Don't laugh at me. I don't generally watch Dancing with the Stars, but as Jenna mentioned, Tuesday is a wasteland.
So, I'm only posting for one reason, though there are additional things I could talk about. But there is only one reason I'm going to actually watch this show - sometimes - this season.
Kelly Osbourne.
She is absolutely fabulous. Everything about her performances is genuine and full of joy. I have seen portions of this show before, and I'm sure there have been better dancers, but I seriously doubt there has ever been anyone on the show who is such a complete joy to watch.
Even better was Ozzy getting choked up when asked about what it was like to watch is daughter dance. He was so proud. He was seriously a choked up. It was incredibly sweet.
I will actually keep watching, just to see her. But I'll probably flip the channel while everyone else is dancing.
Read more!
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
TV - The Emmys
Remember last year's Emmys? Oh the horror. A gaggle of uncooperative and uncomfortable reality TV hosts took the stage and "improved" an intro that made everyone shudder.
Thank goodness the Television Overlords recognized the splendor that is Neil Patrick Harris, and thank goodness NPH had the good sense to demand being a producer for the show as well, so that there was some hope in it being run efficiently while also being entertaining. I think he was successful. Read on for more.
In general I thought the show was good, the winners were boring. None of my favorites won in the acting categories, nor did any of my second favorites with the exception of Kristen Chenoweth, who I still love and think is great and looked amazing, although I though Wiig or Poehler probably deserved the nod after an actually amazing year of SNL.
Grouping the awards in genre was a neat idea, by which I mean that it was tidy and easy to follow. However, that kind of lead to a real boring middle section of who-gives-a-care about Amazing Race, Little Dorrit, or Gray Gardens.
But the real story here is NPH. I loved how dapper he was, that he's a song-and-dance man, that he cared enough and showed that he cared by staying on stage. I cannot believe that he didn't win his Emmy! That was the biggest crock-of-hoohah especially considering who he lost to. Anyway, I loved the Dr. Horrible bit and the blunt discussion that broadcast television is fading into the background as the world expands into On-Demand and Internet viewing.
Wait, maybe that's the real story: the television world is certainly in a crazy shifting, expanding state. The way ratings are determined and valued is in flux as DVR viewings have to count almost as much as live-viewing, let alone factoring in Hulu or iTunes downloads. America isn't all sitting down on the couch at the same minute to have a shared experience anymore, and valuing commercials that air along with live programming is sooo 20th century. To quote presenter and nominee Julia Louis-Dreyfus, perhaps this is the "last official year of network broadcast television" ... but probably not. : )
Read more!
Thank goodness the Television Overlords recognized the splendor that is Neil Patrick Harris, and thank goodness NPH had the good sense to demand being a producer for the show as well, so that there was some hope in it being run efficiently while also being entertaining. I think he was successful. Read on for more.
In general I thought the show was good, the winners were boring. None of my favorites won in the acting categories, nor did any of my second favorites with the exception of Kristen Chenoweth, who I still love and think is great and looked amazing, although I though Wiig or Poehler probably deserved the nod after an actually amazing year of SNL.
Grouping the awards in genre was a neat idea, by which I mean that it was tidy and easy to follow. However, that kind of lead to a real boring middle section of who-gives-a-care about Amazing Race, Little Dorrit, or Gray Gardens.
But the real story here is NPH. I loved how dapper he was, that he's a song-and-dance man, that he cared enough and showed that he cared by staying on stage. I cannot believe that he didn't win his Emmy! That was the biggest crock-of-hoohah especially considering who he lost to. Anyway, I loved the Dr. Horrible bit and the blunt discussion that broadcast television is fading into the background as the world expands into On-Demand and Internet viewing.
Wait, maybe that's the real story: the television world is certainly in a crazy shifting, expanding state. The way ratings are determined and valued is in flux as DVR viewings have to count almost as much as live-viewing, let alone factoring in Hulu or iTunes downloads. America isn't all sitting down on the couch at the same minute to have a shared experience anymore, and valuing commercials that air along with live programming is sooo 20th century. To quote presenter and nominee Julia Louis-Dreyfus, perhaps this is the "last official year of network broadcast television" ... but probably not. : )
Read more!
Monday, September 21, 2009
Book - The Road
The most recent pick for my book-club was "The Road" by Cormac McCarthy. I am so happy that this was our choice. What an amazing novel: my favorite since "...Edgar Sawtelle." It doesn't sound like it should be an enjoyable book: the story takes place in a post-apocalyptic world where a father and son wander the lands trying to survive. However, thanks to the captivating writing and the powerful emotions it provokes, reading this book was a beautiful experience. Read on for further discussion.
The reader doesn't know what cataclysmic event took place to ruin the continent, but the land is now burnt to a crisp and ash hangs in the air making is dusty and gray during the day and absolutely pitch-black at night. We don't know how long the world has been in this shape, but can estimate that it's been perhaps somewhere around eight years (the boy was born into this world just a few days after the incident and seems to be around eight years old when we pick up their story). The father and son, who are given no names nor any real physical descriptions, are heading south to beat the worst of the winter and to perhaps see the state of the ocean. They search for survival supplies and exist on any found canned foods, as nothing is able to grow in this utterly barren landscape. Perhaps most frighteningly, there are roving gangs of evil people who have resorted to cannibalism - real life zombies!
The writing is simple prose mixed with poetic and cryptic passages that are chilling and beautiful. I had to resort to my dictionary about a thousand times thanks to McCarthy's vast vocabulary, but his way with words is worth the effort. One reviewer remarked that the urgency provoked in the writing made the reader feel they HAD to turn the pages in order to help the father and son survive: so true!
This is a tremendous parable about love and humanity that has often been associated with a biblical style. It's true that the father comes off as a sometimes vengeful God while the son is the encapsulation of mercy and hope. Together these two "carry the light" while in the darkest of circumstances that is in no way clichéd. Read more!
The reader doesn't know what cataclysmic event took place to ruin the continent, but the land is now burnt to a crisp and ash hangs in the air making is dusty and gray during the day and absolutely pitch-black at night. We don't know how long the world has been in this shape, but can estimate that it's been perhaps somewhere around eight years (the boy was born into this world just a few days after the incident and seems to be around eight years old when we pick up their story). The father and son, who are given no names nor any real physical descriptions, are heading south to beat the worst of the winter and to perhaps see the state of the ocean. They search for survival supplies and exist on any found canned foods, as nothing is able to grow in this utterly barren landscape. Perhaps most frighteningly, there are roving gangs of evil people who have resorted to cannibalism - real life zombies!
The writing is simple prose mixed with poetic and cryptic passages that are chilling and beautiful. I had to resort to my dictionary about a thousand times thanks to McCarthy's vast vocabulary, but his way with words is worth the effort. One reviewer remarked that the urgency provoked in the writing made the reader feel they HAD to turn the pages in order to help the father and son survive: so true!
This is a tremendous parable about love and humanity that has often been associated with a biblical style. It's true that the father comes off as a sometimes vengeful God while the son is the encapsulation of mercy and hope. Together these two "carry the light" while in the darkest of circumstances that is in no way clichéd. Read more!
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Important Issue #1: Male Boob Equivalent
Women have butts and so do men. Full-frontal shots of pubic areas carry the same "wow" factor regardless of sex. But what packs the same punch as a full frontal boob-shot when men are involved? Yes, I know that men have nipples and chests, but those are hardly as sexualized as the female breasts.
Although this area could be found on the female form as well, my vote is for the pelvic indentations found on the male lower abdomen, usually accompanied by some sort of "treasure trail," as illustrated within the yellow box below. I anxiously await your thoughts on this important issue!
Thursday, September 17, 2009
TV - Fall Schedule
This is more for my convenience, but please feel free to read-on for a handy schedule of when television shows start their new seasons. I edited the one created by Ausiellio from EW significantly, but you can view his complete schedule HERE.
Thursday, September 17:
Bones, 8 p.m. (Fox)
Community, 9:30 p.m. (NBC)
Fringe, 9 p.m. (Fox)
It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, 10 p.m. (FX)
The Office, 9 p.m. (NBC)
Parks and Recreation, 8:30 p.m. (NBC)
Saturday Night Live Weekend Update Thursday, 8 p.m. (NBC)
Friday, September 18:
Crash, 10 p.m. (Starz)
Sunday, September 20:
Bored to Death, 9:30 p.m. (HBO)
Curb Your Enthusiasm, 9 p.m. (HBO)
Monday, September 21:
The Big Bang Theory, 9:30 p.m. (CBS)
Castle, 10 p.m. (ABC)
Heroes, 8 p.m. (NBC)
House, 8 p.m. (Fox)
How I Met Your Mother, 8 p.m. (CBS)
Thursday, September 24:
Flash Forward, 8 p.m. (ABC)
The Mentalist, 10 p.m. (CBS)
Friday, September 25:
Dollhouse, 9 p.m. (Fox)
Ghost Whisperer, 8 p.m. (CBS)
Saturday, September 26:
Saturday Night Live, 11:30 p.m. (NBC)
Sunday, September 27:
The Cleveland Show, 8:30 p.m. (Fox)
Dexter, 9 p.m. (Showtime)
Family Guy, 9 p.m. (Fox)
The Simpsons, 8 p.m. (Fox)
Friday, October 9:
Ugly Betty, 8 p.m. (ABC)
Thursday, September 17:
Bones, 8 p.m. (Fox)
Community, 9:30 p.m. (NBC)
Fringe, 9 p.m. (Fox)
It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, 10 p.m. (FX)
The Office, 9 p.m. (NBC)
Parks and Recreation, 8:30 p.m. (NBC)
Saturday Night Live Weekend Update Thursday, 8 p.m. (NBC)
Friday, September 18:
Crash, 10 p.m. (Starz)
Sunday, September 20:
Bored to Death, 9:30 p.m. (HBO)
Curb Your Enthusiasm, 9 p.m. (HBO)
Monday, September 21:
The Big Bang Theory, 9:30 p.m. (CBS)
Castle, 10 p.m. (ABC)
Heroes, 8 p.m. (NBC)
House, 8 p.m. (Fox)
How I Met Your Mother, 8 p.m. (CBS)
Thursday, September 24:
Flash Forward, 8 p.m. (ABC)
The Mentalist, 10 p.m. (CBS)
Friday, September 25:
Dollhouse, 9 p.m. (Fox)
Ghost Whisperer, 8 p.m. (CBS)
Saturday, September 26:
Saturday Night Live, 11:30 p.m. (NBC)
Sunday, September 27:
The Cleveland Show, 8:30 p.m. (Fox)
Dexter, 9 p.m. (Showtime)
Family Guy, 9 p.m. (Fox)
The Simpsons, 8 p.m. (Fox)
Monday, October 5:
Sherri, 7 p.m. (Lifetime)
Sherri, 7 p.m. (Lifetime)
Friday, October 9:
Ugly Betty, 8 p.m. (ABC)
Thursday, October 15:
30 Rock, 9:30 p.m. (NBC)
30 Rock, 9:30 p.m. (NBC)
Tuesday, November 3:
V, 8 p.m. (ABC)
Read more!
V, 8 p.m. (ABC)
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Book - The Lovely Bones
Alice Sebold's debut novel was a huge best-seller a couple of years ago. Now more readers are looking at it with a more critical eye. Why? Because it doesn't really live up to the hype. The story is a bleak one: a 14 year old girl, Susie, is raped and murdered by her next-door neighbor. I'm not spoiling anything by telling you that, it happens in the first couple of pages. Susie then proceeds to heaven where she is able to look over her grieving family and have insight into their thoughts.
Don't be fooled: this is not a murder mystery. The story is not about the evil man getting caught and being brought to justice. Although Susie's father pursues finding the culprit, this novel is much more about how each member of the family deals with grief... and nothing really happens. They live troubled lives and suffer a bunch but nothing really progresses except time (the book spans about eight years).
Beyond the critiques of the narration "gimmick," due attention has been brought to the fact that the writing style is forced. There are some crazy similes, one of the worst being "Her pupils dilated, pulsing in and out like small, ferocious olives". THIS WOMAN wrote a hilarious and scathing review that is worth reading for other examples of the crazy language and just for a good laugh. However, whereas this woman would only recommend the book "to enemies" I would recommend it to anyone who can handle somewhat sappy stories. The book isn't all that long and the depiction of heaven is interesting and thought-provoking.
Even though this review is long enough already, it's still worth talking about the fact that this is going to soon be a major motion picture that has been cited as a possible Oscar contender. I have to say this is an incredibly ambitious endeavor. Let alone the fact that there is 14 year old getting raped and murdered at the get-go... half of the story takes place in heaven! There's also the fact that the story covers eight years (the younger brother ages from 4 - 12 years old)! It is also a book that depends greatly on the like-ability of multiple children and tweens (yikes! child actors!). And, without giving too much away, there is a bizarre, erotic, exorcism-type scene. So yea... should be good! I certainly want to trust Peter Jackson, however, this is also the director who decided it was okay to leave this as the final line of "King Kong": " 'Twas beauty killed the beast!" 'TWAS IT?! Read more!
Don't be fooled: this is not a murder mystery. The story is not about the evil man getting caught and being brought to justice. Although Susie's father pursues finding the culprit, this novel is much more about how each member of the family deals with grief... and nothing really happens. They live troubled lives and suffer a bunch but nothing really progresses except time (the book spans about eight years).
Beyond the critiques of the narration "gimmick," due attention has been brought to the fact that the writing style is forced. There are some crazy similes, one of the worst being "Her pupils dilated, pulsing in and out like small, ferocious olives". THIS WOMAN wrote a hilarious and scathing review that is worth reading for other examples of the crazy language and just for a good laugh. However, whereas this woman would only recommend the book "to enemies" I would recommend it to anyone who can handle somewhat sappy stories. The book isn't all that long and the depiction of heaven is interesting and thought-provoking.
Even though this review is long enough already, it's still worth talking about the fact that this is going to soon be a major motion picture that has been cited as a possible Oscar contender. I have to say this is an incredibly ambitious endeavor. Let alone the fact that there is 14 year old getting raped and murdered at the get-go... half of the story takes place in heaven! There's also the fact that the story covers eight years (the younger brother ages from 4 - 12 years old)! It is also a book that depends greatly on the like-ability of multiple children and tweens (yikes! child actors!). And, without giving too much away, there is a bizarre, erotic, exorcism-type scene. So yea... should be good! I certainly want to trust Peter Jackson, however, this is also the director who decided it was okay to leave this as the final line of "King Kong": " 'Twas beauty killed the beast!" 'TWAS IT?! Read more!
TV - Thursday
Are you serious Thursday night?! That's way too much quality television for one evening. Once things get cooking this fall there will be:
That's 6 hours of TV I would gladly watch all on one night. Yikes. None of these could've been moved to the barren waste-lands of Tuesday or Wednesday?! Read more!
- FlashForward on ABC
- Bones on FOX
- The Vampire Diaries on CW
- The Office / Community / 30 Rock on NBC (and yea, probably Parks and Recreation, too)
- It's Always Sunny... on FX
- AND Project Runway on Lifetime.
That's 6 hours of TV I would gladly watch all on one night. Yikes. None of these could've been moved to the barren waste-lands of Tuesday or Wednesday?! Read more!
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Books - "Pride and Prejudice" and "Pride and Prejudice and Zombies"
Compare the first lines from these two books:
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife."
And
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains."
There you have the differences between Jane Austen's classic, and the hysterical zombie infused version co-authored by Seth Grahame-Smith.
I had never read "Pride and Prejudice" so I decided to read these two books in tandem: a couple chapters of the original followed by the corresponding chapters in the Zombie version. This was certainly an enjoyable experience, if not more than a little redundant. Gramhme-Smith's book contains 70% (at least) of the classic story in word-by-word verbatim (which is why he only gets a co-author credit alongside Miss Austen herself). P&P&Z is also a tiny bit longer, to allow more space to dedicate to crazy zombie killing mayhem without losing any of the original story.
As for the original work itself, I had a very nice time reading the story. It was witty and romantic. P&P&Z had all the same wit and romance, but also many more laugh-out-loud moments that appealed to the 13-year-old boy in me. Not only does the new version have zombies and ninjas, it also has a lot of poop, barf, and balls jokes. The balls jokes are particularly amusing, (e.g. “Balls are always a subject which makes a lady energetic” and “I find that balls are much more enjoyable when they cease to remain private.”) although I wish that Gramhme would have made the characters ignorant of the puns instead of writing about how they'd snicker at themselves.
If I were a high-school English teacher, I'd give my students a choice between reading these two books. I think it would create a fun conversation between those who chose to read the classic and those who chose to read the zombie version. Those who read Gramhme's version would still be able to ace a proficiency test on the classic, as essentially all of the original language and plot-points are encompassed in the Zombie book.
Greg and I both are greatly looking forward to "Sense and Sensibility and Sea-monsters" that will be released later this week from the same publishing house as P&P&Z.
Read more!
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife."
And
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains."
There you have the differences between Jane Austen's classic, and the hysterical zombie infused version co-authored by Seth Grahame-Smith.
I had never read "Pride and Prejudice" so I decided to read these two books in tandem: a couple chapters of the original followed by the corresponding chapters in the Zombie version. This was certainly an enjoyable experience, if not more than a little redundant. Gramhme-Smith's book contains 70% (at least) of the classic story in word-by-word verbatim (which is why he only gets a co-author credit alongside Miss Austen herself). P&P&Z is also a tiny bit longer, to allow more space to dedicate to crazy zombie killing mayhem without losing any of the original story.
As for the original work itself, I had a very nice time reading the story. It was witty and romantic. P&P&Z had all the same wit and romance, but also many more laugh-out-loud moments that appealed to the 13-year-old boy in me. Not only does the new version have zombies and ninjas, it also has a lot of poop, barf, and balls jokes. The balls jokes are particularly amusing, (e.g. “Balls are always a subject which makes a lady energetic” and “I find that balls are much more enjoyable when they cease to remain private.”) although I wish that Gramhme would have made the characters ignorant of the puns instead of writing about how they'd snicker at themselves.
If I were a high-school English teacher, I'd give my students a choice between reading these two books. I think it would create a fun conversation between those who chose to read the classic and those who chose to read the zombie version. Those who read Gramhme's version would still be able to ace a proficiency test on the classic, as essentially all of the original language and plot-points are encompassed in the Zombie book.
Greg and I both are greatly looking forward to "Sense and Sensibility and Sea-monsters" that will be released later this week from the same publishing house as P&P&Z.
Read more!
Friday, September 11, 2009
TV - Project Runway 9/10
I've never been a fan of the whole idea that producers get involved in competition-type reality shows in order to keep the interesting people on the show. But, in my opinion, they needed to do a little more of that on this season of Project Runway.
So, I'm not a fan of the way over the top, super out there designers. Usually, I'm not even a fan of the "good" ones who are way over the top. But they do make the show a little more interesting. This season, they eliminated the two "kooks" on the very first two weeks, and in week four, they eliminated the only black woman, who was also prone to more colorful (though usually tasteless) creations. To be fair, she did get kicked out for designing a pretty boring black dress that I could probably go buy at Sears. But they have eliminated a lot of entertainment value in the first three weeks.
What remains are a number of very talented designers, but also a number of designers who don't really stand out from one another - with some exceptions, obviously - and no one who I would describe as even a little bit avant garde.
I'll still watch, because I just like seeing the runway show with all the pretty outfits, but I think from a pure entertainment value/ratings game perspective, the producers made a mistake. Especially since, in each of the first two contestants to be eliminated were up against the guy who basically sent a model down the runway covered in pantyhose material - who was subsequently eliminated in week three. I would rather have had an additional week of annoying and bizarre Malvin than an extra week of annoying and boring Mitchell.
On another note, Gordana's dress was far and away my favorite last night, and I didn't get the winning outfit at all. It looked sloppy and scrunched up and just plain ugly. Read more!
So, I'm not a fan of the way over the top, super out there designers. Usually, I'm not even a fan of the "good" ones who are way over the top. But they do make the show a little more interesting. This season, they eliminated the two "kooks" on the very first two weeks, and in week four, they eliminated the only black woman, who was also prone to more colorful (though usually tasteless) creations. To be fair, she did get kicked out for designing a pretty boring black dress that I could probably go buy at Sears. But they have eliminated a lot of entertainment value in the first three weeks.
What remains are a number of very talented designers, but also a number of designers who don't really stand out from one another - with some exceptions, obviously - and no one who I would describe as even a little bit avant garde.
I'll still watch, because I just like seeing the runway show with all the pretty outfits, but I think from a pure entertainment value/ratings game perspective, the producers made a mistake. Especially since, in each of the first two contestants to be eliminated were up against the guy who basically sent a model down the runway covered in pantyhose material - who was subsequently eliminated in week three. I would rather have had an additional week of annoying and bizarre Malvin than an extra week of annoying and boring Mitchell.
On another note, Gordana's dress was far and away my favorite last night, and I didn't get the winning outfit at all. It looked sloppy and scrunched up and just plain ugly. Read more!
TV - Glee Revisited
When I saw the pilot of Glee (as blogged about HERE) I was entertained, but skeptical. I can say after seeing the second episode that I am completely on board now. This show has spunk and awkwardness that is rare for television. Almost every one of Jane Lych's lines are forever-quoteable ("That was the most offensive thing I've seen in 20 years of teaching — and that includes an elementary school production of Hair"). And the song choices this episode were also superb (LOVED "Take a Bow"). I really hope the show can keep its ratings up while also keeping the kookiness and the more PG-13 themes and jokes.
Read more!
Read more!
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Film - Ponyo
Hayao Miyazaki can do no wrong. Just like his other films, Ponyo manages to completely immerse the audience in pure magic. Read on for more about the movie, but I went in knowing basically nothing about the movie, other than my general knowledge of Miyazaki, and I highly recommend seeing the film this way. It's just the kind of movie that you should really experience without any preconceived notions. However, if you've alread seen it or just can't keep yourself from reading my incredible insights, read on.
So, I didn't know going in that this is basically a retelling of the little mermaid. Of course, it is tweaked a lot, to fit Miyazaki's style, but that's the underlying tale. The main tweak is that the human boy and the "little mermaid" who is named either Brunhilde or Ponyo, depending on who you ask, are little kids.
In typical Miyazaki fashion, there are some extreme characters, like Ponyo's father, voiced by Liam Neeson, who is a long-haired, sea man who appears to be wearing make-up all the time, or her mother who is an enormous and beautiful sea goddess of some kind. But the absolute delight of this film lies in Ponyo herself.
I'll admit that I was slightly antsy for the first twenty or thirty minutes. It was fun, but it didn't have the spark I was looking for. But once Ponyo becomes a real girl, it's amazing. She is energetic and innocent. She causes a major sea storm without even realizing it. She loves ham. A lot.
This wasn't my favorite Miyazaki movie, but it was still absolutely fantastic. Fun, magical, beautiful. A wonderful way to spend a couple hours. Read more!
So, I didn't know going in that this is basically a retelling of the little mermaid. Of course, it is tweaked a lot, to fit Miyazaki's style, but that's the underlying tale. The main tweak is that the human boy and the "little mermaid" who is named either Brunhilde or Ponyo, depending on who you ask, are little kids.
In typical Miyazaki fashion, there are some extreme characters, like Ponyo's father, voiced by Liam Neeson, who is a long-haired, sea man who appears to be wearing make-up all the time, or her mother who is an enormous and beautiful sea goddess of some kind. But the absolute delight of this film lies in Ponyo herself.
I'll admit that I was slightly antsy for the first twenty or thirty minutes. It was fun, but it didn't have the spark I was looking for. But once Ponyo becomes a real girl, it's amazing. She is energetic and innocent. She causes a major sea storm without even realizing it. She loves ham. A lot.
This wasn't my favorite Miyazaki movie, but it was still absolutely fantastic. Fun, magical, beautiful. A wonderful way to spend a couple hours. Read more!
Book and TV - The Stand and Lost
Damon and Carlton (Executive Producers and Head Writers for the show) have long cited Stephen King's "The Stand" as their main inspiration source-material for shaping the story-line of Lost. Therefore, I couldn't resist picking up this huge novel in an attempt to gain insight into one of my favorite shows. It also doesn't hurt that this epic-tale has been judged by many respectable sources to be King's magnum opus. So read on for my review of the book, my insights into how it might relate to Lost, and also some excerpts of interviews where Team Darlton discuss "The Stand."
"The Stand" is about a world where a super-flu epidemic strikes, killing almost all of humanity. Those that are inexplicably immune begin to have the same dreams pulling them together. King introduces the reader to a tremendous amount of characters (like Lost) who are all seeking some sort of redemption. Almost every character seems well-rounded and creates interest, also like Lost (although in The Stand, absolutely every character talks like Sawyer so they may grate on you a bit at times). And, many of the characters are similar (e.g. pregnant chick, rocker, stoic leader, even an impressive dog).
The circumstances faced by the characters in this novel and Lost are also comparable. The characters in King's work who have survived experience a mythological "pull" sensation that draws them together to start and shape a society. They all understand that they need some semblance of order and togetherness if they are going to survive, especially considering there is a village of evil Others not too far off in the West. And, not to spoil too much, the beginning of the end is marked by a big-bomb detonation.
So what insights can be gathered comparing these two works? I would say the main thing I learned about Lost after reading this book is that Team Darlton share King's sentiment that mythology should only be the background for a story about character-development. "The Stand" ended with a solid understanding that the characters faced their faults and gained peace in their sense-of-self. They were presented with opportunities to receive redemption, and those that embraced them gained comfort. The conclusion did not address any of the questions that arose from the mythological experiences. Why were these people the survivors? Who exactly are Mother Abigail and Randall Flagg? We have a sense at the answers, but much much much is left to interpretation. I fear Lost will end in a similar fashion, but I also think the fan involvement with the show will shape it in such a way that more questions will be answered than would be if King was at the helm.
As for which work I enjoy more, I am confidently in the camp of Lost, even though the show has yet to conclude and it could still spoil my affections. King's mythology is wrapped up in the same good versus evil debate, but there is never any question as to who is good and who is bad. WIth characters like Jacob, the Man in Black, Christian Shephard's ghost, and Ben (just to name a few!) Lost has not been so quick as to identify who we should be rooting for. There are many more shades of gray and a lot more ambivalence. Also, Lost has so many more elements to its mythology: Dharma, Hanso, Widmore, Time-Travel, and on and on. It's a much more complex-world and I like the complexity.
Anyway below are some excerpts which will allow Carlton and Damon to express their own opinions on how "The Stand" has influenced them:
Here is a snippet of the interview between the writing team and King that was conducted by Entertainment Weekly. The entire interview can be read HERE:
Carlton Cuse: For us, The Stand has been a model. Lost is about a bunch of people stranded on an island. It's compelling, but kind of tiny. But what sustains you are the characters. In The Stand, I was completely gripped by everyone you introduced in that story — how they come together, what their individual stories are, how they face the premise. That was such a good model for Lost.
Lindelof: The first meeting I had with J.J. about Lost, we talked about The Stand, and it kept suggesting ideas throughout the process. The character of Charlie was always going to be a druggie rocker, but when Dominic Monaghan came in to audition we started saying, ''What if he was a one-hit wonder?'' I said, ''Like the guy in The Stand! The guy with just this one song.''
King: Yeah. ''Baby, Can You Dig Your Man?''
Lindelof: His entire character sort of is constructed around that. The thing about The Stand is that there are all the archetypes, and we embraced the same thing. The strong, silent, heroic type. The nerdy guy. The techie. The pregnant girl. All those characters exist in The Stand, too.
---
And here's another little comment Carlton gave Variety:
For both Damon and me Stephen King’s “The Stand” was the most influential model for “Lost.” Because “Lost” is not the tenth carbon copy of a medical, legal or cop show there wasn’t a clear roadmap for how to make it work for 100 episodes by looking at other TV shows. So instead we turned to “The Stand,” a 1,000-page novel with a high-concept idea at the core: most of the world’s inhabitants have been killed by a super flu. What we loved about the book was that what sustains the 1,000 pages is not the mythology of the super flu but the stories of the characters. The mystery of what was happening on this island had to be secondary to the mystery of “who are these people?”
-- Read more!
"The Stand" is about a world where a super-flu epidemic strikes, killing almost all of humanity. Those that are inexplicably immune begin to have the same dreams pulling them together. King introduces the reader to a tremendous amount of characters (like Lost) who are all seeking some sort of redemption. Almost every character seems well-rounded and creates interest, also like Lost (although in The Stand, absolutely every character talks like Sawyer so they may grate on you a bit at times). And, many of the characters are similar (e.g. pregnant chick, rocker, stoic leader, even an impressive dog).
The circumstances faced by the characters in this novel and Lost are also comparable. The characters in King's work who have survived experience a mythological "pull" sensation that draws them together to start and shape a society. They all understand that they need some semblance of order and togetherness if they are going to survive, especially considering there is a village of evil Others not too far off in the West. And, not to spoil too much, the beginning of the end is marked by a big-bomb detonation.
So what insights can be gathered comparing these two works? I would say the main thing I learned about Lost after reading this book is that Team Darlton share King's sentiment that mythology should only be the background for a story about character-development. "The Stand" ended with a solid understanding that the characters faced their faults and gained peace in their sense-of-self. They were presented with opportunities to receive redemption, and those that embraced them gained comfort. The conclusion did not address any of the questions that arose from the mythological experiences. Why were these people the survivors? Who exactly are Mother Abigail and Randall Flagg? We have a sense at the answers, but much much much is left to interpretation. I fear Lost will end in a similar fashion, but I also think the fan involvement with the show will shape it in such a way that more questions will be answered than would be if King was at the helm.
As for which work I enjoy more, I am confidently in the camp of Lost, even though the show has yet to conclude and it could still spoil my affections. King's mythology is wrapped up in the same good versus evil debate, but there is never any question as to who is good and who is bad. WIth characters like Jacob, the Man in Black, Christian Shephard's ghost, and Ben (just to name a few!) Lost has not been so quick as to identify who we should be rooting for. There are many more shades of gray and a lot more ambivalence. Also, Lost has so many more elements to its mythology: Dharma, Hanso, Widmore, Time-Travel, and on and on. It's a much more complex-world and I like the complexity.
Anyway below are some excerpts which will allow Carlton and Damon to express their own opinions on how "The Stand" has influenced them:
Here is a snippet of the interview between the writing team and King that was conducted by Entertainment Weekly. The entire interview can be read HERE:
Carlton Cuse: For us, The Stand has been a model. Lost is about a bunch of people stranded on an island. It's compelling, but kind of tiny. But what sustains you are the characters. In The Stand, I was completely gripped by everyone you introduced in that story — how they come together, what their individual stories are, how they face the premise. That was such a good model for Lost.
Lindelof: The first meeting I had with J.J. about Lost, we talked about The Stand, and it kept suggesting ideas throughout the process. The character of Charlie was always going to be a druggie rocker, but when Dominic Monaghan came in to audition we started saying, ''What if he was a one-hit wonder?'' I said, ''Like the guy in The Stand! The guy with just this one song.''
King: Yeah. ''Baby, Can You Dig Your Man?''
Lindelof: His entire character sort of is constructed around that. The thing about The Stand is that there are all the archetypes, and we embraced the same thing. The strong, silent, heroic type. The nerdy guy. The techie. The pregnant girl. All those characters exist in The Stand, too.
---
And here's another little comment Carlton gave Variety:
For both Damon and me Stephen King’s “The Stand” was the most influential model for “Lost.” Because “Lost” is not the tenth carbon copy of a medical, legal or cop show there wasn’t a clear roadmap for how to make it work for 100 episodes by looking at other TV shows. So instead we turned to “The Stand,” a 1,000-page novel with a high-concept idea at the core: most of the world’s inhabitants have been killed by a super flu. What we loved about the book was that what sustains the 1,000 pages is not the mythology of the super flu but the stories of the characters. The mystery of what was happening on this island had to be secondary to the mystery of “who are these people?”
-- Read more!
Friday, September 4, 2009
Book - The Magicians
So, when I was visiting with my friend, Laura, she basically forced this book on me. Im not complaining. For a complete fantasy geek like me, this was totally great. The premise isn't really new: a teenage boy who always wished there was something more to life finds out there is, and is accepted to a highly selective school of magic. Adventures ensue.
However, this book is more of a commentary on that almost universal desire than it is an actual representation of that desire. Or at least, that's what it is trying for, I think.
So, there is almost an annoying focus on how much the main character, Quentin, wishes and believes that there is more to the world than his mundane existence. At first, I was like, "Yeah, yeah, yeah. We get it." But once you get into the book, it's good that you understand the level of his obsession with a more adventurous and magical life.
The book heavily alludes to a series of books Quentin read as a child which are basically the Chronicles of Narnia. The main focus of his inability to accept the "regular" world is that he never stopped wishing that those books were real, and that "Fillory" which is the Narnia counterpart, was a place he could actually get to. Come to find out, he's right - shocker.
I don't know. Part of me wants to just say that the book was just kind of a good mishmash of a bunch of other fantasy books I love so much, but I really do think that this book was able to focus in on the interest in fantasy and magic that many of us still have, even as adults, and to kind of pick it apart. I think that in the end the book kind of advocates that the interest is good for you, but taking it to an obsession is unhealthy.
Anyway, in a very reading-heavy summer, I enjoyed this as much or more than everything else that I read for the first time this summer. The only thing I would say is that people who are very familiar with Chronicles of Narnia would probably enjoy it more than people who aren't. Read more!
However, this book is more of a commentary on that almost universal desire than it is an actual representation of that desire. Or at least, that's what it is trying for, I think.
So, there is almost an annoying focus on how much the main character, Quentin, wishes and believes that there is more to the world than his mundane existence. At first, I was like, "Yeah, yeah, yeah. We get it." But once you get into the book, it's good that you understand the level of his obsession with a more adventurous and magical life.
The book heavily alludes to a series of books Quentin read as a child which are basically the Chronicles of Narnia. The main focus of his inability to accept the "regular" world is that he never stopped wishing that those books were real, and that "Fillory" which is the Narnia counterpart, was a place he could actually get to. Come to find out, he's right - shocker.
I don't know. Part of me wants to just say that the book was just kind of a good mishmash of a bunch of other fantasy books I love so much, but I really do think that this book was able to focus in on the interest in fantasy and magic that many of us still have, even as adults, and to kind of pick it apart. I think that in the end the book kind of advocates that the interest is good for you, but taking it to an obsession is unhealthy.
Anyway, in a very reading-heavy summer, I enjoyed this as much or more than everything else that I read for the first time this summer. The only thing I would say is that people who are very familiar with Chronicles of Narnia would probably enjoy it more than people who aren't. Read more!
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Film - Julie and Julia
What a joyous experience it was to watch this movie! There are so many things to like. For one, it is a smartly written script by Nora Ephron. You might think that this was just a film adaptation of Julie Powell's book "Julie & Julia" but you'd only be correct in part. Powell's book is half of the story - the half describing the efforts of a young bureaucrat who, while struggling to find a sense of self, tackles all the recipes in "The Art of French Cooking." Ephron intertwines this story perfectly with the life Julia Child herself, adapting from Child's "My Life in France."
The performances are also stellar. If Meryl Streep got a nomination for her work in "The Devil Wears Prada," then one would hope she gets the same recognition for her hilarious and yet dead-on portrayal of Julia Child.
And also - it was so refreshing to see a movie featuring great husbands. We see tons of stories where guys make nice love interests- but how do those men stand the test of time? Supportive, funny, smart and sexy - these are some great dudes.
It might be a bit of an overstatement, but I do truly believe that this is the type of movie I'd like to see land one of those bonus 5 Best Picture nominations. It was smartly crafted, featured superb performances, and made you feel great. Can a feel-good movie be deserving of a nomination? With ten spots open it's a possibility.
Read more!
The performances are also stellar. If Meryl Streep got a nomination for her work in "The Devil Wears Prada," then one would hope she gets the same recognition for her hilarious and yet dead-on portrayal of Julia Child.
And also - it was so refreshing to see a movie featuring great husbands. We see tons of stories where guys make nice love interests- but how do those men stand the test of time? Supportive, funny, smart and sexy - these are some great dudes.
It might be a bit of an overstatement, but I do truly believe that this is the type of movie I'd like to see land one of those bonus 5 Best Picture nominations. It was smartly crafted, featured superb performances, and made you feel great. Can a feel-good movie be deserving of a nomination? With ten spots open it's a possibility.
Read more!
Film - The Time Traveler's Wife
Although a classic case of "the book was better," (read my review of the book HERE) the film version of "The Time Traveler's Wife" is not completely without merit. I like Eric Bana and Rachel McAdams, and they are given a huge pass by getting to play much more watered-down and likable versions of Audrey Niffenegger's characters. However, their like-ability comes at the price of depth. And they are not the only elements of the book that are sanitized. In the book, Henry's injury is much more severe, Clare faces even more difficulties with her attempts at conceiving a baby, the overall language is borderline caustic, and the ending is.... different.
As for the time-traveling itself, without having read the book the movie's explanations of Henry's "Chrono-Displacement Disorder" might be a hard pill to swallow.
If you've read the book, this would be a nice supplement to your reading experience. If you haven't, no need to see this film.
Read more!
As for the time-traveling itself, without having read the book the movie's explanations of Henry's "Chrono-Displacement Disorder" might be a hard pill to swallow.
If you've read the book, this would be a nice supplement to your reading experience. If you haven't, no need to see this film.
Read more!
Book - The Wet Nurse's Tale
Erica Eisdorfer has written a lovely novel about the life of a wet nurse in Victorian England. Susan Rose is a bawdy scullery maid who ends up becoming a wet nurse after an unexpected pregnancy. Susan faces many heart-breaking challenges, but faces them all dead-on with vigor, spunk, and a tremendous amount of cunning. She acknowledges when she's acting immorally, but always provides a sympathetic excuse. As a Gypsy once told her, "you'll see to yourself, girl." Read on for more.
Eisdorfer's book provides a welcome glimpse into the world of nursing babies. I don't think you'd have to have the experience in order to find these passages charming, although the fact that I was actively breastfeeding my own baby while reading the story probably enhanced my perception of the novel.
The novel is interrupted periodically with little vignettes of women's reasons for giving their children over to a wet nurse (all of them customers of Susan's mother, a woman who wet nursed well into her 40s). There have been some complaints that these asides are distracting, however, I welcomed them. They were not only short, interesting stories; they provided insight into raising children in the Victorian era. There were no bottles and certainly no formulas during this time. If a woman couldn't nurse her baby, her healthy alternatives were limited. These anecdotes were informative and also prevented me from running with my original assumption that any woman who would give her baby over to a wet nurse was a monster.
If I were to have any complaints, it might be about the ending, where Susan's luck trumps her cunning. However, this is a super-fast, enjoyable, moving and funny read that I would recommend to anyone (particularly maternal females).
Read more!
Eisdorfer's book provides a welcome glimpse into the world of nursing babies. I don't think you'd have to have the experience in order to find these passages charming, although the fact that I was actively breastfeeding my own baby while reading the story probably enhanced my perception of the novel.
The novel is interrupted periodically with little vignettes of women's reasons for giving their children over to a wet nurse (all of them customers of Susan's mother, a woman who wet nursed well into her 40s). There have been some complaints that these asides are distracting, however, I welcomed them. They were not only short, interesting stories; they provided insight into raising children in the Victorian era. There were no bottles and certainly no formulas during this time. If a woman couldn't nurse her baby, her healthy alternatives were limited. These anecdotes were informative and also prevented me from running with my original assumption that any woman who would give her baby over to a wet nurse was a monster.
If I were to have any complaints, it might be about the ending, where Susan's luck trumps her cunning. However, this is a super-fast, enjoyable, moving and funny read that I would recommend to anyone (particularly maternal females).
Read more!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
