Yes, I Cry During Happy Movies

Lady Brainsample has had three days in a row of being almost completely happy, so she wishes to make a blog post. Not only was yesterday a mostly happy day, but Friday she found out there is a SLIGHT chance she may be able to get an A in the dreaded Business Law class.

But that's not the point of this blog post, so she will switch from third person back to first.

I saw The Muppets. (the movie, not them in general...)

Now, when I found out last June that they were making a new Muppet movie that was going to be a theatrical release, I was skeptical. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the Muppets. Always have. But the last thing they made that had to do with the Muppets (I think it was some sort of TV or direct to DVD-type special called Letters to Santa or something like that...) failed to please.
It wasn't that it was BAD bad, but it wasn't the regular caliber of proper Muppet productions. It was a predictable plot with mediocre music that was obviously contrived to squeeze money out of the franchise. Honestly, the last great Muppet movie was probably Muppets From Space.

Even the movie before that (It's a Very Merry Muppet Christmas) wasn't that great. There were moments I absolutely LOVED, (see this blog post) but overall, it was just meh.
But anyway, up until it actually came out, I was skeptical. Then one of Mom's old friends saw it and said that if it didn't win Best Picture, the Oscars would be exposed for the sham that they are.

Ok, that's encouraging. Hope slightly restored.
Then I heard the beginning of the latest Overthinking It podcast, in which they were planning to discuss the movie. Before I stopped listening to it, (didn't want to hear spoilers) they said all sorts of stuff about how you MUST see this movie, etc., etc., etc.

Ok, I'm excited.

I was not disappointed. So, I echo others. GO SEE THIS MOVIE.

There are SO many things I loved about this movie. The music was outstanding, the non-Muppet actors did a fine job, the Muppets themselves looked GREAT.
The story was great; reading the synopsis, I thought I would be able to predict where the story was going to go, but I didn't.

But what was really awesome was a feeling I got that was similar to how I felt watching Toy Story 3. When I saw Toy Story 3, it felt really relevant to me because Andy was going to college, he was the same age as I am; so it was like they made the movie not only for all the kids of this generation, but also for the generation that grew up with the Toy Story movies.

Similarly, with the Muppet movie, when we finally meet Kermit again, he talks about how they've waned in popularity, but in spite of that, Walter, the greatest Muppet fan, loves them and eggs them on to put on another show. Whenever Kermit said something about people not knowing who they were or caring anymore, my mental thoughts were, "I still love y'all!!!"

All of the Muppets reuniting again in the story was incredibly awesome, Kermit finally admits that he loved Miss Piggy, and I don't know how to write about other stuff that I loved without sounding so inCREDibly sappy.
Even more sappy than I sound when I tell you readers that I cried. A whole lot. Not just during sad parts! During all the happy angsty parts. When Kermit and Piggy finally started singing Rainbow Connection together, I completely lost it.

Final comments: Jim Parsons was AWESOME as his appearance as the human version of Walter; Chris Cooper makes a great villain; and I loved that Uncle Deadly (one of the less well-known Muppets) got to have a featured role and turned good at the end.

And because I haven't posted anything about my cats recently, I'll show y'all my attempt to get Trillian (our newest) to take a picture with me.
It didn't go as planned, ha ha.

Pretty in Pink and Say Anything: A Discussion about Love Transcending Class Lines in Teen Movies of the 1980s

I watched one of my favorite movies yesterday, Pretty in Pink, and while watching it, I was struck with a number of similarities in subject matter and theme to another one of my favorite movies, Say Anything.
If this were a proper literature paper, my thesis statement might be something like "Pretty in Pink and Say Anything are perfect examples of 1980s coming of age movies about romance across class lines."

Just as a tangent, I find it funny that MOST 80s movies I watch instantly become favorite movies. Well, other than Sixteen Candles. I liked it, but not like I like The Princess Bride, The Breakfast Club, Ferris Bueller's Day Off, Say Anything, Pretty in Pink, Overboard, The Lost Boys, Back to the Future, Dirty Dancing, The Goonies, and Ghostbusters.

Anyway, watching Pretty in Pink again, I'm still among the camp that thinks Andie (the Molly Ringwald character) should've ended up with Duckie. (Jon Cryer) Now, don't get me wrong, to make a movie that will make money, I understand what they mean when they said in the bonus feature, "Ya can't make a movie where she doesn't get the cute guy in the end."
Also, they discussed how if you make a movie about romance across class lines and then have the lower-class heroine end up with the lower-class guy, that doesn't send a good message about love conquering all and stuff like that.

The big problem with that in Pretty in Pink is the lack of character on the part of Blane (Andrew McCarthy), the rich kid Andie falls for. I just don't find him interesting and lovable like I do Duckie. Yes, he at first thinks he can go out with Andie despite backlash for it from his rich friends and possible backlash from his parents, but he loses any respect I had for him by backing out on taking Andie to the prom and making up the excuse that he had "asked someone else earlier and forgot."

Duck, on the other hand, though he acts a bit like a jerk when he finds out Andie is going out with Blane, he only does so in an overreaction. He truly believes that Blane is only going out with her to use her and finds that disgusting when Duckie himself has been devoted to her for so long and loves her so much.

Now turning to Say Anything, I believe this movie also is thematically about love over class lines, but in a much subtler way. In Pretty in Pink, there is very obviously a divide in the town: a literal wrong side of the railroad tracks. Andie at the end of her first date with Blane doesn't want him to take her home because she doesn't want him to see where she lives.

In Say Anything, the "class line" isn't so much about physical address and/or amount of money, but about education and prospects, and this I believe is more likely to be realistic in today's world.
While in Pretty in Pink we have Andie, the "lower class girl" and Blane the "rich guy," in Say Anything we have Diane Court (Ione Sky), the valedictorian and Lloyd Dobbler (John Cusack), an intelligent and sweet but underachieving guy. Diane has been accepted to a prestigious study abroad fellowship in England, while Lloyd has no concrete plans for the future and what plans he does have include trying to become a pro in kickboxing "the sport of the future."

In Pretty in Pink, we have pressure placed on the couple from their social groups and on Blane's side, his parents if they knew about what was going on, but Andie's father encourages her that if they love each other, they should forget about their friends.
In Say Anything, most of the action takes place after graduation. At the party Lloyd and Diane go to as their first date, Lloyd's friends all like Diane (though they all wish they could have known her before graduation. It is explained that she took classes at the college in their town as well, so wasn't involved heavily in the student body.) After graduation and the final party, social groups aren't much of a force over the summer, so pressure on the couple in this movie comes in the form of Diane's overprotective loving father. (John Mahoney)

Diane's father doesn't object to him based on money; (Lloyd at the time is living with his grown sister and his parents are working in Europe.) he objects to her dating him because of his lack of prospects, saying to him, "You're not a permanent part of her life. You're a distraction."


In both of these movies, we have an absent mother and a father who wants to take care of his baby girl the best he can. In Pretty in Pink, the father is still bereaved from his wife leaving, so he's more...how do I say this?...sympathetic to his daughter's happiness in the way of love. 
In Say Anything, the father also wants his daughter to be happy, but he sees that goal as being accomplished by urging her to get the best possible education and preparing for the future. He sees anything (or anyone) that takes even a little away from that as a distraction and a waste of time.


And so, you ask, what is to be gleaned from all this? 


I'm not sure. In Pretty in Pink, the ending is left hazy. Andie obviously chooses Blane, the rich kid, and we're left to hope that things worked out for them in the end despite potential criticism from his parents and being ostracized by his friends. We know that Duckie gains respect for Blane for coming alone to the prom and tells Andie to go after him so that they can be happy. Her father wasn't much of an issue. And so we have a fairy tale type ending.


In Say Anything, we also have a happy ending, but this one is a bit more bittersweet. Diane's dad is conveniently convicted of embezzling money from tenants of his nursing home, and so put away into prison and not much of a driving force in his daughter's life. She forgives him and visits him before she leaves for England, but decides to be with Lloyd even though from prison, her Dad still disapproves of him.
I'm left to wonder what happened when (or if) they came back from England. I'm sure they were happy together and Lloyd got his act together to take care of and eventually marry Diane, but assuming they ever went back to America and Diane's dad ever got out of prison, what kind of family dynamics would they have?
Would he still be angry for her choosing to be with Lloyd or would he see that he was unreasonable and accept them? And would they care if he did or not? We know that she forgave him for what he did with the money, but would she still want to have a major relationship with a man who stole most of what they had and caused so much unhappiness for her and Lloyd over the summer before they got back together?


Who knows.

2 (or 4) down, 1 to go/Miniature Book Review

Yet again, I have neglected my blog. I've pretty much just skipped out on blogging this whole semester, but I have only 1 final left to go tomorrow (in historical geology) so I thought I'd try to get back to writing on here again.
~
A few months ago, I finally read Battle Royale. I read it because on Goodreads, people kept saying that the Hunger Games ripped it off and that Suzanne Collins was unoriginal. I tend to disagree.
The starting idea may have been similar (kids being forced to fight to the death in a "game") but the execution was completely different.
The author of Battle Royale took a much much darker approach to it and made it...how do I put it...much more gory and violent than Suzanne Collins did. Also in Royale, it was a grade of school, so the competitors knew each other. The author of Royale also made the story much more complex by focusing on every single one of the competitors, whereas Collins took a much more personal approach with Katniss' first person narrative.

Which do I like better? Probably Hunger Games. I liked the characters much better and the writing much better. (though I am convinced that some of the triteness of the writing of Battle Royale came from being translated into English from Japanese.) The ending was also much more positive in the Hunger Games.

So, does anyone have any thoughts on the casting of Hunger Games so far?

Flash Fiction/Dawn Treader Review

Yay! Some people still read my blog!

I had two requests on the comments section of my last post, but I'm welcome to more!

First, Q said succinctly, "Flash fiction."

My opinion on flash fiction...I have to confess that I had to go look it up on Urban Dictionary because I had no idea what it was!

Urbandictionary.com defines flash fiction as "A style of fiction writing characterized by intensity and brevity. Usually under a page in length."

With that being said, I would have to say that my opinion on it would probably vary with the different pieces I would read. It would probably be similar to my love/mostly hate relationship with free verse.
I love the idea of telling a story in six words or less, so I might like some flash fiction, but I would have to read more of it before I could really have an opinioin.
(by the way Q, if you know some good flash fiction on the internet, I'd love to read it.)



Moving on to Countess Madeline's request: "Hello! I think you should write a full review of Dawn Treader. I'd like to see your thoughts on the film."

Countess, are you sure you want to open that floodgate? All right, here we go!

As I said in my last post to start out, I thought it was an all right film, but a terrible adaptation.
Going into the movie, I had a somewhat optimistic view. Though we had received conflicting reports in the news about making the movie, I thought that changes made to the film couldn't ruin it overall for me.
They could.
Watching the movie, I felt like the writers of the script were high the entire time they wrote it and didn't really care about the integrity of the themes of the book. The convoluted mess of an adaptation tried to go for a more "epic" Harry Potter type film, but in doing that, it felt like a cheap fantasy film made for young children with a mindless story and shallow characters. (for the most part)

This review by glumPuddle on NarniaWeb expresses most of my frustrations well, and though I wouldn't go so far to say that I won't look forward to the next film (if it is made) I will be more pessimistic about it.

With all that negativity out of the way, I will say there are some things that I did enjoy about the film.

(spoilers will probably follow)

1. The look of the actual Dawn Treader ship I really, really loved. The purple sail was all I had hoped it would be, and the whole ship was beautiful. With that being said, I wish they had had more sweeping majestic shots of it.
2. Will Poulter's performance as Eustace. Try as they might, they couldn't ruin him for me.
3. Eustace's relationship with Reepicheep.
4. Caspian with facial hair. (ok, that's not super important to the film, but I felt like it was one of the more redeeming qualities of it)
5. The one part in the movie I can think of with verbatim words from the book where Aslan says that in our world, he has another name, and that the children must learn to know him by that name. That part....made me cry. (in a good way)

There was probably more that I enjoyed, but those are the main good qualities. (in my opinion)
Now to the really bad....
The really bad, I thought, for the most part wasn't was they put in, but what was left out.

The whole "quest" thing....ok, I'm going to skip the whole part about the seven swords to defeat the green smoke thing. I wouldn't have minded it so much had there not been a total lack of the true purpose of the voyage. (in the book) The true purpose of the voyage in the book was about the honor of finding the seven lords and fulfilling an oath and about the longing for Aslan's Country.
In the movie...there was hardly any of that.

When I think about it, I can't understand the thought process for alot of the scenes that they ruined or left out entirely. For most of the instances, they took something incredibly clever and meaningful and dumbed it down to fit the formula of a typical action movie.
For excample, the whole scene at the Lone Islands and slave traders was completely ruined. Instead of the clever plot to reclaim power without any fighting whatsoever, what do the script writers do? Make it an action scene.
Another example: the irony about how Reepicheep figured out how to defeat the sea serpent? Completely lost.
And though the Dark Island was creepy and all with the poor spirits sacrificed to ol' Smokey, (good to know he lived beyond the crappy ending of Lost) it never truly scared me like the Dark Island did in the book. I don't remember exacly what they said in the movie, (something to the effect of thoughts becoming realities) but that doesn't have the psychological impact of this exchange: (this is not the exact exchange, but I don't have the book in front of me at the moment)

Lord Rhoop: We must sail! Turn back! This is the island where dreams come true!
Capt. Drinian: What could possibly be the matter with an island where dreams come true?
Rhoop: No, no, not dreams as in fantasies or daydreams, but dreams. Dreams! Nightmares!

Listening to the dramatized version when I was a kid, I remember there was a blood-curdling pause before everyone sprang into action to get the heck out of Dodge. It scared the living daylight out of me.
Whereas the movie, it was somewhat creepy, but then Edmund says something to the effect of, "Oops! I thought about a sea serpent! We're screwed!" and the scene goes right back to its intended direction of action, action, action.

This probably sounds more like a rant than a review, so if it's not your cup of tea, I apologize.

Closing thoughts: for me, the bad outweighed the good. Prince Caspian managed to be a great adaptation (with its few quirks) as well as a great film, and I felt that Dawn Treader had so much potential to be great (it is, after all, one of my favorites of the books) but as a building is only as good as its foundation, to some extent, a movie is only as good as its script, and this one was bad.

If anyone would care to give his opinion, please comment! Once I wrote a controversial post about Lord of the Rings that had about twenty comments of back and forth debate, and I loved it.

Next time on Cease Repining: to balance out a negative review with a positive, Lady Brainsample will write about Tron: Legacy.

Ok! I'll Attend the Tale!!

So...a review. To clarify, this is a semi-joint review: a review of the movie (based on a musical) and the original cast recording (of a revival of the original musical).

Anyway.....Sweeney Todd. (quick synopsis borrowed from here: "A barber who slits people's throats has a neighbor who makes meat pies....... you do the math.")
I have to say, I didn't expect to like it that much. I knew my best friend really liked it, and my tastes usually coincide, but in this instance, I thought....well, never mind with what I thought. I think I LOST my train of thought... (haven't had my cup of tea yet this morning.) Spoilers probably follow.

So ANYWAY again....my friend gave me the soundtrack, but because I hate listening to showtunes without knowing the story, I put the movie on hold at the library. Because I'm in a scatter-brained mood, I'll do this part of the movie review list-like:
CON: Blood....for some of the more....let's say, 'dramatic' scenes, I just closed my eyes. Yes, I know the subject matter, but Tim Burton didn't need to be THAT graphic.
PRO: Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, and Alan Rickman. They each were AMAZING in their roles, and they all sang very well, I thought.
CON: They didn't use the Ballad of Sweeney Todd and all its reprises!!! That song was an integral part of explaining what the musical was really about!! (but more on that later)
PRO: Costumes, make-up, and overall look of the movie I thought fit very well with the story and characters.

Moving on from the movie to the music and show in general, it really has grown on me. Yes, it's dark, but it's dark for a reason. Sweeney Todd was motivated to slit throats because he wanted to avenge the supposed death of his wife. Yet ironically, in getting his "revenge" he actually kills his wife! We can despise Sweeney or pity him, but we are not immune to what led him to such dark deeds. Just as the Ballad said, "Perhaps today you gave a nod to Sweeney Todd" and "To seek revenge may lead to hell, but everyone does it if seldom as well."

If I had anything else to say about this subject, I forgot what it was, so I'll just leave y'all with two of my favorite songs from the musical, one version from the original cast the other from the movie. Enjoy!

Theater Exploits and Sequels on Mini-Review Day

So I wanted to post something profound...or intelligent...or along those lines. But nothing of that sort came to me. Instead I've been drowning in the prop list for the Foreiegner. Ah, yes. I've been sort of absent from the blog world as of late, so I haven't mentioned the news. I am stage managing my very first play! It has been completely awesome for many reasons, but one of the more humorous ones has to do with my age... See, I'm the second youngest person in the cast/crew (the only younger person being the sound operator) yet I get to boss around (nicely, of course...) a bunch of adults. It's awesome...

Books...
I have read and finished three sequels, so on Lady Brainsample's Mini Review Day, I'll discuss sequels in the Hunger Games series, Oracles of Fire series, and Ender's Game series.

.

Bones of Makaidos: Took me a while to get into, but once I did, I couldn't put it down. Bryan Davis tied up all the loose ends I can think of from the series very well.

Catching Fire: Took me in on the first page and kept me in its clutches to the very end. Very, very frustrating ending because it completely sets itself up for the next one, but very enjoyable nonetheless.

Children of the Mind: I really love how after Ender's Game and the Shadow series, Orson Scott Card focused less on action and more on character and philosophy. But...(spoilers follow) Ender dead?? What?!?!?! And how can this be the conclusion when there are so many other things that need to be explained such as whatever happened to Bean and his kids? Orson Scott Card takes too long in writing....

With all: I highly recommend reading each of the previous books in the series before taking on either of these books, especially for Bones. Each of them are great series, so it's worth reading them all.

Final bit of news: two new EJC films up. One of them made to showcase my friend with an amazing Gollum voice, the other completely unscripted to showcase each of my dear friends who play the piano very well.
Without further ado, presenting

Gollum's Present (the Remake)
and
Piano Problems

An Actual Review!

So...I saw Inkheart today. I have to say I'm not...enthralled with it, let's say? Don't get me wrong, there were some elements of the movie that I liked alot. But I'll get the bad out of the way first.
The movie didn't seem to have the same charm to it that the book did. I'd like to quote WORLD magazine's review of the movie because they put it better than I could:

"The movie also stumbles by editing out the literary grace notes that made the tale a love-letter to reading. It pays lip service to this ideal by having characters say how much they love books, but it drops the finer details that illustrated that love. No notes written in Elvish pass hands between Meggie and Mo here, Meggie never falls into her imagination curled up in an alcove of Elinor's library, and we never get a chance to see Mo's beautiful work as a restorer of old books."

I also agree with their asessment of Eliza Bennet, the actress who played Meggie: she was a good actress, but because she's 16 and Meggie is supposed to be 12....it didn't quite work out for me.
The Shadow...I had hoped they would come up with some way to make it NOT LIKE THE BALROG. Yes, they're both huge things make up of shadow and flame, but come on, they wouldn't be THAT similar. At least the Shadow didn't have a flaming sword and whip...

Now that we've got the bad out of the way, the good.
The acting was excellent, I think. Yes, I may have thought of Smeagol a few times with Andy Serkis as Capricorn, but that's because I'm a geek! I make those connections. Andy Serkis was brilliant as Capricorn; Basta and Mo looked JUST like I imagined them; and Paul Bettany did a surprisingly good job as Dustfinger. (good thing too, since he's my favorite character) But, the one who gets the prize for being JUST like the book character is Helen Mirren (however you spell it) as Elinor.
The locations and sets and feel of the movie also fit very well with the story. I loved how they did the color schemes with Capricorn's castle with all the different shades of grey and black then different things being dark red to stand out. Nice touch.

Overall, it was an ok movie, but I'd rather go read the book.

Phantom of the Opera --- ON STAGE

Well, recently I had the amazing privilege of seeing The Phantom of the Opera live on stage, and there are many words that come to mind to describe it: amazing, fantastic, gripping, tragic, beautiful. But a review that just describes something in such pithy undescriptive tones would be boring, so I'll try to think better ways to relay my awesome experience. As always, spoilers are a constant presence, so beware. Also seeing the musical makes me even more suspicious of the sequel, as I posted about earlier.

Times I cried in the whole show: four.

Three times in Act 1 and once in Act 2, though that time was rather...extensive, we'll say.

Favorite scenes:

Chandelier going up:

We were in the mezzanine, so we had a spectacular view of the chandelier and how it ascended from the stage, over the heads of the orchestra pit and people in the first few rows, then all the way up the theater.

When Christine and Meg were singing Angel of Music:

The ballet chorus girls kept making hilarious mistakes. There is always the constant question of whether art imitates life or life imitates art: I think in this case, art imitates life because I've made many of the same silly mistakes those girls have made when dancing.

Title song:

Ohhh......my.........gosh...... There are no words sufficient enough to describe this scene. This one in my mind was the thing I had anticipated the most, and it did not disappoint. Think of how the movie version had an elaborate set, then stuff it down to moving platforms, fog, candles that come out of the stage, moving boat, and the Phantom himself. With a hat! I'm so used to the movie, I always forget that he has an awesome hat in the musical. Add to that the music itself and the actors singing it, and... ugh! I'm flabbergasted trying to explain, so I'll just move on... Well wait, before I go on I have to say something: I was obsessed with Spamalot before I was obsessed with many other Broadway musicals, Phantom being one of them. But seeing "Phantom of the Opera" (individual song) on stage made me completely get how brilliant "The Song that Goes Like This" was in parodying it in its staging. I don't think I'll ever be able to choose my favorite musical.... It's either Spamalot, Phantom of the Opera, or Les Miserables...such a decision...but moving on.

Music of the Night:

Rocked. His high light note literally made me and a friend I was seeing it with gasp in amazement.

All I Ask of You and its Reprise:

This Raoul actually wasn't annoying! It's amazing how this has happened two times in a row... the Lovesick Tenor in love with the Main Soprano usually never fails to annoy in movie versions or soundtracks. In both Les Mis and Phantom, their Marius/Raoul and Cosette/Christine were not completely annoying!

Phantom lowered down on the statue: completely amazing.

And of course, the Chandelier Crash.

Really, it crashes. Right back onto the stage. And it rocked.

Past the Point of No Return to the end:

I'm really coming up with nothing descriptive that wouldn't completely ruin the musical for someone who hasn't seen it, so I'll just say this: it made me cry pathetically.

Overall, I had an incredible time, and I was so blessed in that I got to see it with some of my dearest friends and family, which made the time even more amazing.

To leave y'all, here is the condensed title song and Music of the Night as performed in the Tony Awards in 1988, by Michael Crawford and Sarah Brightman, the original Phantom and Christine. This'll give you a tiny taste of the awesomeness of the set, especially the title song.

Ok, a mini-speech... I always find it interesting how as an actor, I've always been taught never, Never, NEVER to turn my back on the audience, yet in shows like Les Mis and Phantom, there are times when a performer has his back on the audience for long stretches of time... I just find that amusing...

After note: See my review of the movie that started my obsession here, and review of the book continuing my obsession here.

Vet Day, Not Quite Proper Reviews, and Theater Exploits

Well, I am still a terrible blogger, but I'm posting for once with lots of little random things on my mind.

This morning was the fiasco of taking all our animals to the vet, which went surprisingly well for us. Because we have six cats and two dogs, we have a proper procedure to carry, otherwise the cats will smell the danger and disappear the morning of the visit. One week before D-Day we get all the cat carriers down from the attic and set them out in plain sight to get the cats accustomed to them. Two days before D-Day, we move all the cat bowls into the small bathroom so that they get used to eating in a place that can be closed up. And finally, the morning of, we cram all the cats in there to be put in carriers. This year went perfectly, heh heh....

Mini-Review Time:

Broadway: The American Musical.
Awesome, AWESOME Broadway documentary hosted by Julie Andrews.

Oklahoma: 1990somethingorother London version
Forgive me, but I like this version better than the original movie. (for those thinking, "Oh, it's just because of Hugh Jackman playing Curly," well, it's partially that, but it's also everyone else playing their roles and alot of how the lyrics to the songs were interpreted differently, especially 'People Will Say We're In Love.') This was also the first version of Oklahoma that I know of in which the main actors danced their own parts for the dream ballet as opposed to the doubles used in the movie and most stage productions.

Bones of Makaidos, by Bryan Davis
FINALLY HERE!!!!! I pre-ordered this book months before it came out in May, but because of our stupid post office, I didn't get it until about a week ago. I'm only about a hundred pages into it, but absolutely loving it. For those who haven't read Bryan Davis at all, don't start with Bones. Start with Eye of the Oracle, move on to the Dragons in Our Midst series, then finish off with the rest of the Oracles of Fire. Don't try to start in the middle.

Speaking of starting in the middle, I have something to say: NEVER EVER EVER EVER read a summary for a book in a series if you're still on a book behind it...especially an Orson Scott Card book. Whilst I was putting Shadow of the Giant on my iTunes, I accidentally read the summary on the back and was consequently spoiled as to a certain....well, thing. (I don't want to spoil it for you too)....I wasn't supposed to know about yet in Shadow Puppets. Nuts..... But oh well, it didn't ruin the book for me.

Final mini-review:
The Complete Calvin and Hobbes: Read it. That's all I can say.

Ok, as to my theater exploits, as you all know I am currently in two plays, Annie and My Fair Lady. (playing the parts of Miss Hannigan and a chorus, respectively) I've come across a fact: in both, I am playing at least one drunk character. For Annie, Miss Hannigan is hung over almost all the time, and in My Fair Lady, during "With A Little Bit 'O Luck" I am right on the edge of being drunk. (the way our choreographer put it was that I was a bar waitress who worked 24 hours a day.) But don't worry, I get respectible parts in Lady too. In Loverly I'm not drunk, and in Ascot I am most definitely sober. Snobbish and high class, but sober. I just wonder what I'll be doing in "Get Me To the Church on Time." Oh boy....

Star Trek: The Reboot

Yay, I finally have inspiration for a blog post.

So...just to get it out of the way, the outburst....IT COMPLETELY ROCKED. And Spock ROCKED EVEN HARDER.

(spoilers probably follow)

Before I get on with it, I should explain the premise: basically, the idea for this movie was to take Spock and Kirk and Bones and everyone from the Original Series and make a movie about them before they were in charge of the Enterprise. I think the term that J.J. Abrams, Damon Lindelof and co. have been using is "reboot."

We learn through the course of the movie, that this is not the world of Star Trek as we know it. Apparently, we have come into an alternate universe because of the rift of....*suspenseful music....*

Time travel. So basically, future Spock (played by Leonard Nimoy) was unable to save Romulus from destruction, so this crazy Romulan guy, Nero blames him for the destruction of his people and in the course of all this mayhem, they get sucked into the past which then alters chains of events and kills George Kirk in the process.

The story goes on just like any other Star Trek story except that they have a real budget now. Gone are the days of using one shot of the ship over and over to save money. And yet, the spirit of Star Trek remains untainted. Every single actor that played a character from the Original Series portrayed their characters PERFECTLY. Absolutely perfectly. Especially Spock, of course. Mannerisms were perfect, lines were written perfectly, and I have absolutely no complaints. Which is odd for me. Normally I am very picky about characters I already know being played by someone else or being played at all in the case of book characters.

Which brings me back to Spock. Zachary Quinto was destined to play him for the reboot. Normally, I abhor using the word 'destiny' but here it feels appropriate, and I'll tell you why. One day, as Mom was doing her laundry and watching 24, she yells to me, "Tasha! Come here! Come here! This guy looks exactly like Spock!!!!!" It was, of course, Zachary Quinto playing his character on 24 and by the time Mom was watching it, he had already been cast as Spock. "Yeah, Mom. He actually is playing Spock!" So ever since then Mom has obsessed about seeing this movie. With good reason.

Live long and prosper.

I LOVE being a geek.

I Think I Have a Thing for Dystopian Novels

First Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, now Anthem by Ayn Rand.

I didn't exactly mean to read it all in one sitting before going to bed last night. It just sort of...happened. But I'm ahead of myself...

Yesterday Mom and I were on the way home from the Post Office and the library, and she said, "Ok, we're listening to Anthem." (backstory: Instead of doing book reports, Mom and I take turns choosing classics to listen to in the car and we discuss them.) So we did. And it was fascinating. It's written from the point of view of Equality 7-2521, a man part of a communist world. Everyone exists for the good of all. There is no individuality. The word "I" is non-existent.

I (Tasha) was hooked.

When I got home, I immediately scanned the library and found the paperback. That night, as already revealed, I read the whole thing. That's pretty special. Yes, it may be considered only a 'novella' by some, but I haven't read like that in a long time. It was...awesome. I almost cried when reading a lot of the parts with Liberty 5-3000. AND it had a happy ending. Well, not happy per se, but hopeful. Again, a lot like Fahrenheit 451. Not completely happy, but hopeful.

One note: at the end with all the ego parts, I disagreed with some of the conclusions that Ayn Rand came to, mostly because I'm a Christian and she was an atheist. Let me explain....

*here be spoilers*

At the end, Ayn Rand comes to this conclusion: "And now I see the face of god, and I raise this god over the earth, this god whom men have sought since men came into being, this god who will grant them joy and peace and pride. This god, this one word: 'I.'"

I (Tasha...) agree with Ayn Rand that individual freedom is indispensable and that the rights of "the many" should not be placed ahead of the rights of the individual, but I cannot agree that 'I' am a god. Only the Lord Jesus Christ can give me peace and joy. Only God can make us complete. Only the God of the Bible is God. He is the only great I Am.

*spoilers be over*

So to close: look upon that dark society well. Unless individual rights are embraced and protected (especially Second Amendment rights, but that's another topic for another time) we will become like that. Only part of a collective. A Borg lost in a sea of never-ending cubes. A slave to society. Never to be regarded as an individual.

"I guard my treasures: my thought, my will, my freedom. And the greatest of these is freedom." -Ayn Rand

An UN-Scathing Review

First of all, anyone who has not seen the Princess Bride MUST MUST MUST go out and see it before reading this review. I do not want to spoil such an awesome movie. And yes, I do mean anyone. I recommend this movie to any and all.

Now, onward.

...................................................

True to my word, I did watch Princess Bride yesterday, and it made me so happy. I seriously think that if I ever had to choose one SINGLE movie as my favorite, PB would be it. It has everything: "Fencing. Fighting. Torture. Poison. True love. Hate. Revenge. Giants. Hunters. Bad men. Good men. Beautifulest ladies. Snakes. Spiders. Beasts of all natures and descriptions. Pain. Death. Brave men. Coward men. Strongest men. Chases. Escapes. Lies. Truths. Passion. Miracles."

(by the way, that's actually the corresponding quote from the book. I'm making this a joint review)

The Princess Bride is probably the only example of a movie I know of in which I am completely happy with the transition from book to movie. Granted, I did see the movie first, but after reading the book, I didn't get one of those, "How in the world could they have changed such-and-such?" feelings after reading it.

In fact, let me tell you story about me and the book. You know how in the movie, the Grandfather is reading the story to his grandson while the kid is sick? Well, they have that in the book except that the author William Goldman made it so that he himself was the grandson listening to his grandfather read this 'book' by 'S. Morgenstern.' There were other parts of the modern part of the story that made references to Florin and Guilder and all those different things actually existing.

I believed it! I wanted to go to Florin to see the Fire Swamp and Cliffs of Insanity and the Princess Bride museum. I wanted to go to the Morgenstern library. Months later, I looked up the book on wikipedia for some reason, and I went into shock. It revealed to me that the whole part about the grandson and Florin being a real country was all just a plot device. That's it. There was no Morgenstern, no grandfather, no Florin. I almost literally broke down because it was so heart breaking. Thankfully, it didn't scar me for life. It just made me really really annoyed for about a month.

But anyway. I really enjoyed watching the movie again because I was able to catch details I hadn't caught the first ten times seeing that movie. One thing I focused on this time through was what each character's obsession/first love/main mission was. Every single main character had one.

Westley's obession is, of course, Buttercup. In the beginning, all he wants to do is SHOW her how much he loves her. Instead of just saying, "I love you," he shows his love. Buttercup asked him to fetch a pitcher that must have only been twelve inches away from her. His actions speak louder than words as he walks over to her and gives her the pot, whispering, "As you wish." Though he was captured by the Dread Pirate Roberts and eventually became Dread Pirate Roberts, he never lost sight of his goal: to get Buttercup back which he does at the end.

Inigo's main mission is to avenge his father and kill the Six Fingered Man. The book talks about how Inigo had always imagined how it would play out with pleas, bribe attempts, and all sorts of other fun, but then decided to go for the simplest thing: "Hello, my name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die." This is an obsession. He spent about twenty years just training with the sword and strengthening himself. He's so good he even fights extremely well left handedly.

I could go on and on and on with character analysis, but this review is getting a tad long. I'd like to hear from y'all. What is your favorite moment from the book or movie? And what do you think a character's obsession is?

A Scathing Review

I honestly didn't have any idea what to write about my blog, but then Mom suggested I review a movie I saw recently that I....didn't exactly like. More like disliked intensely.
This will be a first, considering most of the reviews I post on my blog are positive, so bear with me.
Lady Jane
To clarify....I only wanted to see this movie because it had Cary Elwes in it. (yeah, yeah, you can call me a Princess Bride freak if it makes you happy) It also had Helena Bonham Carter, who I consider to be a fine actress. Not one of my favorites, mind you, but a good actress nonetheless. Things got even better when I found out Patrick Stewart was in the movie too. (again, call me a mindless Star Trek: TNG geek)
(by the way, this is a ranting review, so if you actually want to see this movie without knowing spoilers, skip this review)

Jady Lane in a nutshell:
Henry VII dies. Edward his son is king.
Jane (HBC) likes Edward, but Lord Whats-His-Ears convinces Jane's mom to have her marry HIS son because Edward is dying.
Jane and Guilford (CE) marry. At first they establish this is a marriage of convenience, but then, (who would have seen this coming? *heavy sarcasm*) they actually fall in love!
Edward dies and leaves a will saying Jane is queen instead of his sister Mary.
Jane is reluctantly made queen. She and Guilford make reform-ish laws. (for the good of the people, darling!! sorry, I'm in a very obnoxious mood right now)
Mary doesn't want to give up her throne and takes back over.
Jane and Guilford are beheaded for treason. (oh, I'm sorry! AFTER someone tried to convert them to Catholicism.)
The End....
................
What the bloody Spanish Inquisition was that??? They're beheaded and that's it?! Ok, yes, it's based on real history, but they could've come up with some other way to make it better. Not lofty eternity Plato quotes to rectify the situation, because the situation was NOT rectified in my opinion. The situation left me feeling mad, pitiful, stupid, annoyed, and more.

So....to rectify the situation on my own, I'm watching the Princess Bride as soon as I can. Because that movie has a REAL romance and a REAL ending. Let's compare the endings of the two, shall we?
Lady Jane ending(after they're both beheaded): *swelling music as background to lofty clouds* "The soul takes flight to the world that is invisible. At there arriving, she is assured of bliss, and forever dwells in paradise."

Princess Bride ending:
Grandpa: As as they reached for each other....
Grandson: What? What?
Grandpa: Ah, it's kissing again, you don't want to hear that.
Grandson: I don't mind so much.
Grandpa: Ah, ok. Since the invention of the kiss there have been five kisses that were rated the most passionate, the most pure. This one left them all behind. The End.
Grandson: Grandpa, maybe you could come over and read it again to me tomorrow.
Grandpa: As you wish.

THERE'S an ending.
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to clear my system of that movie and watch the Princess Bride.

Fahrenheit 451

"The bigger your market, Montag, the less you handle controversy, remember that! Authors, full of evil thoughts, lock up your typewriters. They did. Magazines became a nice blend of vanilla tapioca. Books, so the snobbish critics said, were dishwater. No wonder books stopped selling, the critics said. but the public, knowing what it wanted, spinning happily, let the comic books survive. And the three-dimensional sex magazines of course. There you have it, Montag. It didn't come from the Government down. There was no dictum, no declaration, no censorship, to start with, no! Technology, mass exploitation, and minority pressure carried the trick, thank God. Today, thanks to them, you can stay happy all the time, you are allowed to read comics, the good old confessions, or trade journals." .... "We must all be alike. Not everyone born free and equal as the Constitution says, but everyone made equal. Each man the image of every other; then all are happy, for there are no mountains to make them cower, to judge themselves against. So! A book is a loaded gun in the house next door. Burn it." -Beatty.

I...LOVED this book. But in contrary to popular belief, it's not really about government censorship. As Beatty himself said, it didn't start with the government. It started with people losing an interest in books as a result of A) technology exploited and B) political correctness in regards to minorities.
A basic synopsis of the book would be that Guy Montag is an average fireman. Average for the time that is. In the future, homes have been fireproofed, so a fireman no longer puts out fires, but starts them. All books and the homes in which they are found are burned. But in a world where pleasure and 'happiness' are king, there are still people who challenge the norm. Clarisse McClellan is one of those, and she challenges Montag's motivation for burning books. This challenge makes Montag start to question the reason of burning books, and the story goes on.

When I read this book, I was amazed because Ray Bradbury wrote many things that seem to already have started becoming true.

1. "School is shortened, discipline relaxed, philosophies, histories, languages dropped, English and spelling gradually gradually neglected, finally almost completely ignored."
That's already coming true. I hardly know anyone my age who knows the difference between the usage of who and whom, that snuck is not actually a word, and that being nauseous and nauseated are NOT the same thing.

2. "Organize and organize and superorganize super-super sports."
Can anyone else notice the obsession with football in America?? As I've probaby ranted before, I don't see the point of football except this: "All right, we're gonna take the ball, and score a touchdown! Break!!"

There are others I could go into, but I realize this post is getting just a tad long.
To close: Unless people start reading and absorbing intelligent books again, I do believe our society will head in this direction.
Lord have mercy.

PS Random fact I found: according to wikipedia, I have read four of the books that are commenly challenged in the US. And there are more on there I'm planning to read, such as 1984. Extra points to anyone who can guess the books I've read on the list.

Vertigo

Oh....my.....goodness.....

This movie is amazing...

I agree with Dad when he said, "I see why Shyamalan was influenced by Hitchcock...they each take their time to set things up." And they do. For a long while you think the story is about something, but then he switches the focus entirely. And what an ending!

What I found fascinating was Hitchcock's use of the camera for Scottie's sense of vertigo. He was able to make an object in the distance stay still, but all the surroundings seemed to move. I did some research, and found out he did that by zooming in while moving out with the camera. Or the backwards way... I forget.

There is much more I could say about this movie, but I won't because I don't want to give anything away. See this movie! It's a classic, and rightly so.

Inkdeath

Inkdeath.... That widely anticipated sequel to a sequel. I have a variety of thoughts on it.

First off, the whole first half drove me insasne! All people were doing was sitting around in angst fretting over what to do and how do it. Either that, or they were sitting in angst trying to persuade others what to do and how to do it. Take for example Meggie. I liked Meggie in the other books. Now she's hit the moody teenager phase and doesn't want Mo to do anything. If my dad had to take a particularly dangerous police assignment, I would worry. I would pray. But I wouldn't try to convince him to not do it. I wouldn't just sit there in boring angst* brooding over it. It seems to me Meggie doesn't do anything useful the whole book except read a couple times for Fenoglio.

Now that the annoying part is over, the good.

As soon as people started moving and Mo agreed to summon the White Women, I started getting into it. That whole scene with the White Women surrounding them was incredible. I could see it clearly in my mind's eye.

Death demands that Mo write the words in the Adderhead's book.

The plot thickens.

And with that, Tasha Brainsample decided she rather liked the book after all but had to change her favorite character from Dustfinger to Violante. Either that or they're tied. Tasha's not sure yet.

Now she moves on to....she thinks City of Ember. She knows she needs to get on with reading her borrowed books from Erustan.**

*I love angst. Well-done angst that is. But I found Meggie's to be annoying.

**Thank you, mellon nin!!!

The Screwtape Letters

"Music and silence, how I detest them both. The melodies and silences of Heaven will be shouted down in the end. But I admit we are not yet loud enough, or anything like it. Research is in progress. Meanwhile you, disgusting little-

[Here the MS. breaks off and is resumed in a different hand.]

In the heat of composition I find that I have inadvertently allowed myself to assume the form of a large centipede."

This is a book that all C.S. Lewis fans should read. It's far different from any of his other books (at least, the ones I've read) The whole book is a series of letters from Screwtape, a senior demon, written to his nephew Wormwood who is a young tempter. Thoughout the book, Screwtape corrects his nephew's naive or misguided attempts to keep his Patient from Heaven. Shortly into the book, the Patient becomes a Christian. This is atrocious is Screwtape's eyes, but all it does is cause him to suggest different tactics to win the Patient over to "Our Father Below."

The only other thing I have to say is that I wish I could find the version read by John Cleese on sale somewhere...

Eternity's Edge

NOTE: Before reading this book, it is HIGHLY recommended to read the first in the series, Beyond the Reflection's Edge. If you haven't read the first, alot of the concepts will be new and confusing.

The book picks up right where the first left off. Nathan Shepherd has found out that his parents are actually alive, but finding them is hard because he and Kelly Clark must stop Interfinity from merging Earth with it's mirror realms. Behind this scheme is Mictar, a stalker who feeds upon life energy of victims and feeds that power into his machine.

As with all of Bryan Davis's books, at times this book can be confusing if you just glance through something. It takes a bit of concentration to keep some of the facts straight in your head. But it's more than just a fantasy/sci-fi/action adventure. The characters are amazing. I would probably read the book even without the mirror realms, or magical violins, or interfinity just because the characters were so interesting and real.

I'm sorry, but I'm very tempted to draw paralells to Bryan Davis's Dragons in Our Midst characters, so for fun I will.

*Nathan is to Kelly as Billy Bannister is to Bonnie Silver.

*Kelly is to Daryl as Billy is to Walter.

*Nathan, like Billy, has a search for his parents.

*Mictar reminds me of Samyaza.

*Kelly is a confused character in some respects who looks to Nathan for guidance, Billy in some ways is confused and looks to Bonnie for advice

But, by no means let this make you think that Bryan Davis has some "writer's formula" for success. Echoes from the Edge series is VERY VERY different from Dragons in Our Midst and Oracles of Fire. I just tend to find similarities like that.

~Phantom of the Opera~

The book was fantastic. Yes, I was biased in favor of it before I read it because I'm a huge fan of the movie. (still haven't seen the musical yet!)

Gaston LeRoux begins by saying, "The Opera ghost really existed. He was not, as was long believed, a creature of the imagination of the artists, the superstition of the managers, or a product of the absurd and impressionable brains of the young ladies of the ballet, their mothers, the box-keepers, the cloak-room attendants or the concierge. Yes, he existed in flesh and blood, although he assumed the complete appearance of a real phantom; that is to say, of a spectral shade."

The story that follows is LeRoux's investigation as a journalist that proves the Phantom (Erik) really existed. As in the movie, the story really kicks off with the arrival of two new managers who must abide by Erik's "house rules" which include Box 5 reserved for him and a salary of 20,000 francs. The managers staunchly believe that it is a joke by the previous managers and refuse to pay Erik or reserve the box.

Many tragedies and incidents take place over the course of the book, roughly matching the movie. Madame Giry plays the same part, but there are other characters such as the Count Chagny himself (not Raoul, his elder brother) and the mysterious Persian who play no part in the movie.

Another thing that was interesting to me was the higher stakes at the end. If Christine didn't choose Erik, not only would Raoul and the Persian die in his torture chamber, but the whole opera house would get destroyed in a rigged explosion.

Alas, I will not give away the end, though some of you can guess it if you've seen the movie.

PS See also my lovely Phantom avatars!

42nd Street

This is a FUN movie. Especially for types such as myself who enjoy a show ABOUT putting on a show. Such is the case with 42nd street. The movie stars Ruby Keeler, Dick Powell, Warner Baxter, and Ginger Rogers among others.

I suppose the story is predictable...a show being put on, rehearsals, lead lady breaks ankle and is replaced by a little-known who is loved by the audience, the show goes on. But I love the "corniness," of these old movies that I watch.

Busby Berkeley productions all have one thing in common: circles. There's always a big show-stopping number in which lots of ladies are in a spinning circle of some kind with at least one shot from the top of the circle. I find it fascinating.