For Old Men, which we had both been eagerly awaiting. Of course, I wanted to, but I was scheduled to go to an Early Music concert in the evening, and had work to do, dogs to walk, chores to do. So of course, I went. I remarked that going from this ultra violent movie to genteel singing and orchestral music would be a stark contrast, not from the sublime to the ridiculous, but from the "something" to the "something else"; in fact, it was from the sublime to the equally sublime.No Country For Old Men was, to coin a phrase, "fucking awesome."
Now I can see that it might actually be possible to film The Road, but I want the Coen brothers to do it. Watching this movie was like watching the reading experience of reading The Road (if that makes any sense at all). It picked you up, sucked you in and didn't let go until the last second.
It is visually breathtaking, with its wide, gorgeous shots of sunrise, sunset, movement of clouds, lightning over prairie, but all slightly desaturated so that we know this is not some Romantic Western Epic.
There is no score. The silence is breathtaking, punctuated only by creaks, clicks, gasps of breath, explosions of gunfire and the stacatto thump of a cattle
The cattle gun is used by one of the most terrifyingly impassive psychopathic killers in movie history. Played by a chilling Javier Bardem, he has a slightly autist air about him - detached, incapable of human empathy or understanding, but with his own peculiar standard of logic. He is Death.
Then there is Random Chance, in the figure of the Lewellyn Moss, played by Josh Brolin. He stumbles on a drug deal gone wrong and makes choices according to his own standards of behavior and logic which lead him inexorably into the path of Javier Bardem.
Then there is Good, represented by the wonderful Tommy Lee Jones. There is a line he speaks about "carrying the flame" which will resonate with all familiar with The Road. Jones' performance is, as always, wise, powerful, amused, laconic, tinged with sadness.
There is not a lot of dialogue, but what there is resonates with the music of Cormac McCarthy's words. I haven't read the book - now, I want to.
Brief intermission while
lidocafe and I stumbled, gasping, from the theatre, and met up with my friend kp, with whom we went for a somewhat rushed but tasty Chinese mealAfter which, kp and I met our friend mkb at the Alix Goolden Hall, where we listened to a concert of a Baroque Orchestra with guest soloists - a soprano and a counter tenor - performing a Handel orchestral suite, some Handel arias and Pergolesi's Stabat Mater.
We do not often enough have the opportunity to hear a counter tenor singing live. His voice is unearthly, hauntingly beautiful. With him singing the alto line, the opening verse of the Stabat Mater was so exquisite I almost broke in half.
It was lovely.
I'm amazed I slept at all, after both those experiences.
Tags:
What I think of as the "Harry Potter Effect" - a renewed interest in YA or children's fantasy - has resulted in the welcome recent republication of authors who had been well-known in certain circles, like DWJ, or well-known from the past, like Edward Eager. It has also seen the reprinting of some rather more obscure but equally deserving works, like A String in the Harp by Nancy Bond or Elizabeth Marie Pope's The Perilous Gard. I've been thinking for a while of beginning a series of posts on old forgotten treasures from my own collection - not necessarily SF or fantasy, but books I loved that I wondered if anyone else had heard of, that I think deserve a bigger audience and potential reprinting. So, I thought I'd launch that series here, and invite others on my flist or from the bigger ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
bittercon community, to link comments to posts about their own forgotten but deserving treasures.
My first oldy but goody is Ellen Kindt McKenzie's ( Drujienna's Harp )
bittercon community, to link comments to posts about their own forgotten but deserving treasures.My first oldy but goody is Ellen Kindt McKenzie's ( Drujienna's Harp )
As lidocafe has already reported on her blog, we had an adventure even getting to see this movie. Ms Lido and I have what seems to be a developing habit of going to Saturday afternoon matinees, and we met at the local grande cineplex only to discover that it had cancelled the 1:00 pm showing of this movie. So we leapt into my golden chariot and sped halfway across town to another, smaller, plex where it was on, fortunately at what we thought was 20 minutes later than our original locale. In fact, it was only 10 minutes later, but we made it on-time, even though I absent-mindedly turned onto the Pat Bay Highway instead of doing the Saanich Rd jog, which would have cut a few minutes off our time, and despite the best efforts of the teenage popcorn vendor who moved as slowly as thick molasses. We caught the tail-end of the last preview as we plopped into our seats, so that was all right.
The movie was worth the trouble. This was the best evil-corporation thriller since The Insider, and more tense, rather more in the vein of The Firm, but more intelligent. The narrative was a masterpiece of "show-not-tell," requiring the audience to pay attention, piece together fragments of story. All the performances were unshowy but equally intelligent, from the increasingly interesting George Clooney to the always fascinating Tilda Swinton, playing a tightly wound, remarkably cold-blooded corporate lawyer, and Tom Wilkinson doing a very complex turn as an "is he crazy or not" whistle-blower. I love it when acting comes from behind the eyes rather than the front of the screen, and all three actors in this case demonstrated controlled internalization to a marvellous degree. There's a scene where George is driving with his young son beside him, controlled rage flashing on and off in his face, that created its own kind of tension. Tom Wilkinson appears to be having a breakdown, then suddenly focusses sharply and comes out with a completely "on," completely sane speech that makes you re-evaluate everything he's said or done before.
One thing I liked about this movie, after the fun of the suspense and the pleasure of watching a thoroughly adult, well-made thriller, was an interesting subtext about the value of family and friends. You leave it not so much chilled by the evil, faceless global corporation, as warmed by the power of human connections. Michael Clayton the character succeeds through his own intelligence but also because he doesn't give up faith in his family and friends, nor they in him.
lidocafe has already reported on her blog, we had an adventure even getting to see this movie. Ms Lido and I have what seems to be a developing habit of going to Saturday afternoon matinees, and we met at the local grande cineplex only to discover that it had cancelled the 1:00 pm showing of this movie. So we leapt into my golden chariot and sped halfway across town to another, smaller, plex where it was on, fortunately at what we thought was 20 minutes later than our original locale. In fact, it was only 10 minutes later, but we made it on-time, even though I absent-mindedly turned onto the Pat Bay Highway instead of doing the Saanich Rd jog, which would have cut a few minutes off our time, and despite the best efforts of the teenage popcorn vendor who moved as slowly as thick molasses. We caught the tail-end of the last preview as we plopped into our seats, so that was all right.The movie was worth the trouble. This was the best evil-corporation thriller since The Insider, and more tense, rather more in the vein of The Firm, but more intelligent. The narrative was a masterpiece of "show-not-tell," requiring the audience to pay attention, piece together fragments of story. All the performances were unshowy but equally intelligent, from the increasingly interesting George Clooney to the always fascinating Tilda Swinton, playing a tightly wound, remarkably cold-blooded corporate lawyer, and Tom Wilkinson doing a very complex turn as an "is he crazy or not" whistle-blower. I love it when acting comes from behind the eyes rather than the front of the screen, and all three actors in this case demonstrated controlled internalization to a marvellous degree. There's a scene where George is driving with his young son beside him, controlled rage flashing on and off in his face, that created its own kind of tension. Tom Wilkinson appears to be having a breakdown, then suddenly focusses sharply and comes out with a completely "on," completely sane speech that makes you re-evaluate everything he's said or done before.
One thing I liked about this movie, after the fun of the suspense and the pleasure of watching a thoroughly adult, well-made thriller, was an interesting subtext about the value of family and friends. You leave it not so much chilled by the evil, faceless global corporation, as warmed by the power of human connections. Michael Clayton the character succeeds through his own intelligence but also because he doesn't give up faith in his family and friends, nor they in him.
Tags:
Elizabeth: The Golden Years
It's appropriate that I start teaching Spenser next week. There was Gloriana, the Virgin Queen, up there on the screen for everyone to adore! Perhaps fortunately, I don't know enough to be annoyed about historical accuracy, or lack thereof. It was luscious eyecandy, especially with the delectable Clive Owen buckling his swash with vigour, and Cate Blanchett in armor, hair blowing in the same wind that blows away the Armada. I was taken with the sheer Girls Own Annual almost jingoism of it all - surely this would not have been PC a decade or so ago ... what has changed?? This is not to say that I did not enjoy it; I did. Just wanted to say, that's all.
Hot Fuzz
This was hilarious. So much fun. And I almost peed myself in the big shoot-out at the end.
The Descent
Courtesy of the film club - visceral, feminist horror. Rather good. Good company, too :)
And on the small screen...
Torchwood
I think so far I like this better than Dr. Who (at least recent offerings - being on record as not totally enamoured of the latest incarnation of him). It's a bit darker, a bit more textured, at least so far.
Deadwood
I suspect I'm going to have to buy my own copy of this. I keep taking the dvd's back to the store unwatched, or only half-watched, because the individual episodes are so powerful that I don't want to watch more than one in a week. The production values are fabulous - everything is so good: music, photography, acting - that each episode seems like a little movie. And the language ("limber-dicked cunt suckers" is my favourite)!!
It's appropriate that I start teaching Spenser next week. There was Gloriana, the Virgin Queen, up there on the screen for everyone to adore! Perhaps fortunately, I don't know enough to be annoyed about historical accuracy, or lack thereof. It was luscious eyecandy, especially with the delectable Clive Owen buckling his swash with vigour, and Cate Blanchett in armor, hair blowing in the same wind that blows away the Armada. I was taken with the sheer Girls Own Annual almost jingoism of it all - surely this would not have been PC a decade or so ago ... what has changed?? This is not to say that I did not enjoy it; I did. Just wanted to say, that's all.
Hot Fuzz
This was hilarious. So much fun. And I almost peed myself in the big shoot-out at the end.
The Descent
Courtesy of the film club - visceral, feminist horror. Rather good. Good company, too :)
And on the small screen...
Torchwood
I think so far I like this better than Dr. Who (at least recent offerings - being on record as not totally enamoured of the latest incarnation of him). It's a bit darker, a bit more textured, at least so far.
Deadwood
I suspect I'm going to have to buy my own copy of this. I keep taking the dvd's back to the store unwatched, or only half-watched, because the individual episodes are so powerful that I don't want to watch more than one in a week. The production values are fabulous - everything is so good: music, photography, acting - that each episode seems like a little movie. And the language ("limber-dicked cunt suckers" is my favourite)!!