Showing posts with label saw a good movie. Show all posts
Showing posts with label saw a good movie. Show all posts

11.21.2013

Ender's Game: From Novel to Movie

Yes, I'm still reading War and Peace, but I only have time for one post today, and I thought a review of the Ender's Game movie would be of more general interest. More W&P next week.

N.B: I'm reviewing this movie as a devout fan of the book it was adapted from. If you've never read the book, the review may make comparatively little sense and include mild spoilers. :)

The great challenge of adapting a much-known, much-loved book to the screen is not so much in translating details from the verbal medium to the visual; it's in finding the heart of the novel and making that the heart of the film as well. Failure seems more common than success.* The Narnia movies were mostly soulless because the scriptwriters missed the point of Aslan and therefore of the entire story. In the 2005 Pride and Prejudice, Keira Knightley caught Elizabeth Bennet's depressive side without catching her bright sense of humor, which resulted in a halfhearted portrayal. And nobody in the film industry seems to quite get the silent moral courage that powers Jane Eyre.

Ender's Game, Orson Scott Card's best-known and very-deservedly-loved novel, centers around the tension between brutality and compassion in the soul of one young human. This is worked out as Ender commands others while undergoing intense psychological suffering himself. It's an unusual and meaningful exploration of the necessity of loving your enemy, with contemplation of innocence and guilt and culpability, of the ethics of self-defense and of the means used toward that goal, of forgiveness and the righting of unrightable wrongs. Some of the questions are answered with a steady regard for truth and hope, and others are left for the reader to wrestle out with his own conscience. The whole of it is written with rare humanity and empathy.

Card was wise to hold onto the movie rights till he found someone who understood his novel and could share the vision. There are plenty of interesting, filmable details in the novel that screenwriter Gavin Hood could have focused on to the exclusion of more important points: tactics and strategy, Battle Room zero-gravity action, bullying scenes, everything that happens at Command School. Instead, Hood exercised unheard-of directorial self-control, abbreviating every one of the action scenes to make room for the core story, which he gave open recognition to with the quote at the beginning.

Not that the film lacked for action, mind. Ender gets his time in both mock combat and the real thing, and the Stilson and Bonzo fights, while shortened, are especially painful to watch. Even the dialogue is generally intense, and all that dramatic tension is reinforced by vids of Mazer Rackham's battle, the Giant's Drink mind game, Battle Room, and the simulator.

It was a delight to get visuals on the Battle Room and the space stations, and here I should say that the sets and photography were utterly beautiful. Scenes involving both Graff (Harrison Ford) and Ender (Asa Butterfield) were shot mostly in dark blue, which emphasized both characters' blue eyes and thereby subtly drew attention to the psychological nature of the story. Scenes with Valentine (Abigail Breslin) were warmer and browner, and while I'd always pictured Val and Ender as fair and Peter as dark (as per the book's descriptions, I believe), rather than the reverse, the color scheme was lovely.

I also loved seeing John Paul and Theresa Wiggin—though the shortening of John Paul to John, while probably accurate to the Wiggins' hiding of their respective Catholic and Mormon faiths, more or less removed the suggestion of religion entirely. Graff's in-book explanation of the Wiggins' quarrels over baptizing their children and of their conscience-stricken compliance with the global two-child policy is not plainly central to the story, so it wasn't an offensive removal, but it's a detail I always found fascinating, so I missed it.

Peter came off as a thug and not much else, but there simply wasn't time or place to give Peter and Valentine their subplots. What Hood kept, however, was Ender's internal conflict between the main characteristics he shares with each sibling: Peter's domineering brutality and Val's empathy and compassion. This was quietly emphasized through images as well as words.

Films rarely equal novels for nuance, and the story did lose some of its depth. The novel doesn't skimp on showing that Battle School is legitimized child abuse, but it communicates the I.F. leaders' belief that there's a clear motive for it in a way the movie doesn't. The movie shows the reactionary aggression of the humans against the Formics a little too unequivocally, too early. The end result is the same, of course, but in the movie, this amounted to making the ending seem a little more predictable and Graff a little less complex. Harrison Ford compensates well for the latter, though.

Moviegoers who have read the book will probably smile affectionately at mention of names like Alai, Bean, Fly, and Dink. Moviegoers who have not read the book will barely notice. These characters were mostly deemphasized—Bean included—for the sake of bringing Petra Arkanian forward, which invested the Battle School segment of the story with a little more female presence than it has in the book. Any study focused on war tactics and combat is naturally going to be male-heavy, so I wasn't bothered by that in the novel; on the other hand, I've always loved Petra as a character, and Hailee Steinfeld brought an impressive amount of light and energy to the role. Her appearance onscreen often eased the tension temporarily.

The ending was modified in a few ways to work better onscreen, and I generally thought these ways so clearly did work better for the medium that I wasn't disappointed. Getting an actual image of a Hive Queen, and a beautiful image at that, was a striking touch. I found that incredibly moving.

I'm just disappointed in two things about the movie: first, that they didn't pronounce Chamrajnagar for me, and second, that we didn't get to see Bean lean into his microphone at the end and whisper about Absalom. To be fair, that latter is from Ender's Shadow and might have given the game away, as it were, but whatever. Like any fan, I have my favorite details.

I'm beyond grateful, though, that the heart of the book was there.

1.31.2013

100 Most Favorite Movies

...because I can never resist a challenge. Want to join in? You can take the challenge yourself at Nathan Bransford's blog.

I didn't think I could come up with a hundred movies, but proved myself wrong in just 24 hours. Goodness only knows what I've missed by not taking a month to do this.

Artistic and literary favorites:

1. Everafter
2. Les Misérables (Hooper)
3. Phantom of the Opera (Schumacher)
4. Much Ado about Nothing (Branagh)
5. Pride and Prejudice (Colin Firth/Jennifer Ehle version)
6. Persuasion (Ciaran Hinds/Amanda Root version)
7. Sense & Sensibility (Ang Lee)
8. Emma (Kate Beckinsale version)
9. Life is Beautiful
10. Bella
11. The King’s Speech
12. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
13. The Scarlet Pimpernel (Anthony Andrews version)
14. Cinderella (Rodgers & Hammerstein; Brandy version)
15. My Fair Lady
16. Fiddler on the Roof
17. Mr. Holland’s Opus
18. Chicago
19. Moulin Rouge

Geekfests:

20. Star Wars: A New Hope
21. Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back
22. Star Wars: Return of the Jedi
23. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 (it was the only one I liked)
24. The Fellowship of the Ring
25. The Two Towers
26. The Return of the King
27. Stardust
28. Back to the Future (I like the first one best, but they were all lovable)

Old favorites:

29. Casablanca
30. Hot Lead, Cold Feet
31. It’s A Wonderful Life
32. The Happiest Millionaire
33. The Apple Dumpling Gang
34. The Apple Dumpling Gang Rides Again
35. Seven Brides for Seven Brothers
36. The African Queen
37. Support Your Local Sheriff

Rom-coms:

38. Return to Me
39. While You Were Sleeping
40. Anne of Green Gables
41. Anne of Green Gables: The Sequel (but do not under any circumstances watch the third)
42. A Walk to Remember
43. Sabrina
44. Sleepless in Seattle
45. You’ve Got Mail
46. Elizabethtown
47. 10 Things I Hate About You
48. My Big Fat Greek Wedding

Drama:

49. The Man from Snowy River (the sequel's likable, but not as good)
50. Frequency
51. Remember the Titans
52. The Shawshank Redemption
53. The Pelican Brief
54. Castaway
55. Little Women (Winona Ryder version)
56. Slumdog Millionaire
57. Save the Last Dance
58. Polly (the one starring Rudy from The Cosby Show)

Comedies and dramedies:

59. Galaxy Quest
60. A Knight’s Tale
61. Blast from the Past
62. The Gods Must be Crazy
63. The Princess Bride
64. McClintock!
65. Napoleon Dynamite
66. Hook
67. Surf Ninjas
68. The Kid
69. The Replacements
70. Sneakers
71. Sister Act (even though the writers knew absolutely nothing about the Catholic Church)
72. Scrooged
73. What About Bob
74. The Truman Show
75. Liar Liar
76. Elf
77. Stranger than Fiction
78. Office Space
79. The Wedding Singer
80. Spanglish
81. Mr. Deeds
82. Robin Hood: Men in Tights
83. Spaceballs

Favorites of my inner child:

84. Aladdin (Disney)
85. Robin Hood (Disney)
86. Tangled
87. Toy Story 1
88. Toy Story 3
89. Finding Nemo
90. Pete’s Dragon
91. The Muppet Movie
92. The Muppet Christmas Carol
93. Honey, I Shrunk the Kids
94. The Horse in the Gray Flannel Suit
95. The Sandlot

Favorites of my inner teenager:

96. The Princess Diaries
97. Raise Your Voice
98. Twilight
99. New Moon
100. Eclipse

I have yet to see The Artist, anything by Miyazaki, or Singing in the Rain. I know. Scold if you must. But what else have I missed? And what would you pick?

1.21.2013

Les Misérables: The Movie, The Musical

What I mean is, ugly things can also be beautiful. A hawk swooping in to kill its prey is beautiful. A woman, stripped of all worldly cares and possessions, about to face her own death at the hands of a murderer, and who realizes that she is a poor soul in need of God's grace just as much as the man who is about to kill her, is beautiful ("A Good Man Is Hard to Find"). The Crucifixion is beautiful. But they're all, to certain degrees painful. Even ugly. Grace reclaims even that.
~Christie, in last Wednesday's combox on Brideshead Revisited

Christie's words returned to haunt me Saturday night during the dark, frosty walk from cinema to car. Schönberg's music still pounded in my head, my cheeks were still tacky and my eyes hot from crying, and the leftover meditative mood kept all of us to a slow pace.

I didn't expect to have to write a second superlative review in the space of one week, but the movie astounded me too thoroughly to go unmentioned here, and besides, I needed a Monday post. Apologies, therefore, if I seem to be in raving mode.

I'm not. It was just that good.

Not being a film critic but merely a writer, singer, and artist's daughter, I've got only armchair observations on the technical side of the making. Director Tom Hooper did remarkable work with The King’s Speech, but I thought he equaled or surpassed himself with Les Mis. It's well written for the screen; William Nicholson’s adaptation of the Boublil/Schönberg/Kretzmer script is flawless, as far as I can tell, though I’ve not seen the stage performance to miss the handful of things that were cut or changed.

The cinematography is on the grand scale and beautiful, even a little bit magical, though that last might be the effect of heavy use of CGI. Shot in an almost monochromatic blue, with thoughtful use of earth tones and strong red as accents, the images retain a hint of stage-play feel while—as with Schumacher's Phantom of the Opera—offering perspectives to the moviegoer that simply can't be had through the proscenium arch. There are especially stunning moments: Javert's patent leather shoes pacing the very edge of the high bridge wall, for instance; furniture thrown from windows in the making of the revolutionaries' barricade; Cosette among flowers behind the gate at Marius' first visit.

Hugh Jackman (left) as Jean Valjean
and Anne Hathaway as Fantine
AP Photo/Universal Pictures
The cast surprised me despite my high expectations. Jackman brought all the grim determination to Valjean that he brought to Wolverine in the X-Men movies, plus a superb compassion and gentleness. Hathaway, whom I'd mostly seen in romantic comedies like The Princess Diaries and The Devil Wears Prada, threw herself into Fantine's desperation. I was in tears nearly every time she was onscreen.

Amanda Seyfried and Eddie Redmayne—Cosette and Marius—were mostly new to me, but did quite credibly as the innocent-souled young lovers. Samantha Barks, strikingly beautiful and expressive, will probably always be my vision of Eponine. Child actors Isabelle Allen and Daniel Huttlestone floored me as young Cosette and Gavroche; I'm not sure how children learn how to act so convincingly so early, but Allen and Jackman displayed an exquisite father-daughter tenderness together, and Huttlestone stole the show every time the camera turned his way.

The Thénardiers could not have been better cast. Helena Bonham Carter is an astonishingly flexible actress; her roles have varied from sweet Lucy Honeychurch in A Room with a View to elegant Queen Elizabeth in The King's Speech to crazed Bellatrix Lestrange in the Harry Potter films, with Mme. Thénardier loosely resembling the latter (that hair!) I know less of Sacha Baron Cohen's work, never having seen Borat—all the way through the movie I wondered why his face was so familiar—but he didn't hold back a thing as the thieving, garish "Master of the House". The pair brought a much-needed comic relief to the story.

The only actor I questioned was Russell Crowe, who comes off a shade too generous, I think, to be properly believable as the merciless Javert. On the other hand, Crowe's touch of noblesse oblige made Javert unusually sympathetic, which prevented me from questioning very much.

The vocals, recorded live during filming rather than in studios for lip-syncing on camera, were unadorned and unstylized, to sound like speech, in contrast to Broadway-standard tone and projection. This made the lyrics more immediately emotional, more accessible, and while I heard tones I didn’t like, the effect was lovely overall. Crowe has a firm, if not very dynamic voice; Redmayne hit just a hair off strident now and again, but made up for that with passion; Jackman was a touch thin in the high register, but his whole heart was in the music. I was too busy crying to find fault with Hathaway's vocals. I loved both Barks and Seyfried, as well as Allen's innocent, lovely rendition of "Castle on a Cloud."

The extended facial closeups of various actors singing passionately, often while in tears, came off a little awkward, though not nearly as bad as it could have been. If the emotions had been off in the slightest, it would have been more than usually uncomfortable. But Hathaway, Jackman, Redmayne and Barks, all of whom underwent the camera in the face, performed without a slip. Hathaway's "I Dreamed a Dream" is particularly gutwrenching.

Russell Crowe as Javert.
AP Photo/Universal Pictures/Laurie Sparham
There’s no nudity and comparatively little gore, but the horror of the deaths, the prostitution, the prison, and the turning of cold law upon Valjean and Fantine and the revolutionaries are not passed over lightly. It is hard to watch, hard to sit through without feeling vaguely guilty over comfortable theater seats and warm rooms and the fact of having plenty of food and clothing. Yet the suffering is reclaimed—as the story demands—by recourse to grace.

Which is why Christie's thoughts on painful beauty came back to me. For all Victor Hugo's spiritual wandering, this story is intensely, emotionally Christian, and for once Hollywood didn’t try to get in the way. It had been over ten years since I read the book, and I was thunderstruck by the lyrics, the scenes of prayer complete with candles and crucifixes, and the ending. The musical is impressively faithful to the novel, but if anything, it emphasizes the power of the bishop's gift to Jean Valjean more strongly than Hugo did.

For those who have never read the book or seen any of the adaptations thereof, the story may prove a bit challenging to follow. It may also be too much, emotionally speaking, for anyone dealing with extreme heaviness or sorrow in their own life.

Those are my only disclaimers. This was the first time in a couple of years that I felt that a movie was really worth the price of theater tickets.

The problem with claiming that a film is astoundingly good is that most of us respond to such reviews by plopping down in a theater seat and saying, eagerly, "Astound me!"—which often means coming away disappointed. So maybe it's better to go in with low expectations. Seize on your dislike for whichever of the actors you've never cared for. Imagine obvious computer effects and way-too-intimate photography. Remind yourself just how dang unhappy the story is. Whatever you need to think about. Just don't let it actually stop you from going.

Go with someone you're comfortable crying with, though.

12.13.2010

New Blog Design, Christians and Art, and Narnia

As you may or may not have noticed: This weekend I completely redesigned my site, thanks to Blogger's relatively-new Template Designer. It felt a little nervy to put both my name and face in the header (yes, that is me)... I'd already found it embarrassing enough to redirect my blog to jennasthilaire.com with everything inside me shouting YOU ARE NOT FAMOUS DON'T BE PRETENTIOUS. Oh well. Pictures personalize a website—at least, that's how I feel when other people put their own up. And that is my name.

Let me know if you come across anything in the new site design that needs fixing, and I'll do my best to oblige.

While normally I'd do my own writing about writing today, fellow Blogengamot member Arabella Figg put up a post at The Hog's Head discussing whether Christian films can be good. Her thoughts and the ensuing discussion on the relationships between Christianity, Christians, and art—including a contribution from Hollywood screenwriter Janet Batchler (who wrote Batman Forever, among other things)—fascinated me. I recommend that. The basic principles are applicable to the art of writing.

If you need further reading material, I just posted a review of the new Narnia movie, Voyage of the Dawn Treader, also at The Hog's Head.

12.18.2009

The New Moon Movie


Lou took me to see this a few weeks ago, and as a movie review post tends to take a lot of time to write, I've procrastinated. I did get a short piece up at The Hog's Head celebrating the faithfulness of the movie to the book, but here I'll talk details. Spoilers ahead!

New Moon being my favorite novel of the four, the movie could have seriously bombed for me. It did not. I liked it, and so did Lou. (Lou, good man, likes the Twilight movies better than the Potter movies. So do I, though in a battle of the books, I think Potter will always win for me.)

The four blank chapters in the novel, titled according to the four months they represent, could have been very difficult to communicate in movie format. Weitz and crew did a fantastic job.

The worst part of the movie experience for me: Sitting in front of the sort of girl who gives Twilight fans a bad name. She kept up a steady run of insinuating commentary throughout the film--out loud. 'Really,' I wanted to tell her, 'I know both the leading boys took their shirts off--but I managed to sit through it without swooning. Can't you?'

Though I consider myself firmly Team Edward, I have to say that the movie (and Taylor Lautner's good work in his role) made Jacob seem a lot more relatable than Edward. Not so in the book. That scene in Eclipse where Bella breaks her hand punching Jacob in the jaw? Yeah, I'm right there with her on that.

Favorite scene: The little flash-forward where a transformed Bella runs with Edward through the trees. Kristen Stewart makes a lovely sparkly vampire.

I found all the cinematography quite beautiful, but especially the vampire and werewolf action scenes, which usually happened in the forests. Being from the Pacific Northwest, I love getting to see this area displayed so splendidly on the big screen.

Leaving out Catherine Hardwicke's old-movie-style clips made for a little discontinuity between the films, but New Moon was still too well shot for that to greatly bother me.

Charlie and Carlisle (Billy Burke and Peter Facinelli, respectively) gave flawless performances, as always.

Bella jumping on the back of the stranger's motorcycle made my one big quibble with the movie itself. She rides off with a catcalling guy she doesn't know ... and he brings her back? Hardly believable.

I did miss Carlisle actually stating his belief that he and his family are not necessarily damned. At least Bella said it.

The Volturi scene had too much action in it for me, but Dakota Fanning makes a perfect Jane. My goodness, that girl can act.

Overall rating: Definitely worth the $9 it cost to see it. At least, for those of us who like Twilight. Feel free to add your own impressions in the comments.

7.27.2009

Review: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince movie

Fifty Favorite Books will return tomorrow ... I promise.

My husband took me to see Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince last night. It wasn't the most exciting event on the planet for him, so I felt bad (he gave a far more positive review of the Twilight movie.) "I hate making people put up with my whims," I told him. He said that I don't have many whims, for which I affirmed his husband skills. He might be right about that after all, though; I just have a few really strong whims, one of which is watching a movie just so I can hate on it with the other Potter fans (although Travis liked it, so maybe it won't get so much ragging this trip around.)

Planning to go see the movie? Spoilers follow, so beware.

Rather than sit down in the theater armed with my encyclopedic knowledge of the book, ready to Reducto the movie's every scene, I decided to watch it as a movie in its own right. I found this difficult, of course, because in know-it-all-Hermione fashion, my knowledge likes to jump up and down with its hand in the air. But I didn't want to drink the Haterade too quickly. (Katdish used that phrase in a comment on Stuff Christians Like the other day, and I've wanted to use it ever since. "Drink the Haterade." That's hilarious.)

I found a few things to hate on. I went into this movie knowing--and it feels like I've known this forever--that an attack on the Burrow was invented for whatever reason. Not only was that not in the book, it was rather pointless as to the movie, with no leadup before or fallout afterward. Also, never in his entire existence does Dumbledore say something as fallibly human as "This is beyond anything I ever guessed!" Let me explain something, Warner boys: When a character is, as they say, "larger than life", you don't mess with his lines. You just don't. And where was Snape? Wasn't this movie called "Half-Blood Prince"?

Beyond those things and similar others, I did find a lot to like about the movie. First, the artistry was downright splendid. It was beautifully filmed and reminded me that big-budget movies tend to recognize true art even when the rest of culture forgets. The music was likewise lovely; better to do as they did then try to produce Fawkes' phoenix song as such. The phoenix song always gets me in the book, and it was Fawkes that finally brought tears to my eyes in the movie, though Ginny holding Harry, kneeling at Dumbledore's side after the fall from the tower, came awfully close.

Other parts of the movie were really funny, even though I'd seen several of them online beforehand. Some of the acting was very good, notably Jim Broadbent as Slughorn, and ... whether due to being prepared for the worst by my long happy years of being horrified at Michael Gambon's Dumbledore performances, or due to an honest improvement, I didn't hate it this time. I tend to like understated acting, which is presumably why I have never really liked David Thewlis's Lupin, and the main criticism of Gambon's current performance is that it's too deadpan. Better deadpan than collaring and shaking Harry or rolling eyes in apparent helplessness.

As to the details, here's my review.

Yes:

Beautiful, beautiful architectural shots. I'll repeat myself: the cinematography was just lovely.

Ginny seeing Hedwig and searching for Harry just before he arrives at the Burrow made for a lighthearted, really likeable scene and brought her character forward.

The Pensieve: Not like I pictured it, but quality. Young Tom Riddle was thoroughly creepy.

The scene with Slughorn at Aragog's funeral and afterward in Hagrid's cabin: Hilarious, poignant, beautifully done.

Ron's encounter with love potion was absolutely hysterical. I'd seen it before, but still got a kick out of it. "All right, you love her! Have you ever even met her?"

Felix Felicis. Nicely done, although Harry clearly had some left over after the Slughorn event and I thought he'd divide it between his friends as he did in the book.

Ginny everywhere. Cheers! They gave her some lines. Bonnie Wright pulled them off with emotion and grace.

Quidditch. In the first movie, the famous ball-game-on-broomsticks had the graphics of a video game. This time, the Quidditch action was fabulous. I loved Luna's lion hat, too, though it would have been fun to see it roar.

Snape's AK. Knowing "the rest of the story", as it were, I thought Alan Rickman pulled off Snape's emotion fabulously.

Ending the movie with Fawkes' departure into the sky. I'm not sure anyone only watching the movies would have gotten that he was Dumbledore's pet phoenix, but for book-formed Potterheads, the Resurrection bird is a powerful and important symbol. Just thinking about it makes my eyes well up.

Maybe:

The scene with the waitress at the beginning of the movie. It worked okay, but I liked Dumbledore's scolding the Dursleys in the book much better, and it doesn't seem necessary to portray Harry as a "normal teenager" interested in "going out" when in the books he's honestly distracted. It detracted a little from the onset of Harry's interest in Ginny, I thought.

It makes sense, I suppose, to play Bellatrix up and Narcissa down in the movie version of the "Spinner's End" scene, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

They at least tried to make Natalia Tena look like the book description of Tonks. And I liked it that she called Lupin "sweetheart", though I of course missed the depiction of their difficult move into romance.

Harry's comfort of Hermione after Ron kisses Lavender is a little too open, a little too unlike the masculine reticence of the Harry we know, but it made for an enjoyable scene and a good explanation of both Harry's and Hermione's romantic turmoil.

I had expected Hermione's flock of birds to attack Ron's face and arms, like they did in the book, but their kamikaze run into the door was tolerably effective.

Harry and Ginny's kiss was sweet, but not really the victorious experience from the book. A mildly seductive initiation by Ginny just doesn't compare to Harry's making the move "without thinking, without planning it, without worrying that fifty people were watching" when she runs into his arms after the Quidditch win.

Harry and Draco's battle in the bathroom. Tom Felton's fantastic acting helped. What I didn't like was that we didn't hear Draco attempt to use an Unforgivable, which made Harry's use of Sectumsempra a little less forgivable. Snape never questioned it, either, which was odd.

The Inferi were never explained, and I expected them to be more like the Dead Marshes in Lord of the Rings, but they served their purpose. I managed to watch them without nightmares, so the scariness factor could have been worse.

Snape's explanation to Harry that he was the Half-Blood Prince was moving, but I did miss the almost-demented "Don't call me coward!"

No:

Tonks' "The first night of the cycle is always the hardest" makes it sound like Lupin's about to change into a werewolf then and there. Followed immediately by Bellatrix and Greyback's attack, it makes no sense. Greyback is a werewolf too (which is never explained) and this just doesn't compute.

David Yates gives a good explanation of his reasons for adding the Burrow attack, noting that JKR herself affirmed it, but I still think there might have been a better way to accomplish the sense of jeopardy. It just felt too out of place with the story.

How did Harry know to use a bezoar to save Ron from the poison? What's a bezoar? We know this from the books, but it came out of nowhere in the movie.

The only pointer to Harry and Ginny's breakup is that she's not in the final scene where Harry, Ron and Hermione discuss the fake Horcrux and watch Fawkes fly away. Not only that, there's no confirmation that Ginny and Dean actually broke it off before Ginny and Harry's big kiss. Actually, there's never even any explanation that Harry and Ginny are officially dating; they just kiss briefly in the Room of Requirement.

Speaking of the Room of Requirement, if Ginny hides the book and Harry has his eyes closed, how will he remember the tiara-on-a-bust when he needs to in Deathly Hallows?

Did Hagrid get Fang out of the burning hut? I suppose, if you'd never read the book, you might not have thought of them as being trapped in the building Bellatrix sets afire.

Gambon's "Severus, please ..." didn't sound like pleading to me. I thought it came across that he was asking Snape to do what he did, which was important but perhaps a little too obvious.

When McGonagall raised her wand and sent a light up into the Dark Mark in the sky, starting to dissolve it, I thought that was sweet. When everyone else raised their wands, I thought they meant to do the same, and since the Mark did fade, perhaps it was intended that way--but it did come across as rock-concerty. Amy Sturgis said that someone in the theater with her actually whispered "Free Bird!" at that point.

* * *

What have I missed? I've just jotted down things as I recall them, so certainly there will be something.

3.30.2009

Entertainment and More

Fireproof

Lou and I saw Fireproof last night on my parents' very nice widescreen TV. Mom and Dad had seen it before, but they watched it again with us--Dad used to be a firefighter himself, after all.

It was an unspeakable relief to watch a movie that didn't savage things I believe--so much a relief that if there was much of the particular cheesiness that tends to creep into films with a strong salvation message, it generally missed me. It was a delight to know that it was his wife Chelsea, not lead actress Erin Bethea, that Kirk Cameron was kissing in the big yay-they-make-up scene, and I enjoyed seeing an honest-to-goodness happy ending.

Honestly, I think we can look to independent filmmakers like the Sherwood Baptist Church and Metanoia Films (makers of Bella) for many--if not most--of the best films of the future. Hollywood seems to be running out of plot ideas and making up for it by throwing around a lot of CGI. Give me a good story any day.


* * *

Twitter

Some months ago I signed up for a Twitter account, which seemed the thing to do at the time. I have since logged in approximately thrice. The Twitter logo should be the picture in the text-speak dictionary next to TMI (Too Much Information, if anyone reading this doesn't recognize the acronym.) I've never met anything so annoying as the possibility of logging one's drollest mundaneities in short blurbs for all your friends to read, and then reading all theirs. I haven't the time. I have not unsigned myself, so if you want to follow absolute silence, look up "librarylily" on Twitter and follow away. Feel free to post your own tweets. I won't swear not to read them, but the chances are very good that I won't.


* * *

Books

In case you really did want to hear about my drollest mundaneities, here's one for the day: My reading list has become something like the challenge of Everest for a mountaineer. Out of the usual desire to overachieve, I have gotten myself stuck climbing the following pile "Because it's there":

The Divine Comedy by Dante. Hell took me many months to escape; Purgatory is a slow climb, but much more pleasant. Heaven sounds intriguing. No one as interested in literature as I am should find poetry so shamefully difficult to read.

The Discarded Image by C.S. Lewis. Lewis is smarter than I am. Not fair.

The Princess and the Goblin by George MacDonald. I love MacDonald's work--couldn't put Phantastes down--but must have gotten distracted somehow, because I'm only one chapter into this.

A Study of Literature by David Daiches. This was a Cornell University publication, written by one of their English professors, and so far it's much easier reading than Lewis's book.

Theology of the Body for Beginners by Christopher West. I just heard most of this book in speech form, having listened to his CDs with Lou during our engagement, but my book club is reading this. At least it's an easy (and excellent) read.

The Deer on a Bicycle by Patrick McManus (his book on writing). Mom and Dad got this for me for Christmas. The preface and first chapter are hilarious.

Twilight by Stephenie Meyer, again, because I always have to have out at least one book that doesn't absolutely require the 'capacity for abstract thought.' Unfortunately, my brain works against itself because there is depth of thought in that book, and I find it fascinating.

Orthodoxy by G.K. Chesterton, again. Superb.

A Cloister Walk by Kathleen Norris. I read most of this immediately after my friend Naomi gave it to me, but have been slowly making my way through the rest of the book by discovering it at odd moments. Good stuff.

Biographia Litteraria by Samuel Taylor Coleridge. That one is online, so I keep forgetting that I'm reading it, but it's interesting.

And that's just the stack I've started ...

12.11.2007

Thoughts of the Month

Sometimes the human brain gets so full that it might consider reversing Number Five's cry of "Input, Stephanie, input!" to "Output!" I hit that point about two weeks ago. Too bad it wasn't tonight, as I might have had more mental energy that way.

***

Bella came to town last week and Lou and I saw it. It made me cry. It took me about three hours afterwards to figure out what all was going on, as past and present and future appeared intermittently throughout the story. But it was a good story, and well acted. I really have to compliment the cinematography too--I loved the way they filmed it. As a drama, I found it pretty emotional and one scene was really hard to watch, but I'm glad I saw it. At some point I'll have to watch it again; it seems like the kind of thing that one gets more out of with a second viewing.

***

Dan in Real Life made me snicker, but if I wasn't the only one who caught the Harry Potter reference, then at least no one else snickered aloud. It's in there. I promise--you can look for it. But if you have the choice whether to see Dan or Bella, see Bella, because that's a better movie. I liked Dan in Real Life, especially since it was part of a hang-out afternoon with Dad. But seriously--when did tempestuous, tantrum-throwing, nonsensical teenage infatuation become the standard for romance? I'm not talking about the precocious adult-in-a-teen-body thing that Disney usually tries to pass off as reality. I'm talking about a bratty, rebellious fifteen-year-old acting like a bratty, rebellious fifteen-year-old and getting held up as a good example. That just did not seem believable to me.

***

Usually I try to read one book at once and read it through. But lately I've had far too tall a stack to plow through it rhythmically and methodically, one at a time. This might have something to do with joining a book club. Or it might have more to do with the fact that not only did I join a book club, I asked my boss for recommendations, decided that I shouldn't own a Dickens book that I hadn't read, got intrigued while looking over Lou's shoulder at his book, got a book I'd long wanted to read as a gift from him on the anniversary of our first date, ordered two books from Amazon and swallowed them whole (not literally) ... and that doesn't include all the basic stuff that I might pick up just because I want to. The floor of my room now looks like a library exploded.

The Napoleon of Notting Hill, a Chesterton novel, made some hilarious and bizarre--but interesting and accurate--points about humor, passion and Chesterton's favorite target for his satirical efforts: the materialist philosophy. I love the way Chesterton writes. Every time I read him, I think "There goes a man who loves the English language as I do."

The Story of a Soul, autobiography of St. Thérèse of Lisieux, brought tears to my eyes about every third page. She was a little, cloistered Carmelite nun who begged the pope to let her enter the convent at a very young age--fifteen or sixteen--and she lived only to the age of 24. The simple pouring out of her heart into a few pages took her posthumously from unknown to international appeal; and reading it, I can see why. Her words continue to come back and convict me of my own selfishness and coldness. She expressed a love for Christ that one rarely sees the likes of in this world.

Dickens' Great Expectations left me with alternating opinions of how much I liked it. I wanted to smack the main character far too often for ease of reading. But he did eventually become the man he ought, and that helped. The "happy ending" that Dickens finally went with was certainly better than the original he penned, but I would have liked a little more of it :-)

***

A few years ago, the understanding of the awful realities of uncertainty and suffering hit me at the very center of my heart. It wasn't a cataclysmic or tragic event, but I remember the day--a cold March or April day, gray and drizzly, floating in an orange raft on the Wenatchee river just above the low-head dam at Dryden. I never went near that dam--we were taught how to stay well away--but I knew the theory of what would happen to anyone or anything trapped in its power, and somehow the knowledge of the dangers of moving water connected in my mind with the fragility of life. It sounds clichéd to say that I have never been the same after that moment, but it is the truth of the matter.

A Dominican priest named Fr. Vincent Serpa, who appears now and then on one of the podcasts I listen to, recently prescribed a few minutes' daily meditation on the crucifix for help in the growing of faith. The thought of the crucifix often comes to mind since then. Yes, we need the empty cross, the knowledge that Jesus is risen. But nothing reminds or inspires me to accept my own suffering like the sight of that wasted, beaten body hanging by nails on wood.

***

It's ten o'clock--time to give my unfortunate wrist a break and go read. Good night.