I'm talking about the new adaptation of Mansfield Park, which was aired last night on PBS. Anyone else see it? It is now being pleasantly skewered over at Austen Blog. And what's with "Masterpiece" without the "Theatre"???
Following the fine (?) tradition of Gladiator, Troy, and Alexander, Hollywood will now be bringing us the story of the battle of Thermopylae, a suicide mission in which three hundred Spartans held the Persian army off long enough for the rest of the Greeks to get off their duffs and defend their homeland. According to The Guardian, the new movie, 300, is based on a graphic novel (red flag #1) which features monsters and warriors with superpowers (red flag #2) written by a man who didn't "realise that the hero wasn't necessarily the guy who won" (flaming radioactive red flag #3). Mark my words: no good can come of this.
via ARLT
How could I resist Imani's expressive "OooOOoo"? The book is yours, Cinnimani, if you'll just e-mail me an address I can send it to. (Sorry Wil, your Soldier of Fortune collection will have to march on alone.)
So, what did everyone think of part two of J.E.? Am I just getting to be an old fuddy duddy or was there far too much kissing? I really thought Toby Stephens was going to swallow Ruth Wilson. I nearly gagged when he spoke the line about wishing for a potion to make him more handsome. What were they thinking?!?
They certainly packed a lot of action into two hours but for some reason it wasn't very compelling. Perhaps there was just not enough time to develop the characters; it takes a special actor to walk on, say a few lines, and give the impression of being a complete human being. The scenes with the dying Mrs. Reed were decent (thanks to Tara Fitzgerald), and St. John wasn't bad, but the rest did not impress. Was it not absurd for them to film the supposedly dark, dank Ferndean Manor on a bright, sunny day? Or am I just being as grouchy as Mr. Rochester?
As for the book, I am nearly half way through and enjoying every single syllable!
I had an enjoyable evening watching two new productions based on great novels, Jane Eyre and The Robber Bride. Actually, I'm not sure "enjoyable" is the right word for my experience of watching part one of the latest adaptation of Jane Eyre. I should have known something was wrong when the opening scene depicted young Jane wandering among dunes in a great sandy desert. The scene shifted to her reading a book with pictures of steamy, exotic places. Whaaa? So much for Bewick's History of British Birds and the lonely, storm-tossed northern seabirds.
Things didn't improve much after that. The gothic imagery, music, and even Rochester's brooding seem forced and cliché. I'm still not sure about Ruth Wilson as Jane, but Toby Stephens' muscle-bound, swaggering Rochester, though not as bad as some, is definitely a miss for me. The worst part, though, is the re-writing of the dialogue. The screenwriter actually has Rochester, and then Jane, use the word "youngish," three times in rapid succession. Youngish?! Oy vey. In the same scene he mentions the duel with Céline Varens' cavalier: "I shot him—in the shoulder or some insignificant place." How dull! Compare that with the original: "Next morning I had the pleasure of encountering him; left a bullet in one of his poor etiolated arms, feeble as the wing of a chicken in the pip..." I don't understand the point of adapting a book and then not using the author's words, especially when they are so superior.
But pay no attention to me. I seem to be the only person on two continents who dislikes this production so thoroughly. BrontëBlog has collected over a score of glowing reviews from critics on this side of the pond. I will watch the conclusion of this production but as an antidote I am re-reading Jane Eyre, which I thought to do this year anyway. So far it is as wonderful as ever.
The Robber Bride was much better done, I thought. It starred some of my favourite actresses, Mary-Louise Parker, Wendy Crewson, and Amanda Root (who was Anne Elliot in Persuasion), and the whole cast was excellent. I noticed they cast an aboriginal actor as a police officer, which was refreshing because nationality was completely irrelevant to her part. I can't say much more about the movie since it's been a while since I read the book, but I definitely recommend watching it if you get the chance.
Here is something for everyone:
The new BBC adaptation of Jane Eyre will be airing soon on PBS. I'm not sure I believe Toby Stephens as Rochester, but we'll see. Ciaran Hinds [swoon] set the bar pretty high for that part. I'm glad Tara Fitzgerald is in it, she's great.
Want to spruce up your public library? Check out Change on the Cheap for ideas on how to make your library more functional, inviting, and (it irks me to say this) relevant (as if books could ever be irrelevant!). [via H20boro lib blog]
Want someone to read you a story? Check out GreatBooksAudio.com where Walter Gerald Burek is reading through The Heart of Darkness and also reads a poem every week. Beautiful site, beautiful voice.
In case you missed the link when it was buried in my library rant, do check out Jon Swift's dyn-O-mite post, "Who Needs Books?" Here is a little taste:
If book huggers think reading is so important, they should watch the movie Fahrenheit 451. In that film (which I'm sure is better than the book, which I have not actually read) people live in a future Utopian society where the government keeps the people safe from terrorism and everyone can afford big-screen televisions. The hero of the film is a librarian who has his hands full freeing up shelf space. By the end of the film they arrive at a solution that makes everyone happy. Bookworms memorize the books they like and recite them to someone who cares. I think if people did that today, it would free up even more shelf space for things like video games, which actually promote the skills kids will need to fight the wars of the 21st century.
Book huggers. Love it!
Yes, that's right, I was the last person on the planet who hadn't seen Brokeback Mountain, but now I've seen it and want to cry forever. Sigh. Good message, though. Don't let fear of what may happen, even fear of what is likely to happen, stop you from living the life that is in you. No one wins when we pretend to be something we're not.
UPDATE: I must have this: Brokeback Mountain: Story to Screenplay.
The backless dress has much to answer for!
—Lady Lydia Eliott, from The House of Eliott (Series 1 Episode 2)
I have to thank Danielle for reminding me about this wonderful series. I saw it a number of years ago and am no less captivated by it now than I was then. It's the story of two genteel sisters who are left nearly penniless when their father dies and must support themselves with their dressmaking skills. It is set in 1920's London, a time of great social change, especially for women. Mrs. Pankhurst and Marie Stopes are mentioned, along with coalminer's strikes and unemployment. No less controversial are the fashions of the day, and the Eliott sisters are in the vanguard when they eventually open their own fashion house. Anyone with the slightest interest in clothes would be well entertained by the award-winning costumes alone, but the writing and acting are excellent as well. Shakespearean actress Barbara Jefford, who plays the arrogant Aunt Lydia, is particularly brilliant and reminds us what good acting is suppposed to be like. Sadly, my library doesn't carry the second and third seasons, but they do have the companion book by Jean Marsh (of Upstairs Downstairs fame), co-creator of the series. I can't get the theme song out of my head now, but the funny thing is that I don't mind! Now if only I knew how to do the Charleston...
It's movie night at Bookworm, and coincidentally it's a Slaves of Golconda double feature. First, The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie with the magnificent Maggie Smith. It's a shame they could only give her one Oscar for her performance. It was spectacular, especially her big fight with Miss Mackay. Wow. I actually applauded at the end of that scene.
The film is based on a play that is a somewhat simplified but generally accurate adaptation of the book. The main departure from the book is when the girls' concocted love letter between Miss Brodie and Mr. Lowther is discovered and precipitates the showdown with Miss Mackay. The characters (especially Mr. Lloyd) take over some of the exposition and also do some interpretation, just to make it perfectly clear what is wrong with Miss Brodie. There is no attempt to emulate Spark's style of writing— the film is conventional— it is the characters and the acting that make it great.
On a girly note, I have to say I enjoyed the costumes too. Smith looked downright sexy in her close-fitting jackets and pencil skirts. Only a woman with her impeccable posture could breathe in some of those outfits!
The second movie I caught by coincidence on TV. It was The Island of Doctor Moreau. I won't go into any details since the Slaves of Golconda are going to read the book together. I'll just say that it's f--ing freaky and philosophically fascinating. I had to laugh at the parental guidance warnings. Forget the violence, the thing is fr-eaky!!! I plan to read the book on nice sunny mornings with a cat in my lap. Oh wait, bad idea. Maybe a plant. Yes, a plant would be much better.
When Danielle at A Work in Progress mentioned that Monster... I mean, Masterpiece Theatre would be airing the BBC production of Dickens' Bleak House, I thought, "That's nice, but it doesn't fit in with my grand reading plan; I haven't even started the Epic of Gilgamesh yet!" 
However, this evening I found myself with my Latin homework done and no further ambitions for the day so I tuned in. Let me tell you, it was riveting. What a marvellous cast, including the devilishly handsome, "when he good, he's very good; when he's bad, he's better," Mr. Charles Dance. (Is it just me or is it getting warm in here?)
I haven't read the book so I can't critique it as an adaptation, but as a stand-alone drama it is top quality, just as we expect from the BBC. If you missed the first episode and haven't read the book, do read the synopsis before attempting episode two. Already, after one instalment, schemes, suspicions, and entanglements abound. With another 13 hours to go I can only imagine how juicy things will get. I might just have to interrupt my orderly reading program and give Dickens a try.
COLONEL: My God, where do you get all the books?
MARCO: Oh, I, uh... I got a guy picks 'em out for me. At random. ... He's in, uh, San Francisco. A little bookstore out there and, uh, he ships 'em to me wherever I happen to be stationed.
COLONEL: You've read them all?
MARCO: Yeah. They also make great insulation against an enemy attack. But the truth of the matter is that I'm just interested, you know, in, uh, principles of modern banking and history of piracy, paintings of Orozco, modern French theatre, the jurisprudential factors of Mafia administration, diseases of horses and novels of Joyce Cary and ethnic choices of the Arabs -- things like that.
Marco realizes he's rambling. The Colonel looks at him, concerned. A long pause.
COLONEL: Ben?
MARCO: Sir?
—The Manchurian Candidate (from the screenplay)
The Colonel then orders Major Marco to take some sick leave so he can be crazy without bothering the department. Great movie (the original; I haven't seen the recent version). Not one to watch before going to sleep, though. I don't think I'll be playing solitaire for a while.
Track comments
Recent Comments