Monday, March 18, 2013

March 18, 2013--1st Birthday

I'm not sure why my day-to-day life never seems important enough for me to blog about.  The past few days or so when I've sat down and told myself I needed to blog, I couldn't come up with "anything to write about."  Nothing witty, nothing smart, nothing that anyone other than myself might find remotely interesting.

I'm in the same rut today but I feel like I have to write something....even if it does seem fairly inconsequential.

The girls spent last week with my brother and sister-in-law so I had the week to myself.  I enjoyed it a lot.  Most of the week I spent cross-stitching, catching up on TV shows, sleeping.  Things I don't usually get to spend a lot of my "extra" time doing.  I did get some housework done, but on my own time, when I wanted to.  I discovered Downton Abbey, which I immediately fell in love with, and have since been catching up on the three seasons that currently exist.

On Friday Chaz and I headed to Paris to spend the night with my brother and sister-in-law and then on Saturday traveled to Quincy for Daphnie's birthday party.  It wasn't quite what I expected, but we had a good time.  Hopefully everyone who was there did too.

We came home Saturday night, had Sunday together and then today got back to the normal grind of things.  I spent the morning listening to Disney radio on Pandora and playing with blocks, stuffed animals, and lots of things that make obnoxious noises.  The girls had a blast and I did too.

The day-to-day.  It doesn't change too much.  But it's my life and I'm more than happy with it.  So there you have it.  A terribly boring update of the past week and a half.  Yay....


The birthday girl decked out in her birthday crown made by Grandma Loreea

Aubrey & Alice (cousin) riding the dinosaur at Bonkers

Daphnie's first birthday cake

Eating cake with Grandma Loreea

We finally decided to give her free reign, let her make a mess

New outfit after the first had been demolished by birthday cake

Opening birthday presents

More presents

Birthday shot with Mommy!











Thursday, March 7, 2013

March 7, 2013--5 Travesties Posing as Films Based on Books

When I say "I wish they would turn this book into a movie" what I really mean is "I wish they would turn this book into a 17-hour long spectacle that includes every single solitary detail and doesn't deviate at all from the story line and has perfect casting."

Truth.

The number of movies made based off books is astronomical.  The number of good movies made based off books....not so much.  Here's my theory: some books, Harry Potter for example are extremely popular and make lots and lots of money.  So some genius gets the idea that they can make a whole lot more money if they turn it into a movie.  Millions of people go and see the movie, some of whom haven't read the books, and after seeing the movie they go buy the books and Voila! more money is made.  Smart, huh?

Here's the problem.  Those of us who have read the book and are only going to see the movie adaptation simply because we can't help ourselves--we have to see how some professional film crew's ideas compare to our own imaginations--have high expectations.  And when I say high, I mean HIGH.

See above italicized quote.

So, if it really is all about making money, these producers and directors and everybody involved in the money making would be a whole lot richer if they came to the conclusion that readers are going to pay to see the movie no matter what.  So why not make multiple movies spanning one book?  You have fans that will pay to see all three movies and you have fans that will be so much happier because you didn't f*ck it up.

Granted, I get that there are a lot of hoops to get through--actors looking older, it costs money to make more movies, blah blah blah.  I get that there's red tape.  Humor me.

So, I would like to now share my own personal top 5 travesties posing as movies based on books.  Your lists might be much more diverse--my own probably seems limited because there are plenty of books I have read where I haven't seen the movie, for whatever reason, or movies I have seen but have not yet read the book.  Anyway, here goes:

#5.  Twilight
     The thing that can be said for the Twilight Saga movies is they do get better as they progress.  The first film is most definitely the worst.  My biggest issue with it is the casting of the two main characters.  Watching Rob Pattison as Edward play opposite Kristen Stewart as Bella is like watching really bad amateur porn.  It's awkward, it's uncomfortable, yet you can't seem to look away.  Now, my husband and I have debated about whether the directors purposely had the two seem awkward around each other throughout the first few movies to emphasize the difference between human Bella and vampire Bella.  Having seen the final installment, which is by far the best, and finally seeing some real chemistry between Robert and Kristen, I think that may be a fairly realistic assumption.  Unfortunately, that's asking a lot of your viewers--to watch purposely bad acting for 4 movies, just to emphasize how good the 5th and final one will be.
     My other issue with the poor acting, on purpose or not, is that when reading the book, you don't get the feeling that Bella is that awkward.  At first, maybe, but not for very long.  She's pretty adult for being a teenager and from the time she finds out what Edward is, she's fine with it.  She's not unsure about what she wants.  She has concerns about her family and friends, but she never doubts that she wants to be a vampire, that she wants to be with Edward.  If anything, Edward is the one that holds back, who is "awkward."  In my opinion, that is not portrayed on screen.
     There are other smaller issues I have with the film, such as the random trip out into the woods so that Bella can confront Edward about what he is (instead of on the way home from the city in the car) followed by the crazy trip up the mountain so that Bella can see Edward sparkle in the sunlight--all in the middle of a school day, no less.  What?  How hard would it have been to stick to the book, I mean seriously?
     3.5 stars out of 5

#4.  Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief
     This one's a little harder to write, for two reasons.  1) I saw the movie before reading the book, which is unusual for me and 2) I've only watched the movie that one time.  Having read the book since, the details between the book and movie have gotten a little hazy.
     One thing I remember clearly is I saw the movie with Chaz (who had read the book) and he was ready to walk out ten minutes into the movie because he was so angry with how things were going.  I do remember that the kids were way too old in the movie--they're supposed to be 12, they're portrayed as 16.  The movie also changes the overall underlying plot, which is that the Titans, lead by Kronos, are trying to overthrow the gods.  Instead they get this bright idea that Luke wants to take over, just because he's a power-hungry teenager.  In reality, Luke is manipulated by Kronos and allows Kronos to take control of his body because he's pissed that his father, Hermes, left his mother and abandoned him.
     Now, maybe that's because they never planned to continue the saga with more movies, but it's still pretty irritating.  Other irritating issues with the movie are the existence of Persephone, Hades' wife, who helps the kids because she hates Hades.  Persephone has no influence in the book and she likes her husband.  The competitiveness between Zeus, Poseidon and Hades, which is huge in the book, is totally passed over in the movie.  Ares' interference, which again, is huge in the book, is also passed over.
     I hate that movies that are "loosely" based on a book take the same name as the book.  Call it something else, still give credit to the book it is "loosely" based on and make people a lot happier.  You save yourself the high and then disappointed expectations of a lot of people.
     3 stars out of 5

#3.  a) Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
       b) Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
       c) Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
     Ok, we're talking Harry Potter, here.  One of the most, if not the most popular fantasy series in existence.  This is the series that has led to every type of fan memorabilia possible, including a theme park built to look like the setting of the wizarding world.  People want to go to Hogwarts, they wish more than anything that it was real.  This is a huge, incredibly influential series to millions upon millions of people.
     So what do the producers do?  They make three very half-assed films that don't come even remotely close to being accurate.
     Issues with Goblet of Fire: the Quidditch Cup and the following riot, no house-elves, Neville telling Harry about the gillyweed instead of Dobby, and the maze.  And those are just the major ones.  I mean, seriously, that maze?  Pathetic.  The maze is huge, and so fun!  All of the spells, enchantments and creatures and all we get in the movie is overgrown shrubbery that tries to consume the contestants.
     Issues with Order of the Phoenix: the time at 12 Grimmauld Place--no cleaning, no discussions between Sirius and Harry, limited Kreacher exposure.  The absolute hell Umbridge turns Hogwarts into--it's all just thrown together with no explicit details.  The Weasley twins' exit--again, pathetic. That's one of the best parts of the book, where everybody cheers and all we get are a couple of fireworks?  What?!?  The battle at the ministry--so many rooms that weren't touched upon, too many injuries that were left unmentioned.  The battle is epic and really shows how far these young wizards and witches have come and how talented they are and you don't get that in the movie at all.
     Issues with the Half-Blood Prince: where do I start?  The fact that the movie spends more time focusing on Ron and Lavender making out than anything else is in itself disgusting.  Harry being in some random place when Dumbledore finds him at the beginning of the movie, instead of Dumbledore picking him up at the Dursleys' and more importantly, putting the Dursleys in their place for treating Harry like crap--ugh.  Snape teaching D.A.D.A. is pretty much skipped over, you get no class time.  Dumbledore's training sessions with Harry are a vital part of book 6 and all we get in the movie is Slughorn's fractured memory.  Oh, and Voldemort as a kid--but nothing about his ancestors, the Gaunts.  Nothing about Voldemort's working and stealing items to use as Horcruxes.  The Horcruxes are the foundation of Voldemort's destruction and we get none of that.
     While Book 6 is not my favorite book in the series, it is a very important book.  There is a LOT of important information that sets up the final installment and barely any of it gets into the movie.  Major fail.
     All three movies averaged out together--2.5 stars out of 5

#2.  Nights in Rodanthe
     There is one major issue with this movie that pretty much ruins the whole thing.  In the book, Adrienne is helping her grown daughter Amanda deal with depression.  Amanda has just lost her husband and has to now raise her two children on her own.  While trying to help comfort her daughter, Amanda blows up in Adrienne's face, asking her what she knows about losing love?  (Adrienne and Amanda's father are divorced.)
     Hurt and heartbroken, Adrienne sits Amanda down and tells her the story of her relationship with Paul Flanner, a man she met while tending a friend's inn for a few days.  She and Paul fall in love over a few days and although their paths take them in different directions after leaving the inn, they stay in touch through letters.  After a few years, Paul tells Adrienne that he wants to come back to her and continue their relationship together and Adrienne is planning for his return when she is informed that Paul has died in an accident.
     Amanda is shocked that her mother has such a story to tell and has kept it secret and suffered in silence for so long.  She realizes that her mother does understand what she's going through and they are able to take comfort in each other.
     In the movie, Adrienne's daughter is portrayed as a 16/17 year old who is very devoted to her father and is very angry with her mother for not getting back together with him when he suggests it.  She just can't understand why her mother wouldn't get back together with her father when it's the easy thing to do and would be so good for her and her brother.  So, Adrienne sits down and tells her daughter the story of her and Paul, basically to placate her daughter who is basically throwing a teenage temper tantrum.
     That "minor" detail changes the entire tone of the story and makes the movie a throw away.  How hard would it have been to stick to the actual story, instead of making things up?  In the book, the father isn't trying to get back together with Adrienne.  So why say he is in the movie?  Why not leave it the poignant, adult story it is?  Major screw-up.
     2 stars out of 5

#1.  Eragon
     And the winner is....you got it.  Eragon.  Worst.  Movie.  EVER!!!  My experience with this one is basically the opposite of my experience with Percy Jackson.  I had read the book, absolutely LOVED the book and was so effing excited about the movie.  My younger brother and I went together and we were sitting in the theatre, bouncing in anticipation.
     And then it started.  And it kept going.  And I sat there is horror, totally appalled at the absolute travesty that deigned to call itself a film playing out on the screen.  I have never watched it again.  It was that bad.  About the only thing that stayed "true" to the book was the names of the characters.  The entire plot was f*cked up, nothing happened the way it was supposed to.
     I really can't go into much more detail than that because I honestly don't remember what happened in the movie.  I just know it wasn't what happened in the book.  It was THAT bad.  I will never watch that movie ever again because I will not torture my integrity as a literary reader like that again.  It was perfectly evident that the producers made it quickly, just to cash in on the name.  Guess they didn't realize how popular the Inheritance Series was going to become.  More's the shame for them.
     If they had done the movie properly, maybe even made the movie in two installments (same can be said for Harry Potter 4-6), the viewers would have been so much happier and satisfied and they'd have made a whole crapload of money more than they did.  Again, more's the shame for them.

Now, let the debates begin....
   


Wednesday, March 6, 2013

March 6, 2013--My Fictional Boyfriends

While perusing Pinterest the other day, I came upon and re-pinned a meme that said the following:

Keep Calm
     Being obsessed over fictional guys isn't weird....is it?

When I re-pinned this, I captioned it with a list of a number of fictional guys I'm "obsessed" with, some that I'm totally fine with and some that I'm slightly ashamed of.  But it got me thinking, what is it about certain fictional characters that we love, and that we hate?  Why do we fall, simultaneously, for the jerks and the romantics?  These characters are just that--characters.  So why do we talk about them as if they really existed, as if they're family?

Well, here are some of my obsessions and why I obsess over them.

1. Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy, Pride and Prejudice
   
     This one I feel is somewhat self-explanatory.  I don't know too many gals who have read the book and/or watched the movie who don't have a slight crush on this man.  He's your typical "love to hate him/hate to love him" guy--at least at first glance.  A first impression portrays him as a superior, vain and extremely stuck-up person.  You want to hate him, only because he looks down his nose at you.  But he is also extremely handsome, with a strange aura of loneliness about him.  A bit of a sense of mystery.  You can't help but be intrigued by him, even as you tell yourself and anyone who will listen he's a grade-A asshole whom you wouldn't give the time of day.  You are now, quite simply, a liar.
     You are never so thrilled (and relieved) to find out that Mr. Darcy truly is a superior man, not in attitude, but in reality.  He is generous, loving, compassionate, accepting.  He's also shy.  And who doesn't love a guy who's just a little nervous about telling you how he really feels.  You like knowing you make him nervous--this rich, handsome man who has everything getting a bit tongue-tied around you--you know you like that feeling of power.
     Mr. Darcy is the perfect mix of good and bad.  The flawed hero.  The black knight on a white horse.  What's not to obsess over?

2.  Ron Weasley, Harry Potter Saga

     Now, I know the Harry Potter obsessions range from just about every character in the book.  I myself have more than one.  Ron is more the "romantic" obsession of mine.  My obsession with Ron can be summed up in one simple sentence:  he's the underdog.
     He's the second to Harry Potter's first, the junior to Harry's senior, the Costello to Harry's Abbott.  Harry gets the credit for just about everything.  And this is not to say that Harry doesn't carry his weight and has much to be praised about.  He does.  But a hero is only as good as his support system.  What good is Percy Jackson without Annabeth and Grover?  What would Batman have done without Robin, or more importantly, Alfred?  Eragon had Saphira, and Brom, and Arya and a whole list of other characters.
     Ron is the guy who no one ever gives enough credit to, even his best friends.  He really is a talented wizard with a bunch of redeeming qualities.  But there's always just a slight sense of surprise when Ron manages to get through something taxing without making a mistake.  And there's always that sigh of resignation when Ron does something wrong.
     He walks out on Harry and Hermione because Voldemort has  manipulated Ron's one fatal flaw--jealousy, particularly pertaining to Hermione.  But he redeems himself by destroying the very horcrux that drove him away.  And from that moment, he's the glue that keeps the group together.
     Maybe this isn't a very good explanation of why I love Ron so much.  Maybe this isn't the best overview of his personality and character.  Maybe I have no real reason for loving him the way I do--beyond his being the underdog--I just do.

3.  Jesse, Pitch Perfect

     First of all, how adorable is he?!?  I fell in love with Jesse the first time I watched that movie.  Part of it was probably because he was such a Breakfast Club guru and the theme song (one of my favs) was used so succinctly throughout the film.  But besides that, he's the cute, geeky guy with a superior moral code.
     He's not "hawt" like so many others.  Not to say he's bad-looking, but he's no Chris Hemsworth or Robert Downey Jr. or Ryan Reynolds.  He's just cute, not hot.  But cute is definitely enough for this guy.  He has a heart of gold with a voice to match.  **Melts**  He sees Beca as a whole package, he truly likes her for her and he doesn't try to pick her apart.  But he also doesn't fall into the role of lovesick victim.  When Beca finally snaps and blows up in his face, he walks away.  And he lets her know.  I deserve better than this (he totally does) and I won't be a casualty of your broken emotional grid (air punch!).  She gets the point and (finally!) realizes the treasure she's found in him.
     He's loyal, he's sweet, he's fairly mature for a college freshman.  He's a catch.

4.  Murtagh, Eragon
     Alex Kavev, Grey's Anatomy
     Daryl Dixon, The Walking Dead

     I put these three together because on a fairly basic level, they're all the same guy: the bad boy with the bad past.  They all had rough childhoods, they all grew up in rough circumstances.  Murtagh was the son of a killer and a spy and was raised under the reigning evil king.  Alex Karev's father was an abusive drunk, his mother was a junkie and a schizophrenic, he had to steal food to eat and was bounced around from foster home to foster home.  My knowledge of Daryl's childhood is limited, but you get the idea that it wasn't the best.  He comments in one episode that he could have just as easily ended up an inmate in prison as with the group of "good guys" he's with now.
     All three guys tend to lash out--hit first before I get hit.  While all three have a respect for women deep down, outwardly they tend to be callous and careless toward women because they are afraid of getting hurt. They all have very tough exteriors while being incredibly vulnerable on the inside.  You get to see short blips of that vulnerability from time to time and your heart melts for these men who want so desperately to be loved and are so desperately scared of allowing themselves to be.
     They're "fixers."  You know they're "bad"--they're harsh and hard and at times purposely cruel.  But you also know they have good hearts and you want to "fix" them.  You want to be that one woman who can prove to them that they deserve to be loved and you won't leave them high and dry.  You want to be the one who convinces them to trust in love and in you.  You want to be the one who brings out the best in them.

5.  The Chairman, Memoirs of a Geisha

     Last one for now.  I have always had a great love for the Chairman.  He is the man who loves from afar, who puts his own needs and wants aside for the benefit of others.  He puts into motion Chiyo's training as a geisha and once she grows up, despite his personal feelings towards her, he puts her into the path of his friend Nobu Toshikazu because he feels it will be the most beneficial for both of them.  It will put love and affection into his friend's life and security into Chiyo (Sayuri)'s life.
     He gets Sayuri out of war-ridden Tokyo, although he gives the credit to Nobu, and later is understanding and forgiving about her sexual set-up to discourage Nobu from becoming her danna.  It is only when the feelings and interests of all others are no longer relevant that he reveals his own true feelings and allows himself to truly love.
     It is true that the Chairman's actions create years of strife for both him and Sayuri.  Had he expressed his feelings for her sooner, they might have been happier sooner, seeing as she loved him too.  But there is no telling how that might have affected the actions of all those around them.  The Chairman is a man with good intentions and a true and loyal heart.  He is faithful and devoted.  Who doesn't want a guy with those qualities?

There are quite a few other "obsessions" I have--Snape, Sirus Black, Will Blakelee, Thor, Captain Brandon to only name a few--but this post has gone on long enough, I'm sure.  So there you have it--my obsessions and why I obsess.  Now that I have put way too much time into thinking about why I love so many men who don't actually exist, you may do the same.  Because you know you do it too.  :)

Until next time....