Posted on September 3, 2008 in Books, Movies
Aristocrats: Caroline, Emily, Louisa, and Sarah Lennox, 1740-1832 by Stella Tillyard is the biography of four high born sisters. As with many of the books I read, this languidly lay in the TBR for awhile. This one for almost a year, but I have quite forgotten where I read or learned about the books only observing that it seemed well criticised and popular enough for the BBC to make mini series on it. It is a thick history book around 450 pages hardcover and very in depth as it covers the lives of these four women. While I enjoy history immensely, I actually do read that many historical books, and to be honest, many of them are dry. This one was not only well researched, but Tillyard makes the prose feel, at times, as if one is reading a novel rather than a distant historical account. There are many academics who are readable and comprehensive, and there are many who are far from it. Tillyard is not only readable, but her writing is accessible to the public which is why this book is a bit of an oddity being very historical, biographical, and a best seller. As a result, one learns a lot about the lives of people in the UK and Ireland in the 18th century. It is not necessarily a page turner for everyone though, and I really only picked it up because I am interested in history, but you may not be curious if aristocrats, rich dead people, biographies, and English/Irish history are not your things. An interesting read none the less.
This six episode BBC series which also aired on PBS Masterpiece in 1999. I had not heard of it until I knew of the book which goes to show you that the series is not the most excellent. I have seen better to be sure even in the British costume drama. I do not think it’s necessarily a bad series; it’s actually difficult to adapt because it is a true story. The adaptors were quite faithful, and I think as with most series of this type, the acting and cast make the most of it. I quite liked Geraldine Somerville as Emily; she is very attractive in it. I did not like the Emily voice over, and the portrayal of Caroline’s storyline left me feeling depressed. The portrayal of Sarah at the beginning was difficult to see though. All in all, I thought it okay because it was a bit slow, but it did not merit too much censure or negativity. I’d take the book any day though.
Posted on July 5, 2008 in Movies
Bee Movie (01 06 08) – I love honey bees. This has a stellar voice cast; they even got Oprah. There were a lot of bee jokes, but they amused me even though they were incredibly cheesy. I guess I love bees and honey too much.
I’m not there (02-03 06 08) – REVIEW
Jumper (08 06 08) – What happened to Hayden Christensen’s voice? He must be smoking a lot. It bothered me, but not as much as Jamie Bell’s irritating character. It’s funny how the movie ends with a possibility of a sequel, but there is no way that is going to happen. I knew before I saw this movie it would not be great, but low expectations are the key to these things. At least Rachel Bilson is pretty, and they actually have decent chemistry due to their real life romance.
Coming Home (30 05 08, 14 06 08)
– I actually was looking for the other Coming Home, but got this 1998 tv mini series starring Peter O’Toole, Joanna Lumbley, and Emily Mortimer. It also stars Paul Bettany and Kiera Knightley, who plays the younger version of Mortimer’s character; she really hasn’t changed that much in a decade. I don’t know why I like Emily Mortimer; she is a frail little thing, but I like her rather mouseish, British looks and demeanor. I like that she does not scream glamour in the way Knighley and Bettany do. Also Bettany could totally be Peter O’Toole’s son. PT and JL are fabu together. Any excuse to watch either of them works for me.
Boogie Nights (22 06 08) – For some reason, I had few inclinations or knowledge of this movie before I watched it. Odd considering it’s such a cult film, but I watched it based on the rec of a friend who told me it was such a wonderful film that exemplified the 80s (she having grown up in the time era of the film). I enjoyed it. I couldn’t believe the plethora of actors who are in this film. Almost the whole cast has had best acting Oscar nominations now. Heather Graham had purpose at some point. So the acting works, and so was everything else. It was funny. It was sad. It was the late 70s, and the early 80s. It’s not something I would rewatch often because it can be so sad, but also, I was not alive for most of this era to feel nostalgic. I liked the montages, and Anderson’s film style. Actually, this is the only PT Anderson movie I’ve ever seen. Methinks I should go about getting Punch-Drunk Love now.
Marty (27 06 08) – This film was uncomfortable to watch because it was honest. I could understand the pressure about being a late bloomer, and the negative stereotypes and ideas perpetuated. I felt the ending was a bit rushed and wished for more insight. Good film.
Persepolis (29 06 08) – REVIEW
Punch-Drunk Love (29 06 08) – So I did get this movie as I said I would. I was underwhelmed and annoyed by the music. Positives include the presence of Emily Watson, Adam Sandler’s acting, and Anderson’s direction. It’s peculiar and has lots of annoying characters except Sandler who really does shine in this however slow the plot is.
Love in the Time of Cholera (30 06 08) – I did not think this was as bad as the critics made it. I’ve read the book, and while I don’t think it can capture the book (too difficult with magical realism), it had it’s nice points. Javier Bardem is wonderful and super fine for one thing, and the visuals are another bonus. It was slow, but not unbearable. The actor that played young the younger version of Bardem’s character looked a lot like Daniel Day-Lewis. It reminded me that Bardem himself is a bit like DDL in his character choices, intensity, and talent. I need to watch No Country for Old Men soon.
The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (30 06 08) – I heard that this was one of the most beautifully shot films of 2007. I must concur. The cinematography was beautiful; I like the director’s choices. The acting was great as well. I really adore Brad Pitt these days, and Casey Affleck surprised me. He was good at being the insecure twerp and transformed into someone I felt pity for. The downside is the slow plot of course. It drags at the beginning, and all the good stuff is in the second half.
Total: 10
Rewatched Movies:
Pride and Prejudice (02 06 08) – My friend who has never watched P&P and I watched the 1995 BBC mini series. It was pretty much a late marathon. I think it was my fifth time rewatching it. It is always so fun and addictive. One can appreciate the intense chemistry between Firth and Ehle. This is definitely one of my favourite mini series. I do wish they included one more scene at the end of the couple before the final scenes. I always thought the fast cut to the ending was somewhat abrupt. Also missing out the hilarity of a scene were Lizzie tells her mother. Still, one of the best series ever to watch over and over again. Never gets old.
Posted on June 30, 2008 in Books, Movies
The two volume omnibus edition of Marjane Satrapi’s graphic memoirs and Bildungsroman of growing up in Iran. I actually did not know about the French edition until too late. As is the case sometimes, I regret not having found the original French version to read especially since I perpetually need to brush up my linguistic abilities. I did see the movie in French. Overall, I found this read immensely enjoyable and wonderful. I love it as much as I love The Complete Maus by Art Spielgman, another identity searching and family history memoirs of conflict. Persepolis was moving, tragic, beautifully drawn, funny, painful, and honest. It is beautiful memoirs of childhood and finding one’s own identity with change and upheaval. I liked all the characters; I could feel for them. I liked young Marji’s spirituality, faith, and religion, and while it was difficult to watch her go through her teen years, I could relate to her in a way I have not for a character in a long time. While I did not live through the political and violent times of war and revolutionnary torn Iran, we have similar family dynamics and other things such as the scene with Marji as waitress that hit home.
I often do not cry for movies or books which is quite odd since I can be so sensitive to things. I must admit that the scenes with Marji and her Uncle Anoosh left me verklempt. I read it twice and it affected me, and the film’s scene with it left me in tears. I cannot say why it particularly resonated with me more than some others things, but the scene moves me above so many others.
The film is wonderfully done as well, and while it is a condensed version, it still has the same simple yet affective black and white imagery. It has a couple of things the graphic novel does not, and it is nicely voice acted all around. It is harder to find a more truer to the novel adaptation than with Satrapi as the co-writer and co-director of the film. Both are recommended.
Posted on June 3, 2008 in Movies, Musings
Adam’s Rib (01 05 08) – Isn’t it fun to watch onscreen couples knowing they are offscreen couples? The chemistry is marvelous. I love the pull and tug, and neither really right, but it’s such a nice little Hepburn/Tracy rom-com. Why aren’t there more rom-coms with married people like this anymore?
Penelope (05 05 08) – Produced by Reese Witherspoon, this is a cute, quirky flick with a very great cast. They shot it in the UK so there are quite a few brits, but only some of them kept their accents (Simon Woods, Lenny Henry, Russell Brand) while the others adopted American accents (James McAvoy, Burn Gorman, Nick Frost). The movie also stars Christina Ricci as the eponymous character, Catherine O’Hara, Richard E. Grant, and Reese herself. Sweet, short, and it has James McAvoy.
Hellboy (08 05 08) – I had the chance to watch this on a flight in 2004, but I dismissed it having heard mixed reviews. Since then, I’ve heard positive things about this film, and with the sequel imminent this fall, I decided to watch it. It’s my second chance at watching Guilerrmo del Toro after Pan’s Labyrinth. I can see his distinct dark fantastical style in both movies. Also, both films have fascists. I do think this film’s script is not the best comic book adaptation, but it really makes up for it with the characters. The romance is kinda sweet albeit rushed through the film. It’s fun and quirky too; I look forward to the sequel.
A World Without Thieves (09 05 08) – This is a Chinese movie starring Andy Lau; it’s okay. Lau’s wig is ugly, and all the females in Chinese movies are bone thin. They shot some of it in Eastern China, but it’s not exactly a strong script and some of the poignant, spiritual scenes are flat.
Message in a Bottle (11 05 08) – I refuse to read another Nicholas Sparks novel, but I actually like the casting in all the movie adaptations. I didn’t even recognize Princess Buttercup (Robin Wright Penn) in this movie. Kevin Costner wasn’t that bad, but he is no Ryan Gosling. I love Paul Newman. That is all.
Cranford (4, 11-12 05 08) – What is it about Elizabeth Gaskell that makes her books so adaptable to screen? I have yet to see an adaptation of Gaskell’s novels I did not like or am indifferent too (same can not be said for the Brontes and Ms Austen). This is actually based on three Gaskell novels, and the creators have weaved the stories so effortlessly and beautifully. The acting is magnificent. There is a lot of humor, a lot of death, but a lot of warmth too. Wonderfully done.
Todo sobre mi madre (All About my Mother) (12 05 08) – None of the Almodóvar movies I’ve seen so far are all that realistic in plots, but the important thing is that they all have raw and real emotional, beautifully written, acted and shot. I like the ambiguity and the humanity of all his characters; nothing is clear cut, and there is love and feeling amidst it all. I can understand why many think this is still his most mature film to date. This one has so many layers and themes with All About Eve and A Streetcar Named Desire attached to it. Almodóvar is love.
The Forbidden Kingdom (17 05 08) – So you don’t watch these movies for plot consistencies, dialogue or even characters. It’s all about the action sequences and the cinematography in China is very well done. Still, I am not going to lie: I cringed at some of the plot turns. Why did Sparrow speak in third person?!
Lust, Caution (19 05 08) – REVIEW.
The Ghost and Mrs. Muir (30 05 08) – A supernatural romance where Gene Tierney (Mrs. Muir) and Rex Harrison (the ghost Captain Gregg) fall in love. It is rather sweet, and I found myself relating to Mrs. Muir’s solitary nature. I am pretty sure this was the first time I’ve seen a Tierney film, and like the third time I’ve seen Harrison. They have such nice chemistry too. I have not watched George Sanders in a lot things, but he does play assholes really well.
Total: 10.
Posted on May 2, 2008 in Movies
Juno (13 04 08) – As predicted, this movie is likable. Lots of Canadian actors too. I enjoyed all of the performances and the script did have a lot of heart. Sweet and enjoyable little flick.
I am Legend (13 04 08) – Slow stuff, but people watch this for Will Smith. This is actually my first Will Smith movie in a long time. It’s well shot, and I liked the dog as I usually do.
A Room with a View (13 04 08) – I’m fairly understanding of Andrew Davies’s scripts and his lack of subtext at times, but he does not do well with Forster. While it wasn’t all bad, it was boring and just not as good as the Merchant-Ivory version. The most annoying thing was he changed the ending to one that felt empty and just weird.
Dan in Real Life (14 04 08) – It feels like ages since I’ve seen a typical rom-com. This was such a cute one too. I actually did chuckle a few times, and I adored the Steve Carell/Julie Binoche pairing. I like how romantic tension is played, the setting, and just the simplicity of a nice adult romance. Underrated and sweet.
Lars and the real girl (15 04 08) – Well, this was fine. Nothing too extraordinary, but Ryan Gosling does make this movie. I’ve been watching RG since his TV days (so about 10+ years), and he has always had the screen charisma. Patricia Clarkson and Emily Mortimer also did well in this. I hope EM gets more work; I warmed to her from Match Point on.
The Swan (15-6 04 08) – This is a 1956 film directed by Charles Vidor starring Grace Kelly, Alec Guiness, and Louis Jordan. It’s a bit slow moving, but the ending is a nice twist. There’s the right humor, and Grace Kelly plays a very convincing shy and awkward Princess. Harder to discern what AG was going for in his immature Prince character, but Louis Jordan is as gorgeous and romantic as always.
Becoming Jane (19 04 08) – I avoided watching this for the longest time because I had heard iffy reviews based on its fictionalization of Ms. Austen’s life. It had a trite Hollywood ending, but the best thing about this is James McAvoy. I am really glad his star is on the rise, and he is one of those actors that can make a movie so much more bearable. His acting and screen charisma is off the charts.
Hable con ella (Talk to her) (24-5 04 08) – REVIEW
Across the Universe (25 04 08) – I love the Beatles. I like interpretations of their songs, and the only good thing about this musical is that some of the numbers (Let it Be, I want you so bad) are well done. It is also well shot, but it is clear they wrote a story around the music. I felt absolutely nothing for the characters. You never get a sense of them at all, and my emotions rang from indifference to annoyance. The characters didn’t even seem to care about each other either, and there were some irksome plot holes. I’m not really keen on any of the actors either. It has no real humor like Moulin Rouge or warmth like Singin in the Rain or the Astaire/Rogers movies. This is how you should not do a musical. As a result, this movie was extremely slow even though I knew all the songs and sang along. It was trippy and well shot, but it was far more tedious.
Rewatched Films:
Moulin Rouge – I own this film; it was given to me by friends for a birthday years ago. It was my third DVD I think, and I’ve watched it a couple of times since. I’m not in the habit of rewatching or rereading many things, but I wanted to watch this again after Across the Universe which has nothing (except the Beatles song) on MR. If Baz Luhrmann decided to do a musical with solely Beatles songs, it would be funny, have some warmth, and a decent (albeit melodramatic) romance. It’s sad for me to admit this, but this truly seems to have been Nicole Kidman’s career height. Right after this movie, she went on to do The Hours (which I also loved), Dogville (I am never watching a Lars Von Trier, but she was good in it), The Others (great reviews; have not seen), Birth (same), but lately, her choices have not been great. I am cautiously optimistic of Australia coming out this November because it is Kidman reunited with Baz. I am only seeing it it because it is a Baz film. Back to MR, based off Dumas’s Camille (I only realized this until after seeing George Cuckor/Greta Garbo’s Camille), this is a fun movie. The songs have been on my playlists for years; I like all of the musical numbers and interpretations. Another thing that AtU lacked was charismatic acting. All the actors in MR seem to have fun and really get into it. Kidman is incredibly zany in the beginning, and I have rarely disliked Ewan Macgregor or Jim Broadbent in anything. Maybe I shouldn’t have rewatched this because now I’m more annoyed by AtU.
Posted on April 1, 2008 in Movies
The Dajreeling Limited (09 03 08) – Review
American Gangster (10 02 08) – The trailer and commercials made this look like a typically fast paced gangster/crime movie. It was actually much more of a character film. The acting of Denzel and Russell were both good. They actually seemed to like being there. It reminded me of The Departed (for obvious reasons) and Catch Me If You Can except that it was very slow and long at almost three hours in length. Neither of the main characters meet until the last few scenes, but the actors had a lot of chemistry. I like this better than Training Day and Denzel’s performance here is actually better. It was also well shot on location. The wonderfully talented Chiwetel Ejiofor is also in this movie.
Paris Je t’aime (14 03 08) – Love! I am a sappy romantic so this gets to me. A couple of the films were odd (in the good and bad ways), but many were just downright wonderful and really well done. I look forward to the New York version.
Sense and Sensibility (30 03 08) – 2008 BBC version. The first half was slow mostly, and I couldn’t get over how similar this Marianne looked like KW, this Elinor sounded so much like ET, and how miscast Willoughby was. Edward is too good looking, but that’s okay. The two female leads held there own in the end. The music and cinematography are nice, and as usual, Col. Brandon played by David Morrissey, is the best part. I love a good adaptation.
In the first three months of 2008, I have only seen 12 films. A year ago this time, I had seen 19. 23 in 2006, 24 in ’05, 41 (!) in ’04, and so on and so forth. Even more strange is that I have read more books in the first three months than movies. That hasn’t happened since 2001. Obviously the decline indicates how much my life has changed, but I just don’t spend as much time looking and thinking about movies as I did. Knitting sort of replaced it, but I can remedy that. I have a To Be Watched pile of movies that I procrastinate watching (which probably contributes to fewer movies watched). Though I will say that going through the books is more important at present. I need movie breaks too.
Posted on February 12, 2008 in Books
Before reading this graphic novel, I had read Alan Moore’s other acclaimed work Watchmen. I enjoyed it, but I’m inclined to think right now V for Vendetta has some even better writing. Moore is a brilliant author who imbues poetic prose and engrossing narrative in graphic works. His characters are fascinating if not compelling. When I was reading this, I was afraid the darkness of dystopia would bring my mood down, but there were a couple of wonderful moments of beauty in this. Moore and co-author David Lodge weave a novel about society, politics, integrity, love, revenge, anarchy, fascism, security, and freedom. V is an intriguing character; a mad genius whose actions I do not necessarily condone, but whose arc makes this novel: “It’s everything, Evey. The perfect entrance, the grand illusion. It’s everything.” While the novel has extremities, there is a moral grey side to it. The work does probe at the human capacity for indifference and to be controlled. A great graphic novel.
I watched the film adaptation more than a year ago. I liked it, and I understand that while Moore does not, Lodge does. I consider them different entities as a result of the changes. While they are not completely divergent, they are notable changes to the ending and fates of characters. The graphic novel is understandably more involved and includes more characters and stories. I highly recommend reading the book, and then watching the movie.
Posted on February 11, 2008 in Books
The few positives of this book are that James Fenimore Cooper does his best to create a narrative of frontier life with themes of racism and friendship. I also did not dislike any of the characters, but the only ones I truly like die. This was not my original choice for Decades 1820’s, and I must say that particular decade does not have any many enticing classic books. This novel was boring. I blame Cooper’s prose which is a bit wordy, but not as crazy as Dickens. At least Dickens seems to take fun in verbosity, but Cooper seems to take himself too seriously. He has footnotes about historical facts, and at times, it could very dry in the academic sense. The character dialogue was better than the descriptions, but even though, I found myself constantly drifting. I am not one to turn my nose up at lengthy prose as I like Tolstoy, Garcia Marquez, Steinbeck and others who write epic novels. Also, books published around the same time are just more enjoyable reads. Frankenstein was a lot more interesting.
The 1992 movie is not like the book, and apparently based on another movie version. There are many differences between he book and the 92 movie which I saw a years ago. The film is okay, and the best part being Daniel Day Lew
While I did not hate this book and there were some decent moments of writing, it was mostly mundane.
Posted on December 9, 2007 in Books, Movies
When I read this book the first time, I was a little older than the protagonist’s age. I’ve reread the books twice since, in audiobook form last year, and yesterday before I saw the movie. I love the HDM trilogy because is an extremely well done fantasy series that is complex and layered. It’s definitely not just for kids and is rereadable for a variety of reasons including the questions and ideas it elicits.
The idea of a movie has been around for a long time, and I remember there had been some issues with the script and switching of directors. I am really glad it has been done. I enjoyed myself. It was great to see all the concepts in the books such as the daemons, and Iorek visualized. The special effects were some of the best things about the book. The casting is fantastic. I think everyone, including newcomer Dakota Blue Richards, did a fine job. I really want to the film to do well; this is actually the first time I’ve been in a movie theatre since May 2006. The success of this movie will determine whether New Line green lights the other two films. The ending is abrupt as a result which brings me to more in depth comments below.
Continue reading →
Posted on November 9, 2007 in Books
Daphne du Maurier was partially inspired by Jane Eyre when writing this book, so I could not help compare it to that book which I love. The characters are not exactly the same, but I enjoyed reading this book almost as much. It is very well written. I’m not someone who reads a lot gothic or mystery literature, but the atmosphere is almost perfect. Du Maurier is an excellent writer. The prose can be poetic. She’s good at dialogue especially with characterizations as well. Mrs. Danvers is incredibly creepy, de Winter is mysterious, and the nameless protagonist is relateable. While very naive at the beginning, it’s hard not to feel sympathetic for the character. She’s also been put in a very hard situation when they go back to Manderley. The use of the nameless protagonist device is something I encountered in Fight Club, so I was not put off by that. Though it did feel du Maurier was teasing the reader at the beginning with the fact we’d never find out. All in all, a very good read with lots of atmosphere, suspense, and just enough romance.
I did not read this book for awhile because I had seen the Alfred Hitchcock adaptation with Laurence Olivier and Joan Fontaine. I did not have the time to rewatch the film, but I remember liking it very much as I do most Hitchcock films, and I also like Olivier. I recommend it as a companion to the book.
Posted on November 1, 2007 in Books, Movies
By Tom Perrotta. I am not a mother, have never lived in the suburbs (let alone an American one), and I’m currently not in a romantic relationship. Also, all these characters are older than me by at least a decade. So I would say I am not at a point in my life to be able to relate to any of this book’s characters and their problems. I did end up relating to some of them because I found the narrative inviting. The back of the hardcover edition has Newsweek calling Tom Perrotta “an American Nick Hornby: companionable and humane, light hearted and surprisingly touching.” That’s funny because Hornby is the reason I picked up this book in the first place. He warmly reviewed the book in Housekeeping vs. The Dirt, his second book of literary essays. Kate Winslet being in the film adaptation sealed the deal. I think the comparison is actually rather apt. I found that Todd’s early scenes in the book reminded me right away of Hornby’s style. I would say that Perrotta is slightly more melancholic and darker than Hornby. The description still stands more or less, as I was able to emphasize and feel for most of the characters in this book.
Perrotta uses third person omniscient narrator on many characters. I like that you can get an idea of so many people, and he pulls it off. Many characters can also take away from the main adultery plot because novels about affairs can be tiresome so instead of being exasperated by Todd and Sarah, I found I was very curious between chapters about what they were up to.
Early on though, the affair reminded me slightly of Kar Wai Wong’s film In the Mood for Love. It was the sort of ephemeral, earnest and slightly sad nature of the two people connecting. Though Perrotta is not as pensive as Wong. The novel’s suspense seemed to indicate a sensational ending which I dreaded, but the ending was fine in the end, more or less. For the most part, the book kept my attention through out, and I found the characterizations well thought out. There is nothing excessively flowery or postmodernist about his prose, and it moved the story and characters along with relative ease. I’m not interested in reading his new novel The Abstinence Teacher any time soon (maybe for the film adaptation?), but this was a fine read.
It took me two days to finish this movie which made the film feel slow for me, but that’s my fault. It was a fine adaptation that was true to the book because Tom Perrotta co-wrote the screenplay. A few changes in the story. They changed Todd’s name to Brad because the director and co screenwriter is Todd Field. Patrick Wilson could be a Todd. Also, I was wondering if the movie’s ending would add on to the one in the book, and it didn’t really. The ending was more lurid than the book, which is appropriate for a film I guess. The pedophile casting and plot was more sympathetic than in the book.
Sarah in the novel is described as frumpy, plain, and not conventionally pretty. I had already seen clips of the movie before reading the book so I couldn’t help putting Winslet’s face in my mind as Sarah when reading the book. The passages about Sarah’s beauty didn’t connect as well in this cases because I adore Kate Winslet and thinks she’s beautiful as a film star and as a real woman. I find her more attractive than Jennifr Connelly who played Brad’s wife Kathy in the film. Though, makeup did a good job of making Winslet frazzled and plain.
They added a narrator, voiced by Will Lyman, into the film. It would seem like an unnecessary, somewhat cheap tool to use in a film adaptation because it becomes that third omniscient narrator, but I liked it. It made it feel a bit like a documentary. Not like Discovery channel animal documentary, but more like a PBS anthropological one.
There were a few humorous touches, but not enough for this film to move faster. If I hadn’t read the book, I don’t know if I would have appreciated the characters or the ending as much as I do. In these cases, I recommend to read the book and watch the movie together rather than go the movie alone. You just get a better sense of everything in the story that way.
Posted on October 24, 2007 in Books, Movies
By Augusten Burroughs. On my allconsuming.net account, I ask for recommendations of nonfiction books. This was the book that most people “thought I might enjoy”. It’s a very popular memoirs, and I can see why. Many people think the book is funny, and I found some moments amusing, but most of the time, it was just strange. I think Burroughs’s prose is simple, direct, and effective as it is. Burroughs childhood and the people around him were quite messed up, but the more I read, the less perturbed I became. He also seemed to grow into the weirdness and unsettling nature of his life as he seemed to just accept what it was. Objectively speaking, a lot of the details were disturbing and sad.
I probably wouldn’t have read this book had not so many people recommended it for me as I really don’t read many memoirs of this type. I have read a lot about travel, food, and of famous people, but not on “normal” people. Not that Augusten Burroughs childhood was in any way normal. It’s a bit refreshing, and I did relate to some aspects of this. Due to the lack of boundaries placed on the characters and their disregard of societal norms and values, some of the stuff described was seemed genuinely fun and liberating to me. Often weird, but still neat. There was a spontaneity that I could see the appeal of in the stories of the mini adventures.
The book was shorter than I thought it would be, and I didn’t feel dragged down by it as a result. I don’t love this book nor do I dislike it. I think it conveys how crazy people are, but then again, maybe we have that in our every day lives. You can tell I’m not easily surprised by a lot of things that I read. Like I said, I was able to relate to it in some way showing you how we all want to be let out of our cages sometime.
So I don’t read movie reviews, but I’m fairly abreast of what films are liked and well received. I don’t remember hearing anything about this movie which usually doesn’t mean well for the film. Two of my friends did not like. One of them said the movie dragged on way too long. I’m inclined to agree. It wasn’t that bad of a movie, but it felt a bit aimless. I don’t think it did a good job of making you feel attached to any of the characters. It was slow, and took a bunch of amusing things from the book, but it wasn’t quite enjoyable or even sad enough. It felt a bit disjointed. I think the script might have looked okay on paper, but was just difficult to be cohesive on screen. I thought the acting was pretty decent since there was Annette Benning, Alec Baldwin, Gwyneth Paltrow (she had such few lines that she did not irk me at all in this film), Joseph Fiennes, and Joseph Cross as Augusten. The soundtrack wasn’t bad either, and there were some nice moments attributed to the director and the actors. All in all, not the worse movie I have seen, but not a great adaptation either.