tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15270552333326261672024-03-09T18:45:55.330-08:00Lit Lovers & Corset LacesLit Lovers & Corset LacesLitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.comBlogger112125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-50813894292286100472018-05-16T17:17:00.002-07:002018-05-16T17:32:10.035-07:00WE'VE MOVED: New Website<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
After all this time I'm back and ready to roll! Please visit my new website, <a href="http://litloverscorsetlaces.com/" target="_blank">Lit Lovers & Corset Laces</a>, where I'll be writing new posts, revisiting old ones, and serving all your Brit lit and period drama fandom needs!<br />
<br />
Years ago, I started this blog as a high schooler looking to share my love for British literature (and Jane Eyre in particular) with other avid readers and likeminded fellows. Lit Lovers & Corset Laces had a successful but relatively short run. Life and the complicated business of "growing up," going to college, and embarking on a never-ending course of self-discovery got in the way. In 2014, my email got hacked and the blog unofficially closed its doors.<br />
<br />
Four years later, I'm back again, no longer a bright-eyed and bushy-tailed high schooler but a seasoned and equally British literature-obsessed graduate student. During these years away, my love for British literature, Jane Eyre adaptations, and period films has stayed with me, fostered in the quiet of my room on Friday and Saturday nights. But recently I have begun to miss this community of lit lovers with whom I could share my nerdy fanaticism. I don't know if it's still a community anymore, or if people even read or use blogger like they used to. In many ways, the new website is starting from scratch. But I didn't want to begin without giving the people who were there from the beginning the opportunity to follow along as I resume this journey again.<br />
<br />
I hope to see you around.<br />
<br />
Blessings,<br />
Ari C.</div>
LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-7217177807871078992014-11-24T20:27:00.000-08:002014-11-24T20:27:46.112-08:00Far From the Madding Crowd and Suite Francaise Trailers <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Greetings from your long lost fellow blogger!<br />
<br />
It has truly been a long time, but I'm too inspired by upcoming films to keep myself from sharing. I've become an avid film lover/analyst of every genre, but literary adaptations and period dramas remain closest to my heart. I'm always scouring the internet for news of them. You can imagine, then, how excited I was when I discovered that <i>Far From the Madding Crowd </i>and <i>Suite Francaise </i>would both be released in 2015 in association with BBC films.<i> </i><br />
<i> </i>I can't quite decide which one I look forward to most! Of course, Thomas Hardy has wormed his way into my heart and nearly become my favorite author these past few years, and <i>Far From the Madding Crowd </i>grows on me more each time I read it. This newest version--directed by Thomas Vinterberg, starring Carey Mulligan, and featuring Matthias Schoenaerts, Tom Sturridge, and Juno Temple--is the first in sixteen years. As many of you may know, the story is that of the strong-willed but vain Bathsheba Everdene whose beauty and pride trap her in a sort of love square (?) complete with a playboy soldier, obsessed old bachelor, and ruined shepherd. If I can find the time and the resolve, I hope to review the novel soon for those who aren't familiar with it.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<object width="320" height="266" class="BLOGGER-youtube-video" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0" data-thumbnail-src="https://ytimg.googleusercontent.com/vi/WCm1XNVD_0c/0.jpg"><param name="movie" value="https://youtube.googleapis.com/v/WCm1XNVD_0c&source=uds" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#FFFFFF" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed width="320" height="266" src="https://youtube.googleapis.com/v/WCm1XNVD_0c&source=uds" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object></div>
It's dangerous to make assumptions based on a two-minute trailer, but so far one things really stands out to me about this adaptation. It appears as though Vinterberg has worked hard to capture the pastoral elements of Hardy's novel, first by emphasizing the natural scenery surrounding the characters and secondly by setting the trailer against the country tune sung by Bathsheba (Carey Mulligan does indeed sing this herself, and the song is called "Let No Man Steal Your Thyme"). If my analysis is correct, then this might prove to be a very good adaptation. <i>Far From the Madding Crowd </i>is defined just as much by the settings as the characters themselves. Hardy's description of weather, topography, and the sky serves as a means through which the reader gains more insight into the inner turmoil of the characters as well as events to come. <br />
<br />
<i>Suite Francaise</i>, on the other hand, is being adapted to the screen for the first time in history. Written by a holocaust victim during the Nazi occupation of France, the novel captures the relationship of French civilians to the German officers boarding in their homes. At the heart of the plot is the complex romance that develops between Lucile Angellier and "her" officer, Bruno von Falk. Michelle Williams and Matthias Schoenaerts (yes, he's also in <i>Far From the Madding Crowd</i>) will take on those lead roles in the film directed by Saul Dibb, whose last movie was <i>The Duchess. </i><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/4cR0L6invGQ?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
This too looks like a visual treat, but the jury's still out as to whether Dibb will be able to capture the emotional complexity of the characters. The novel captured more thoughts than words, which is always hard to translate into a film. If Williams and Schoenaerts can deliver and the script succeeds in making their characters multidimensional, <i>Suite Francaise </i>has the potential to be a powerful movie. That's a tall order though. I'm also interested to see if other story lines are fully developed and whether Kristen Scott Thomas taps into the full depth of her role.<br />
<br />
Other films coming soon or in the works include <i>Madame Bovary</i> starring Mia Wasikowska and an adaptation of Sebastian Faulks' WWI masterpiece, <i>Birdsong</i>. Nicholas Hoult is supposedly set to star in that, reportedly beating out Eddie Redmayne who starred in the Masterpiece Classic adaptation of the same novel. Development of the film has been rather quiet, however. Faulks seems reluctant to give his full support, so this one might take a while. Fall 2015 will also bring a new adaptation of<i> Frankenstein</i> starring James Mcavoy.<br />
<br />
Glad to be back! Hope you enjoy!<br />
<br />
Ari<br />
<br /></div>
LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-47492104973808788592013-12-04T11:53:00.002-08:002013-12-04T11:55:07.063-08:00"Lolita" by Vladimir Nabokov Review <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjJXzY7hW7rSkoe2kPNVCeG7CZskvryJt53-invjAHA_fJk_j4CvLx5dSYI0Lx2Ly1GGEJXBSjrCkoIiEYOaefV6YRD-0etPiffUDmxqbU0OCCN2B8iPmdpSKtf7gPVOFG2dyDorjshbYg/s1600/lolita1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjJXzY7hW7rSkoe2kPNVCeG7CZskvryJt53-invjAHA_fJk_j4CvLx5dSYI0Lx2Ly1GGEJXBSjrCkoIiEYOaefV6YRD-0etPiffUDmxqbU0OCCN2B8iPmdpSKtf7gPVOFG2dyDorjshbYg/s400/lolita1.jpg" width="260" /></a></div>
<i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #003300;">"</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #003300;">She was Lo, plain Lo, in the morning, standing four feet ten in one sock. She was Lola in slacks. She was Dolly at school. She was Dolores on the dotted line. But in my arms she was always Lolita."</span></span></i><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span style="background-color: white; color: #003300;"><br /></span></i>
</span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #003300; font-family: inherit;"> Alone, heartbroken, and at death's door, Monsieur Humbert Humbert opens his confessions with a passionate reflection on his lost love, Lolita. She is the "light of my life, fire of my loins," he says. With just one sentence, the reader already feels poor Humbert's longing. Romantic, right? </span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #003300; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #003300; font-family: inherit;"> It turns out that Humbert Humbert is a pedophile. Psychologically scarred by the unconsummated love of his youth, he travels through adulthood repressing a dark desire for pubescent "nymphets". Middle-aged Humbert resolves to leave Europe and its memories of young prostitutes and a failed marriage behind in order to forge a new life in the New England area. There are psychological breakdowns and other minute misadventures, but he eventually finds himself in the 1960s suburban home of Charlotte Haze and there falls instantly in love/lust with her daughter, Dolores (a.k.a. Dolly, a.k.a. Lo, a.k.a. Lolita). </span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #003300; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #003300; font-family: inherit;"> Humbert is oppressed by an attraction unlike which he has ever experienced. Furthermore, this illicit and hopeless love is threatened by Charlotte Haze's affection for him and her apparent disdain for Lolita. What is he to do? Luckily, Humbert doesn't have to think too much. A strange twist of events puts Lolita in his custody and sends them on a long journey. However, both Humbert and Lolita realize that they will never be able to outrun the shadows of the past or the shame within themselves. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #003300; font-family: inherit;"> Despite what some might consider too controversial, uncomfortable, or morally questionable a subject, <i>Lolita </i>is quite simply a masterpiece. Many analyses have condemned Vladimir Nabokov for what might appear to be the romanticization of pedophilia, but I would politely disagree. In fact, what is so incredible about <i>Lolita</i> is that despite the overwhelming poetic prose and biased narrative style of Humbert Humbert, the reader can still hear Nabokov's voice through the novel's subtleties. (Yes, there is something subtle to be found in a pedophile's last confessions. One just has to be perceptive enough to realize it.) I believe that hidden voice does offer some words of disapproval concealed within the abundant use of figurative language; words that the reader is charged with revealing for his or herself. If not denunciation (which I'll admit is quite arguable), Nabokov does make very clear the consequences of Humbert and Lolita's relationship and the effect it has on them and the world through which they travel. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #003300; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #003300; font-family: inherit;"> Regardless of how one interprets the verbose, enigmatic, and sensuous language of <i>Lolita</i>, the beauty of Nabokov's delivery and his way with words is beyond dispute. The novel is worth a read for that alone, if not for anything else. I would not, however, recommend it to anyone unable to dig beneath the surface of the text. Even though the language is gorgeous, what's underneath is what Nabokov really wants the audience to appreciate. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #003300; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #003300; font-family: inherit;">--Ar</span><span style="color: #003300; font-family: geneva, helvetica, arial; font-size: x-small;">i</span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
</div>
LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-75134838697104386522013-11-13T11:16:00.001-08:002013-12-05T13:20:35.773-08:00Which Book Should I Review Next?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Should I even waste words (if there is such an act) apologizing for another prolonged absence?<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I spent almost the entire summer reading. Mostly in my room. There were parks and long car rides, and an amazing trip to Barbados, but reading was the common denominator. I revisited <i>Tess of the D'urbervilles</i> for the third time and tried out <i>The Portrait of a Lady </i>by Henry James. Those were the only remnants from the genre of classic literature. The rest were scattered across the board. I read what looked good. I read what was suggested to me. I read anything. I read everything. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Even now with the adjustment to the college workload and routine, I haven't stopped. It's escalated, really. The overwhelming thirst for knowledge started burning this summer. My college experience thus far has only served to fuel the fire. The only satisfaction I receive (though transitory) is the feeling of having finished a book. Then it ends, and I have to pick up another one. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Why am I saying this? Just to let you know that I haven't stopped <i>reading</i>. Just writing. Or writing here, at least. But I'm beginning to feel that urge again. The question is, where to begin? </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I've decided to leave it up to you guys. Hopefully you'll give me some feedback. If not, I won't despair. I know I've been gone for too long and my desolate blog views tell me that many of you have stopped looking for me. I'm just flirting with the possibility of revitalization. I just might stick to it this time. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Ok, so the books: </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li><i>Heart of Darkness </i>by Joseph Conrad</li>
<li><i>Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close </i>by Jonathan Safran Foer </li>
<li><i>Lolita </i>by Vladimir Nabokov</li>
<li><i>The Innocent </i>by Ian McEwan </li>
<li><i>The Autobiography of Malcolm X as Told by Alex Haley </i>by Malcolm X, Alex Haley</li>
<li><i>The Alchemist </i>by Paul Coelho</li>
<li><i>Disgrace </i>by J.M. Coetzee</li>
<li><i>Slaughterhouse Five </i>by Kurt Vonnegut </li>
<li><i>The History of God </i>by Karen Armstrong </li>
<li><i>1984 </i>by George Orwell </li>
<li><i>A Streetcar Named Desire </i>by Tennessee William</li>
<li><i>The Prophet </i>by Kahlil Gibran </li>
<li><i>Zealot </i>by Reza Aslan</li>
<li><i>Portrait of a Lady </i>by Henry James </li>
<li><i>The Stranger </i>by Albert Camus</li>
<li><i>Sons and Lovers </i>by D.H. Lawrence </li>
<li><i>The Color of Water </i>by James Mcbride </li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
Which one am I reviewing for you guys? </div>
</div>
LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-11877259465228612692013-06-22T09:52:00.002-07:002013-12-05T13:24:32.802-08:00The Great Gatsby 2013 Review <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
High school has officially ended, and along with preparing for college, that means that I can now return to the occupation of lit loving again. Yes, it's been far too long, but it feels good to be back and writing in this blank text box once again.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
There's so much to share with you. I've read many books during my blogging hiatus and seen a few movies. I've analyzed <i>Wuthering Heights </i>nearly to death in my AP English Literature class and gulped down Joseph Conrad's <i>Heart of Darkness</i>. In my very limited spare time, I finally finished <i>Far From the Madding Crowd </i>and watched its adaptations. All in all, this ought to be a very enterprising summer for Lit Lovers & Corset Laces before I go boldly facing the new world of NYU or U of Miami and the college experience. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Anyway, in the midst of studying for my AP tests, I specifically set a Saturday night aside to go see Baz Luhrmann's <i>The Great Gatsby </i>with my sister and best friend. Thank goodness that pretty much every American has had to read the novel around their sophomore year, so I didn't get the usual elbow in the arm followed by "What the heck is going on?" or "Wait, what? Explain to me what just happened" like I normally do. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I should probably start by saying that this film is not going to be for everyone. I know that I <i>always </i>include a disclaimer about how opinions differ and the like, but I especially mean it when it comes to this movie. Why? Because it's a Baz Luhrmann film, and he's the type of director whose movies you either love or hate altogether. How many of you liked the 90s edition of Romeo and Juliet with ecstasy pills playing the role of Queen Mab? Yea, well that's Luhrmann. But to be fair, that is one of his riskier movies. Others include <i>Moulin Rouge </i>and <i>Australia. </i></div>
<div>
<i><br /></i></div>
<div>
It's clear that this version of <i>Gatsby </i>was purposely meant to cater to my generation, which read <i>The Great Gatsby </i>two years ago, loved it, and would appreciate a modern twist. That doesn't make it any less faithful to the source material. To me, it just made the movie better. The 1920s weren't all too different from today in the sense that all the young and rich wanted to do was drink, party, and live without a care for how their actions affected others. Luhrmann put the 20s into a new context. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<u>Cast </u></div>
<div>
<u><br /></u></div>
<div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigBwo5Yk8Zq2-QWTAE3ENSYyQQSKxf54mGRL529UF7etqMOeN18Jc6PL5z65TBuUe-T4rnpwQL-TF4i3eXcMiB6_CtOtTUYHpqTzchjOMyNNDM4jKKHj43mUCJjHnmo7O6hj6i3zSRj9U/s1600/the-great-gatsby-official-soundtrack-teaser-cover2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="233" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigBwo5Yk8Zq2-QWTAE3ENSYyQQSKxf54mGRL529UF7etqMOeN18Jc6PL5z65TBuUe-T4rnpwQL-TF4i3eXcMiB6_CtOtTUYHpqTzchjOMyNNDM4jKKHj43mUCJjHnmo7O6hj6i3zSRj9U/s400/the-great-gatsby-official-soundtrack-teaser-cover2.jpg" width="400" /></a>I've never much appreciated Leonardo Dicaprio as an actor. In the days of <i>Titanic </i>and <i>Romeo and Juliet</i>, he was just a good-looking kid acting in good-looking movies with good-looking girls, and there was rarely any substance. As his career progressed, he seemed kind of stuck in the middle. His talent is, in my opinion, on the slim side<i>. </i>He never completely transforms into character. He goes overboard trying to be convincing, and all that results is Leo Dicaprio <i>attempting </i>to be whoever in whatever movie. But that only makes him perfect for the role of Gatsby, who (like Dicaprio) has spent his whole life overcompensating and pretending to be someone he's not. Dicaprio's shallowness and unconvincing approach to playing an unconvincing character actually managed to be...well, convincing. The two were a near perfect match. What does the audience actually know about Gatsby? Nothing. Even after everything is explained, no one ever really gets a clear picture of who Gatsby is. All we know is that he is great specimen of ambition and hopefulness. Dicaprio plays the part well. We feel for Gatsby the same way (if not more than) we do in the novel. And yet we're never truly let in. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
It's hard to talk about how Carey Mulligan does well as Daisy Buchanan because Daisy is one of the most frustrating characters in literary history. But I do like the way Mulligan manipulates the role. Throughout the movie I kept wondering, "Why exactly didn't I like Daisy?" Then the climax hits, and Mulligan does exactly what Daisy is supposed to do: she retreats into her world of "carelessness." And Carey is also gorgeous. Coldly gorgeous. Somewhat like Daisy. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXHbr4nYfYz-j_lQY5jeYBdoBjCYIe_VrlLBOm5ciM1uOTORN3JvGOB7nxJTLPGvgZFu-mmI6iWL-GWTF2PCrNp8S5EHmFDEMsG3LMoZ5q0HcQSVMoKhYGkr_DpCkQ8Ia1FBClCbQq5xs/s1600/TheGreatGatsby_thumbLG.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhXHbr4nYfYz-j_lQY5jeYBdoBjCYIe_VrlLBOm5ciM1uOTORN3JvGOB7nxJTLPGvgZFu-mmI6iWL-GWTF2PCrNp8S5EHmFDEMsG3LMoZ5q0HcQSVMoKhYGkr_DpCkQ8Ia1FBClCbQq5xs/s400/TheGreatGatsby_thumbLG.jpg" width="400" /></a>Casting Peter Parker--I mean, Tobey Maguire--was the most iffy decision in the movie. Personally, I've never liked Maguire in anything. He plays the same character in every movie, and Nick Carroway was just too much. But then again, Nick is just kind of the narrator and in-between guy. The audience can't really make up its mind about him. I don't like his voice, I don't like his lost way of acting, and even when Nick is supposed to buckle down and realize his disgust for Daisy and Tom's inauthentic world, it never seems genuine.<br />
<br />
I would not have chosen Joel Edgerton to play Tom Buchanon. Perhaps this is a misinterpretation on my part. Personally, I never picture Tom as being hyper-masculine in the "big and burly" sense that I get from Edgerton. To me, Tom is somewhat akin to Stanley from <i>A Streetcar Named Desire: </i>magnetic sex appeal, insane ego, and the joy of getting pleasure from women. Joel Edgerton just doesn't have that kind of comfort in the role. I'd prefer someone more Bradley Cooper-esque, which is funny because Bradley Cooper was actually rumored for the role at one point.<br />
<br />
The roles of Jordan and George Wilson are perfectly casted, but casting Isla Fisher as Myrtle is a fail, and I'll leave it at that.<br />
<br />
<u>Screenplay/cinematography/soundtrack/costumes:</u><br />
<u><br /></u>
<i>Screenplay</i>: As far as dialogue, the screenplay is surprisingly faithful to the novel. However, the first part of the movie is incredibly fast-paced. There's just too much happening at once and it has the capacity to make you dizzy and slightly annoyed. Some scenes are just awkwardly written, particularly the Nick's day in the apartment with Tom, Myrtle, and Co. After the audience is introduced to Gatsby, the pace slows and the movie settles in and really gets good.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgON8oGMBtYAYnIlMSlgpOAJZ2gW4TfxkI-3HUDwaOzfLFOnXo7Sx16DLQ4gb0gYrsiRNYMUm1rHlhB086J0nRUtoIb-f51IroPHuLU9OjAIZDItqCs80mW8Y4QB_AoAxm8Mp1mf4bKVBk/s1600/pegasus_LARGE_t_1581_105906777.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgON8oGMBtYAYnIlMSlgpOAJZ2gW4TfxkI-3HUDwaOzfLFOnXo7Sx16DLQ4gb0gYrsiRNYMUm1rHlhB086J0nRUtoIb-f51IroPHuLU9OjAIZDItqCs80mW8Y4QB_AoAxm8Mp1mf4bKVBk/s400/pegasus_LARGE_t_1581_105906777.jpg" width="400" /></a><i>Cinematography</i>: Nothing incredibly breathtaking. Luhrmann is all about dramatic affect, so there are a lot of melodramatic closeups, extravagant computer works and camera techniques, and other things that I really don't know about. Anyone really acquainted with the technical aspects of cinematography will appreciate this, but I know nothing about any of that.<br />
<br />
<i>Soundtrack: </i>I downloaded it. It's filled with modern artists from every genre, most of which I happen to love. Alone, the soundtrack is just a really good CD. What's great about the film is that the songs aren't the least bit overpowering. In most cases, the words are stripped away the instrumentals are all you hear, and they fit perfectly into the story. The music incorporates clear elements of the time period.<br />
<br />
<i>Costumes: </i>Perhaps not necessarily true to era, but certainly fun to look at. And you can see the influence of the roaring twenties.<br />
<br />
<br />
<i>The Great Gatsby </i>was a risk when it was written and a risk whenever it's translated to the big screen. I respect Luhrmann and love the way he manages to artfully imbue the novel's larger-than-life qualities into the movie. However, the helter-skelter pace of the first half and some of the excess (such as releasing it in 3D) detract from the substance of the story in some places. Overall it is a big and breathtaking display, but not an entirely cohesive one. Three out of five stars would do it justice.<br />
<br />
--Ari </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-82193472698584881642013-02-01T18:22:00.001-08:002013-02-01T18:22:47.946-08:00Tess of the D'Urbervilles 2008 Review <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
I know, I know. It's been a while. Life has been hectic lately to say the least, and it doesn't seem like it's going to slow down anytime soon. I'm growing up now. College is fast approaching, my eighteenth birthday is less than a month away, and my eyes have been set on the future. At the same time, I've also been extremely sentimental about the past. I've taken a lot of time to spend quality time with my mother, watching old period romances that we both love and introducing her to new things. I'm making her read <i>Atonement </i>before I graduate. Yesterday I was home sick from school and I begged her to come and watch a movie with me. <div>
"But we're trying something new today," I said adamantly. So I introduced her to <i>Tess of the D'Urbervilles</i>. </div>
<div>
"Why <i>Tess of the D'Urbervilles</i>?"You might ask. I have such a love/hate relationship with the novel. I've always hated the hypocrisy and injustice Tess receives from the world and sometimes I have even despised Tess. Yet, the book is such an exceptional piece of literature that I could never hate it fully. Now all of a sudden I love it. Perhaps this has something to do with my newfound love of feminism and literature that handles social injustice. More than anything, I believe it speaks to my maturation as a reader and lit lover. Lately, I've been doing more than just "reading." I have been analyzing, thinking, and really immersing myself in the diction, syntax, plot, figurative language, and voice of every book. Somewhere in the midst of all this, I've realized that I've lost some of the fanaticism I felt towards certain books and gained a newfound and deep appreciation for others. <i>Jane Eyre </i>and <i>North and South </i>will always have cherished places in my heart, but <i>Tess of the D'Urbervilles </i>is beautiful in a way that I haven't witnessed in a novel. </div>
<div>
Anyway, of course it comes with two adaptations that I have watched multiple times. The 2008 just so happens to be my favorite. So here we go...</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<u>Casting</u></div>
<div>
<u><br /></u></div>
<div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPCCHmurJnoDX5ftQ1aZ3_lQDetA-l3m4VBhyhhPIYLqE8hPLFPr0WBZZKdOBrXLBY75LtIs27o7ZbUgtjRpMd6pydmpZIMshzBkbGAplJb682Be1nXZT6bIXcuw8cdTlwUtu9q8CnvL0/s1600/tumblr_m44p11sJJI1r15fi0o1_500.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPCCHmurJnoDX5ftQ1aZ3_lQDetA-l3m4VBhyhhPIYLqE8hPLFPr0WBZZKdOBrXLBY75LtIs27o7ZbUgtjRpMd6pydmpZIMshzBkbGAplJb682Be1nXZT6bIXcuw8cdTlwUtu9q8CnvL0/s320/tumblr_m44p11sJJI1r15fi0o1_500.png" width="320" /></a>Gemma Arterton was near perfection. Her fresh, natural, and yet pensive beauty is perfect for the character. Hardy on multiple occasions describes (and has others do the same) Tess as the physical embodiment of feminine beauty and exalts the perfection of her imperfections. More than anything, the character is depicted as balancing the elements of youth and innocence with the more refined attributes of womanhood. Arterton has all of these qualities. This would be nothing, however, if she didn't also inhabit the role and play it as it should be played. Beyond being a hard character to cast externally, Tess is perhaps one of the most difficult protagonists to capture in terms of spirit, personality, and progression. Whoever does it <i>has </i>to be convincing, or else the film or miniseries would be ruined. On one hand, the audience admires test for being so resilient and dignified despite her experience, yet there is an obvious sense of frailty in her that contradicts her strength and makes it hard to comprehend. Arterton gets it, though. I can't think of anything she does wrong. The fact that she nails the character while also keeping the audience engaged is a major feat that I do not take lightly. Superb performance. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I hate Alec D'Urberville so saying that someone plays him well is almost an insult. But Hans Matheson does do a very good job with the character. Of course, all the audience wants to do is despise him, but there are clear moments of (almost) tenderness in the midst. My only problem is that everyone knows he is up to no good from the very beginning. I wish he would have put more effort into his ambiguity for Arterton's sake. Tess admits several times that she was dazed by Alec's charm and mysterious appeal when she first met him, and I don't feel as if that translates as well as it should. Otherwise, Matheson is great at playing the man closest to the devil. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDCspFag1OyRiEqCughQ5GzKCzM8oYPAfs80vP2LLQus9PL1F7GQgYeWwYD3GaF110pnhRZii8NsP_6GZG-fMwPdeI9qUVW93XFiYmeCoTv19MD9Xj9NKpDHCQHpXLeCUYtuZHQRPPxAA/s1600/Tess-of-the-D-Urbervilles-tess-of-the-durbervilles-7508612-772-510.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="263" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDCspFag1OyRiEqCughQ5GzKCzM8oYPAfs80vP2LLQus9PL1F7GQgYeWwYD3GaF110pnhRZii8NsP_6GZG-fMwPdeI9qUVW93XFiYmeCoTv19MD9Xj9NKpDHCQHpXLeCUYtuZHQRPPxAA/s400/Tess-of-the-D-Urbervilles-tess-of-the-durbervilles-7508612-772-510.jpg" width="400" /></a>I'll be the first to say that I <i>adore </i>Eddie Redmayne as an actor. As Angel, however, there is something a bit lacking, and I'm not sure whether the fault belongs to him or the screenwriter. My major qualm with Angel in this adaptation is that the audience doesn't see nearly enough of his intellect. Angel is supposed to be a man of modern ideas and revolutionary, "new age" philosophies. This is absolutely essential to the character because of the clear irony it presents in the novel. That irony is not as evident in this miniseries. Most of this is probably due to the fact that this miniseries seems geared towards a younger audience and thus Hardy's philosophies would be hard to work in, but the lack of it detracts from Tess and Angel's relationship. On the other hand, maybe this is just me being critical because I hate Angel's character as well. Oh well. Redmayne is swoon-worthy enough, and he seems to fit perfectly into the time period. Well done. Not spectacular, but good. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<u>Screenplay/Cinematography/Soundtrack/Costumes</u></div>
<div>
<u><br /></u></div>
<div>
<i>Screenplay: </i>Very well executed. Of course, as I mentioned before, it doesn't do as good of a job capturing Hardy's specific attention to social commentary, philosophy, etc., but there is plenty of that in the first adaptation and more than enough to suffice in the novel itself. Also, can I really be angry? Not everything can make it into an adaptation. The plot is mirrored almost perfectly, the dialogue is translated well. I am impressed. One thing I <i>do </i>love and <i>must </i>comment on (**SPOILER ALERT**) is the extra flavor added to the end. When Tess walks to her death and images of the dance she and Angel might have shared are interspersed with the sorrow of the present, the emotion is <i>intense</i>. It moves me to tears every time. I am so glad the screenwriter added this because it emphasizes the "what if" question that plagues the characters and the audience throughout the novel. It is also beautifully carried out and appeals to romantic saps like me. (**END SPOILER ALERT**). </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<i>Cinematography: </i>Better than that of any other BBC miniseries. Not saying that it is amazing, because it's not. After all, it's just a miniseries. But it pays particular attention to Tess's surroundings in the same way Thomas Hardy does in the novel. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-5vC-5I6dWb_lwSANLnzez2FM9unN4tGZViD97aMu1Rc5DYm-gThVitvaVQPG66xB3Sbj8byMQIeCvvRKVbTHBQ-c-agbXJ4l5opYrOtytyIrcutbuIkuGEOZt2f7WDyQD6vecM9uEEw/s1600/gemma-arterton-tess_885859c.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-5vC-5I6dWb_lwSANLnzez2FM9unN4tGZViD97aMu1Rc5DYm-gThVitvaVQPG66xB3Sbj8byMQIeCvvRKVbTHBQ-c-agbXJ4l5opYrOtytyIrcutbuIkuGEOZt2f7WDyQD6vecM9uEEw/s1600/gemma-arterton-tess_885859c.jpg" /></a></div>
<div>
<i>Soundtrack: </i>Minimalist, but beautiful. I would buy it if I knew where to get it. There are two songs in particular that flow in and out of the miniseries. One is the song the dairymaids sing and the other is a raw violin instrumental that fits perfectly with the story. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<i>Costumes: </i>Eh. Nothing special. But then again, they're not really supposed to be. I'm no expert on the time period either, so I can't vouch for historical accuracy. I know that the novel is set in the late Victorian period, but because most of the film takes place in low-income country society, I would think that the local attire was more simplistic and less confined to a time period. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
This miniseries is a great adaptation of a great novel. I would definitely recommend it as well as the earlier one. Both are very good. As lit lovers, I'm sure that you guys will watch both. I might review the other one soon, but I can't be sure. Gemma Arterton carries the 2008 on her back and she does it well. She really takes on the persona of Tess Durbeyfield and <i>that </i>is what makes this adaptation worth watching.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
--Ari </div>
</div>
LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-35387576204553921692012-12-25T19:22:00.001-08:002012-12-25T19:22:54.359-08:00Les Mis was Perfection<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Review coming soon. </div>
LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-50715949654174937152012-12-11T16:21:00.001-08:002012-12-11T16:30:35.622-08:00Anna Karenina 2012 Movie Review <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<br />
I was supposed to go see <i>Anna Karenina </i>on Saturday, but it turns out my school life has overflowed even into my weekends. Instead, I found myself with a monday evening rather clear of homework, and I begged my parents to embrace these few hours of freedom and come see the movie with me. So there I sat, the only teenager in a scantly populated movie theater, with a parent on either side of me...neither of which has ever even read a page of <i>Anna Karenina. </i>Still, I was brimming over with excitement. On top of that, I had to repress squeals when I saw the <i>Great Gatsby </i>and <i>Les Miserables </i>previews while waiting for the movie to start.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I wasn't quite sure what I was looking for from this movie, considering <i>Anna Karenina </i>has never been (and probably never will be) one of my favorite novels. I didn't imagine my expectations were too high--I suppose I was just there to see how well it was done. I wanted to see if it would sink or swim. I wanted to see how some of my favorite actors would do their jobs trying a hand at these literary characters. I wanted to know if my predictions were correct. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
And I came out with some answers. Beware--spoilers will be bountiful.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<u>Casting:</u></div>
<div>
<u><br /></u></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi27wZL9QAjY5NtrtE7r74R2uKUCYT0s78J85c2pKKm4G9GQg6iFy5yj0QTKRUNFFZZvVeMLXkCqkUOzBvmMCSxd7vkzjre4l_eKulbTUBOynZ5lL3O16tlqahAQA9Fw5irhkUYghG8MWk/s1600/anna-karenina-2012-stills-anna-karenina-by-joe-wright-32234640-940-627.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi27wZL9QAjY5NtrtE7r74R2uKUCYT0s78J85c2pKKm4G9GQg6iFy5yj0QTKRUNFFZZvVeMLXkCqkUOzBvmMCSxd7vkzjre4l_eKulbTUBOynZ5lL3O16tlqahAQA9Fw5irhkUYghG8MWk/s400/anna-karenina-2012-stills-anna-karenina-by-joe-wright-32234640-940-627.jpg" width="400" /></a>As my regular viewers and followers know, I predicted a kind of crash and burn for Keira Knightley in the role of the titular character, Anna Karenina. Not only did I mention that her thin physique is completely unlike that of the character, but I also expressed a weariness of Knightley's position as Joe Wright's predictable go-to girl. Keira didn't crash and burn, though. I wouldn't go far enough to say that she turned in a spectacular performance. It won't get her nominated for the Oscar she's long been in search of. It was simply better than I expected. But, let's not start getting optimistic too soon. The performance was still incredibly lacking in my personal opinion. There were moments when Keira was underacting when she should have been doing more and overacting when she should have been subtle. Overall, she struck me as unbalanced and inconsistent. I'm not completely sure whether this opinion rises from her actual performance or from my general dislike of Anna Karenina's character to begin with. I can only end by saying that I've seen other adaptations of <i>Anna Karenina, </i>and Keira did nothing more or less than the actresses before her have done. And it was simply wrong to cast her after she's already played Elizabeth Bennet and Cecilia Tallis under Joe Wright's direction. Now the wow factor is starting to wear off and it seems as though Wright is taking a good thing too far. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Jude Law as Alexei was flawless. For the first time, I was actually able to view Karenin as a sympathetic figure who only wants to prevent Anna from destroying herself and making others miserable. In this adaptation, Law sells Alexei as a more relatable character. There's nothing truly wrong with his marriage. Grant it, there are moments when he's a little demanding, and he does have to use the 19th century equivalent of Viagra before he goes to bed every night (I'm not kidding, he keeps it in a box), but he strikes the audience as a concerned and dutiful husband nonetheless. That's much more sympathetic than the heartless, domineering, and blatantly chauvinistic Alexei other movies have portrayed. I felt Alexei's heartbreak and got to understand the character more through Law's performance--Karenin has built a comfortable life around his career and family, and all of a sudden he is blindsided by his wife's infidelity when he feels like he has never asked much of her. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Vronsky is portrayed by Aaron Taylor-Johnson. There's not much to say about that. Vronsky is a "rich, good-looking calvary officer with nothing better to do than make love to every woman he sees." It wasn't hard for Taylor-Johnson to nail that. His chemistry with Knightley is good though. He pales in comparison to the rest of the fine portrayals in the film. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj60FJWgxvMqeoMN5ETpOfOQ6QtUZcA-vuw2yAoPMR2OLDYPnFH5ugjyWUxWRMkxpfYx-JA3JVQTFCzbs9P_fHbfxUbqT3DP1yf9FcQZScLgTLW6L9OO2NSUdg18AmXgssAmbkPrHMarLA/s1600/tumblr_maikvwzmnH1rywvbho4_1280.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="286" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj60FJWgxvMqeoMN5ETpOfOQ6QtUZcA-vuw2yAoPMR2OLDYPnFH5ugjyWUxWRMkxpfYx-JA3JVQTFCzbs9P_fHbfxUbqT3DP1yf9FcQZScLgTLW6L9OO2NSUdg18AmXgssAmbkPrHMarLA/s400/tumblr_maikvwzmnH1rywvbho4_1280.jpg" width="400" /></a>By far, the person who really stole the spotlight was Domhnall Gleeson as Levin. The shameful thing is the audience doesn't see him nearly enough considering that Levin's story occupies half of the novel. Still, whenever Gleeson is on the screen, he is amazing. His portrayal of the character infuses life into the film and creates the perfect contrast to Vronsky. It's a wonder to me how Domhnall does all of this with so little time to work with. I would have loved to see more of him, because he's a game changer and the kind of actor that illuminates the character. I could write paragraphs upon paragraphs about it, but you could only really know what I'm saying if you go see the movie. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
As for the more minor characters....Stiva is played by Matthew McFadyen, who injects just the right amount of comic relief into the morbid story and accomplishes his purpose. Kelly MacDonald is his wife, Dolly, and has a relatively minor part. Alicia Vikander is the pretty and ever-so-sweet Princess Kitty. One more observation--I just found it slightly awkward that Keira and Matthew played passionate lovers as Lizzy and Darcy in <i>Pride and Prejudice</i>, and then turned around to play a brother-sister relationship in this movie. It was messing with my mind a little bit, which is why I am starting to stand in adamant opposition of using the same actors over and over in literary adaptations. *cough cough* Just a little note for Joe Wright in case he's reading. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<u>Screenplay/Cinematography/Soundtrack/Costumes:</u></div>
<div>
<u><br /></u></div>
<div>
<i>Screenplay: </i>I enjoyed it. At first, I must admit that I was wary of the idea of having the entire movie take place on a stage. I understand that it's representative of the superficiality of imperial Russian society, but at times it's a little too literal for my liking. It took a little getting used to, but I settled in soon enough and as the film progressed I actually found myself appreciating the originality. As for the faithfulness of the dialogue, I truly cannot say. I haven't read the book in so long. From what I remember, however, all the main events are included. I give kudos to the screenwriter. I can only imagine how hard it must have been to piece a screenplay together from a 700 page book and still manage to be so inventive. That's really what it is...inventive. </div>
<div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfpXbiQ6sUz8oFMgvPGBOurberu0Qyzx6Hsda_bHlfPcgthC6AWBch0nEdnbUDhYABEf6_YbDLHyKllqDdyBKfzWiTnLwshlb3l4WtAPzLS2JmSF364o8m2HtWAzame5I-MT7cEVXUUvM/s1600/Anna-Karenina-2012-Stills-anna-karenina-by-joe-wright-32234642-940-627.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfpXbiQ6sUz8oFMgvPGBOurberu0Qyzx6Hsda_bHlfPcgthC6AWBch0nEdnbUDhYABEf6_YbDLHyKllqDdyBKfzWiTnLwshlb3l4WtAPzLS2JmSF364o8m2HtWAzame5I-MT7cEVXUUvM/s400/Anna-Karenina-2012-Stills-anna-karenina-by-joe-wright-32234642-940-627.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<i>Cinematography: </i>I think one of the primary reasons why the screenplay and setting works as well as it does is because the cinematography was done extremely well. Even though the entire movie basically takes place in an opera house, the camera captures everything as if it were as natural as walking through the streets of Russia. The shift from scene to scene in different parts of the theater is intriguing to the eye, and yet natural enough that I didn't feel overwhelmed or confused. </div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<i>Soundtrack: </i>One track sounded strikingly similar to a piece in the 2011 <i>Jane Eyre. </i>Of course, I wasn't surprised to see Dario Marianelli's name on the end credits. I'll admit, the soundtrack isn't nearly as stunning as his work on previous movies, but <i>Anna Karenina </i>isn't really made for an all-star soundtrack. What Dario Marianelli needed to achieve was subtlety in the face of such a visually unique film. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<i>Costumes: </i>Beautiful. I'm not quite sure if they match up perfectly with the time period, but they're certainly enjoyable to look at. I'm sure there's an Oscar coming for the designer (who also collaborated with Wright on <i>Atonement </i>and <i>Pride and Prejudice</i>). It is obvious that a lot of thought and detail was put into the costume design, and it made the movie even more visually aesthetic. Everything is so sensual. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<u>Conclusion</u></div>
<div>
<u><br /></u></div>
<div>
It is interesting. I doubt you're going to exit feeling ecstatic or blown away, but rather intrigued. This film gives one a lot to think about, and more than anything, it makes you want to go back to the book and read with a little more vigor. I'm sincerely pondering watching it again just to see exactly what I think of it. It's strange that the movie is called <i>Anna Karenina </i>and yet I find myself less captured by Keira Knightley's portrayal and Anna's struggle and more by Levin's relationship and the technical aspects of the movie. But then again, that's exactly how I felt about the book. Oh well. I definitely recommend you try it for yourself. And, of course, tell me what you think. </div>
<div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWeOhKvbllE35FE8Cj8o36Q764ubts8TgBqD3xoTSgaxiWSCJBoiJmwUqHfT_WaQC6kW8axZirkFi9xuiNa6xgzJbsf5ID4OHStI2qcpkwWLgEdOIkfxcRpbSSbg761M5FnSvF3469meU/s1600/Jude%252BLaw%252BAnna%252BKarenina%252BKMPRC%252B2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWeOhKvbllE35FE8Cj8o36Q764ubts8TgBqD3xoTSgaxiWSCJBoiJmwUqHfT_WaQC6kW8axZirkFi9xuiNa6xgzJbsf5ID4OHStI2qcpkwWLgEdOIkfxcRpbSSbg761M5FnSvF3469meU/s400/Jude%252BLaw%252BAnna%252BKarenina%252BKMPRC%252B2.jpg" width="257" /></a></div>
<div>
P.S I miss you guys. It feels good to get back to lit loving. Oh, and it is a miracle that the makeup artists made Jude Law look unattractive. Just to remind you how much of a god he actually is. How is it possible that he is so beautiful?<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-69392884580149788832012-12-08T08:58:00.001-08:002012-12-08T08:58:15.144-08:00Sigh of Exasperation <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Sabbatical.<br /><div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I really am sorry for neglecting you guys, and I miss you terribly. In fact, I miss reading and writing for fun more than anything. The problem is that I have absolutely no time. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I spend eight hours of the day at school, and every hour I have left is dedicated to mounds of homework, college applications, or scholarships. Even my weekends are all consumed by the stressfulness of having to meet this deadline or that due date. I've pushed everything else out of my system, and unfortunately, that includes blogging. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Fear not, however. I will be back in a few months after I emerge from my black hole. And I am going to see Anna Karenina tonight to give myself a much needed break. </div>
</div>
LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-36263457193672211552012-11-03T12:17:00.002-07:002012-11-03T12:17:51.826-07:00Les Miserables 2012 <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
A few years ago, when I was in eighth grade, a friend of my mother's called me on my cell phone. She was wondering if I'd like to go see a play with her. I immediately said yes. I'd always loved plays, and though I wasn't a serious theatre-goer I appreciated the art form and loved watching things being acted out on stage. She picked me up from the house and I asked her what we were going to see.<br />
<br />
"It's called Les Miserables," she explained. "You'll love it, I promise."<br />
<br />
At the time I had never heard of <i>Les Mis </i>in my life. It's seems slightly ridiculous that I had called myself a lit lover and yet, I had neither read nor heard of the novel or been aware of the play.<br />
<br />
Of course, I exited the theatre completely in love, bought the book, and finished it in record time. But now I'm returned to my initial state of embarrassment. How could I have been completely ignorant of the fact that there's a <i>Les Mis </i>film hitting theaters in December? Where in the world have I been? What's worse is that it stars all of my favorite actors. Hugh Jackman? Eddie Redmayne? <i>How could I not have known this? </i><br />
<i><br /></i>
It's going to be amazing though! I'm about as excited as you can get right about now. <i>Anna Karenin</i>a is coming soon,<i> The Great Gatsby</i> right after, and then <i>Les Miserable</i>?? These are going to be a good few months for a lit lover.<br />
<br />
Anyway, I'm just writing to express my dismay at not having known. I would write some in depth analysis of my initial thoughts, but they're quite simple. This movie is going to be absolutely breathtaking, and if it's otherwise then I will be vastly disappointed. The casting is perfect, the director had his name on another favorite of mine, <i>The King's Speech, </i>and it seems as thought the filmmakers have really gone to the furthest extent to translate the emotion of <i>Les Mis </i>and make it as realistic as possible. Gosh, I can't wait!!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/K-uw5TehnZA?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<br />
<i>P.S </i>I know I've been misspelling it, there's supposed to be an accent mark over the "e" in "Miserables", but I've forgotten how to do that on a keyboard.<br />
<i><br /></i></div>
LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-55798688617165457412012-10-28T16:32:00.001-07:002012-10-28T16:32:09.798-07:00Reading Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Can't take my nose out of it.<br />
<br />
This is my way of telling you that I'm not dead, I've just been on my fall break drowning in a book and haven't had any inclination to get around to writing that film review of <i>Atonement </i>I promised you guys. It's coming though! </div>
LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-88298856568717951612012-10-08T19:01:00.001-07:002012-10-08T19:01:44.987-07:00"Atonement" by Ian McEwan Review <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
I've reached an epiphany.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
There's a reason why this blog has experienced a period of apathy, neglect, and lonesomeness. And despite all my humblest apologies blaming my tedious workload, the college application process, the search for scholarships, and the demands of everyday life for my absence, there is a far deeper reason for the solitary state of a blog once inhabited by an active blogger. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I haven't been reading. Not for myself, anyway. I've been stuffed full of coming-of-age short stories, poems, and novels in my AP Lit class, breezed through <i>Their Eyes Were Watching God, </i>and will soon be waltzing straight into <i>Hamlet. </i>But it's been forever since I've stepped into a Barnes and Noble, walked leisurely through the shelves, plucked off a book of my own choice, and actually read it for enjoyment. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I could just as easily review a book that I've already read, but where's the fun in that? The joy of blogging comes from the inspiration of having just finished a brand new book, and feeling the urgent and slightly neurotic need to tell the world that you've read it and explain just how awful or amazing it is. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiiQDpyQVRdJo2O8hZczLUiniuJTWgQ2gCYgcRu_txbgOmqKpqTUJzYUuLxEOIr7F0Ryc0vWQ_nDiM3snQAu7XMAl95vEOEp7RrjH4uS32tLWxb-xbzWn1YW-YAHhDk7F-fU0g_FCyIzAU/s1600/atonment.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiiQDpyQVRdJo2O8hZczLUiniuJTWgQ2gCYgcRu_txbgOmqKpqTUJzYUuLxEOIr7F0Ryc0vWQ_nDiM3snQAu7XMAl95vEOEp7RrjH4uS32tLWxb-xbzWn1YW-YAHhDk7F-fU0g_FCyIzAU/s1600/atonment.jpg" /></a></div>
<div>
Obviously, I've just finished reading <i>Atonement</i> for the first time, and it has renewed my blogging spirit and set my fingers to mercilessly tapping against the keyboard. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The novel was amazing. I would trouble myself with establishing protocol with a plot summary, but it's just too good to hold off the praise for later. <i>Atonement </i>is an undeniable literary masterpiece in every identifiable aspect. Ian McEwan captures in engrossing richness the three perspectives of Briony Tallis, her older sister, Cecilia, and the charlady's son, Robbie, woven together by the thread of a series of events that alters the the lives of the characters and pinpoints the essentiality of perception in any story. At thirteen, Briony is struggling with her passage from a juvenile writer into a real novelist. Her problem lies in her lack of understanding of the world. While pondering on this, Briony happens to look out the window and witness an exchange between Cecilia and Robbie, and her misperception of the encounter, combined with the acts that follow, lead to a story with a depth that Briony would never have dreamed of. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
McEwan is genius. Everything about <i>Atonement </i>is sensual and alive--there is life in every object and emotional layering behind each passing observation. Nothing in <i>Atonement </i>is written for the mere purpose of being written, however. Even in the midst of such gripping description, the reader never feels overwhelmed because it is understood that every detail is essential. There isn't any tedium. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
It has also been awhile since I've been so completely pulled into the fictional world and felt as if I was seeing through the eyes of the character, or serving as an invisible presence in their little world that witnesses everything. <i>Atonement </i>did just that, however, literally yanking me out of reality and into the pages. I finished the book in two days, I was so engrossed. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The syntactical and dictional vivacity of <i>Atonement </i>is magnificent, but all this would be nothing without McEwan's perfect feel for character development, especially in regards to the three main pieces of the puzzle. Briony, Cecilia, and Robbie each have a separate stream of consciousness that is distinct and filled with individuality. Their thoughts and emotions are all on display, and McEwan makes sure to give them each their own psyches. This is the greatest glory of the novel--the way it completely masters playing with perspectives. Everything--the setting, the plot, the supporting characters, and the main characters--is seen through three different lenses (there is a fourth, but only for a little while). It's truly magical, and provides for the best emotional response from the reader. The use of the different viewpoints jerks every heartstring and gives rise to conflicting emotions (which I personally love to have when reading a novel). It also better captures the dynamics of relationships, which are absolutely key in the novel. The relationships between people and the nature of those connections are the driving force behind what makes the novel so captivating, and it is Briony's misunderstanding of them that sets everything into motion. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The complexities of <i>Atonement </i>and its near perfection are given no justice by my unorganized review. It's simply too hard to explain how brilliant the novel is and what exactly makes it so outstanding. It just provokes that "feeling"--the sense of contentment you feel when you just <i>know </i>you're reading something special. I know that it sounds like a bunch of nonsense now just because of my inability to articulate it, but just read it and I'm sure you'll understand afterwards. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
--Ari </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
P.S: Yes, I know there's a movie. And yes, I have watched it. And YES there will be a review following shortly. Watch out for me :) And keep the comments coming. Even when I'm not posting, I always keep an eye on comments and make a point to respond. </div>
</div>
LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-25805920859389671402012-09-20T14:47:00.000-07:002012-09-20T14:52:30.215-07:00More Anna Karenina Clips <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/RQUwa9yN378?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZXgWdJCuvLk?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/G5lV8kX59ew?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/eWrCm55LcF0?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<br />
Hello there! Haven't forgotten about you. In fact, I've actually written about four different drafts that just haven't been posted yet.<br />
<br />
But this is important news to my American followers. My UK ones are probably rolling their eyes at my tardiness, seeing that the movie is already rolling through theaters across the Atlantic.<br />
<br />
I just wanted to give you a little taste of what we'll be seeing in <i>Anna Karenina</i> and share the information I've gleaned from UK sites as to what we can expect. These aren't <i>all </i>the available clips, but they are perhaps the most revealing I would think.<br />
<br />
Ok, so time for another round of Ari's random thoughts:<br />
<br />
<ul style="text-align: left;">
<li>When I said "Oh no, they turned <i>Anna Karenina </i>into a musical" I wasn't exactly right, but I was getting extremely warm. The fact is that apparently the entire movie takes place within an opera house, serving as both a cost efficient way of avoiding replicating Russia and an overt symbol of the artificiality of Anna's world. </li>
<li>^^ With that said...hmmm. I'm not sure how it will play out at all. I guess I'll just have to wait and see. </li>
<li>The more I see of sneak peaks and clips, the more I'm convinced of the certainty that Keira Knightley was miscast. It simply makes no sense. Not because she's not a good actor, but because she's just NOT Anna Karenina, and there's nothing she could do that could possibly better mold her to fit the part. Anna is such a hard character to play because she's dynamic to the highest degree. She enters the novel as the figurehead of all things elegant and composed and takes her exit as an incredibly weak and slightly neurotic character. I don't think that's necessarily a part made for Keira, who is better in the role of more sarcastic and witty characters. I could go on forever about the mistake, but you get my point. Oh, and she doesn't deliver good acting here. </li>
<li>I'm beyond certain that Jude Law will be fabulous. He makes Karenin seem human, and it's intriguing to watch because few readers bother to wonder if the character has a heart or not. Karenin is supposed to be symbolic of everything Anna is longing to get away from, but in this movie he's seemingly made into a multifaceted character. His sense of possession over Anna isn't just because of the sake of appearances, but because he honestly seems to care about her moral wellbeing and the practical consequences of her ill-fated passion. It seems like he's trying to save her as best as he knows how. Now, I don't remember if that's what the character in the novel was trying to do (I haven't read it in a while), but if not, then it's a great artistic license taken. </li>
<li>I've completely neglected to address Domhnall Gleeson, which is a serious mistake because he, along with Jude Law, seems to be a major bright spot. He's the perfect fit for Levin in so many ways. He's not the most entrancing hero in literature, and he's socially awkward and slightly arrogant at times, but underneath he's a true romantic. I expect an underrated performance from Gleeson, which will fit the character perfectly. Levin is a major character in the novel, and yet readers and filmmakers are often so quick to forget about him in the face of Anna's conflict. </li>
<li>Aaron Johnson...Well, for now all I see is a pretty boy trying to act. It's lacking substance right now. He's rather doll-like. </li>
</ul>
<div>
As usual, comments are appreciated. </div>
</div>
LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-1309277254523925652012-09-03T12:00:00.002-07:002012-09-03T12:00:47.093-07:00"Their Eyes Were Watching God" by Zora Neale-Hurston Review<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
I'm still alive, just to let you guys know ha. Senior year began last week, and for me it feels like my summer had already ended a month ago when I drowned myself in summer work, rereading <i>Frankenstein,</i> annotating <i>Frankenstein</i>, writing novel notes for <i>Frankenstein</i>, making presentations for <i>Frankenstein</i>, and then dedicating the last week to reading books about the intricacies of the American government and brushing up on my rusty knowledge of its constitution. <div>
<br /></div>
<div>
In a nutshell, the workload is already pretty heavy. In a few weeks, college essays and applications will be another source of stress. In the midst of it all, I almost thought about giving up blogging for good, or just announcing a sabbatical of some sort. Then I got a sweet little comment from Lady Disdain and realized that blogging is more imperative now than ever. Because I miss you guys, and when I'm constantly writing about the things that my teachers and college admissions officers want to see me write, it takes away some of the joy. That's why I need Lit Lovers & Corset Laces. Nothing I write here is graded. I'm not given some kind of prompt. My grammar, diction, and content isn't being weighed. Here, I write what I want. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
With <i>Frankenstein </i>out the way, my new English teacher decided to move back into the realm of American literature--more specifically African-American literature. While British Literature has always been my most beloved genre, I've always been the type of girl to read whatever I can get my hands on, so other genres tend to speak to me as well. As an African-American girl who is actually quite in touch with her culture, black lit speaks to me in a very personal way. When my English teacher announced that we were delving into <i>Their Eyes Were Watching God, </i>I couldn't even contain my excitement. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrT7b9tXHnh540asVyNqMtcT6k1XjsyNZHh3mjIahxngxMBq-AN0RhO4T8dEfW_aVesctSumpnE_3-pwgDdJBIcRncF2hdgOt82xbzyU82W3HyJ6rke9vc91d7xlui6IAUE_grB9c1GP0/s1600/115512522.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrT7b9tXHnh540asVyNqMtcT6k1XjsyNZHh3mjIahxngxMBq-AN0RhO4T8dEfW_aVesctSumpnE_3-pwgDdJBIcRncF2hdgOt82xbzyU82W3HyJ6rke9vc91d7xlui6IAUE_grB9c1GP0/s400/115512522.jpg" width="254" /></a><i>Their Eyes Were Watching God, </i>by Harlem Renaissance author Zora Neale-Hurston follows the story of one Janie Crawford. Janie is a beautiful mixed-raced girl with long, dark hair, an innately sexual figure, and a wild spirit. At the age of sixteen, she sits in the yard of her grandmother's home and observes the nuances of spring, taking particular note of the perfect marriage of nature when a bee pollinates a pear tree. Then and there, Janie decides that true love should resemble that moment, and a seed is planted within her to seek that kind of love. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Her dream seems doomed to death when she is basically auctioned off in marriage to Mr. Logan Killicks by her grandmother, who explains that giving Janie to the old farmer is the twisted, maternal way of protecting her and seeing that she wants for nothing. Thus, Janie is married at sixteen. Logan Killicks worships her at first, but after receiving no encouragement, he subjects her to the role of a "farmer's wife." Janie is miserable until she makes the acquaintance of Joe Starks, who she meets on his way to Florida. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The ambitious Joe is seeking to construct a town of black people, where he may prove to be a big and valuable voice in the world. Janie is attracted to his big dreams, and he insists that she run away from her husband and marry him so he can treat her like the lady she was born to be. Janie eagerly complies, and true to his word Joe creates a town from the dust and becomes mayor, but he places Janie on the shelf as a trophy-wife. Janie progressively finds herself more miserable as he degrades her intelligence and makes her feel unimportant. She stays married to him, however, until his death. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
By this time, Janie is near forty and feels as if the best days of life have passed her by. She relishes her independence, however, as Joe left her a large amount of money and she now has the capacity to live as she chooses. She insists that she will not marry, but soon after Joe's death she meets Tea Cake, a young and insanely handsome drifter. Tea Cake is twelve years Janie's junior, and her friends insist that he is only after her money, but in him Janie finds the physical and emotional love that resembles the pollinated pear tree from her past. She runs away with him and begins life all over again as the woman she's always wanted to be, but the forces of nature and the god that controls Janie's fate prove to have other plans. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The thing about <i>Their Eyes Were Watching God</i> is that it isn't some weary story about the struggling souls of black folk like most Harlem Renaissance novels of the time. Instead, Zora Neale-Hurston strays away from all of that and makes things simple. The life of the black farmer isn't placed under a social microscope and deemed hopeless and destitute. Rather, the simplicity of southern black life is painted as it truly was at the time. Blacks were poor, uneducated, and on the low end of the social spectrum, but they had ambitious spirits, kind hearts, and happy souls. They did not spend their time worrying about the problems in society, but rather enjoying what they had and seeking what there was to gain. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
With the social connotations of the black struggle milked out, the novel really focuses on one girl's metamorphosis as she discovers herself. The most obvious theme in the novel is her relationship with men, but at the story's essence there is so much to behold in her relationship with nature and its forces as well as the world. Hurston breaks genre barriers by creating <i>Their Eyes Were Watching God </i>with a masterful blend of feminism, cultural richness, and "coming of age" ideals. Janie finds herself by rejecting all the notions of who her family, race, and gender think she should be and becoming a real woman. Her relationship with Tea Cake not only symbolizes her success in finding a love that mirrors the the bee and the pear tree, but the victory of her ability to live a life always reminiscent of that moment of natural perfection. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Super long review, I know. But comment please! There's also a movie. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Miss you guys, and hope to be back asap. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
--Ari </div>
</div>
LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-71813331588322631072012-08-03T20:57:00.001-07:002012-08-03T20:57:58.759-07:00Anna Karenina 2012 Clip<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="344" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/IhGxs7cipDo?fs=1" width="459"></iframe><br />
<br />
Just thought I might share.<br />
<br />
I, for one, am absolutely perplexed. First off, after a few minutes of deep deliberation and raiding my mind for any existing knowledge of the book, which I read two years ago, I still have yet to understand the purpose of the seemingly melodramatic fireworks/dance scene at the beginning. My first reaction when watching was, "Oh God, they turned Anna Karenina into a musical." Thank Heaven that seems not to be true.<br />
<br />
Perhaps sharing my thoughts on the clip so soon after having watched it is not exactly the wisest thing to do. I'm still grappling with my thoughts. So, instead of attempting to write a post with any kind of dictional or syntactical dignity, I'll instead list the foremost thoughts in my mind. These thoughts might be random and none of them really take precedence over the other. They might be minute observations or argumentative opinions. At this point, however, they're really all I can give.<br />
<br />
<br />
<ul><li>Kiera Knightley is miscast. I'm sorry, I just don't see Anna Karenina. She was much more suited to her role in <i>Pride and Prejudice. </i>Her performance in <i>Atonement </i> was beyond reproach. Now, however, I'm almost tired of seeing her as Joe Wright's go-to girl. Was she cast because it was an expectation? Was she honestly the best woman for the role? I don't know. </li>
<li>The clothes don't fit her right. Wasn't the latter half of the 19th century all about voluptuousness and curves? </li>
<li>The firework/musical thing...ummm. ??? The jury is still deliberating on that one. </li>
<li>Vronsky could be a hit or miss. I'm not quite sure yet. </li>
<li>I do appreciate, however, that a director has finally decided to cast the leads remembering the age differences between the novel's characters. Karenin is much older than Anna, and Jude Law looks it thanks to a pretty stellar makeup job. Anna is older than Vronsky. You can detect these age differences much better than in other adaptions. Side note: Why does hollywood have such a problem dealing with the ages of the characters? Will Cathy and Heathcliff ever look like teenagers? Will Rochester ever be played by a 38 year old man alongside an 18 year old Jane? </li>
<li>Jude Law is going to be amazing. In the midst of this discombobulating blur of a clip, he is the constant deliverer. I can see something fantastic coming from him, and it is that which has me ready to see just how this movie will turn out. </li>
<li>I think every minute Jude wasn't in the clip was stale and slightly awkward. </li>
</ul><div><br />
</div><div>Please comment! I love to respond. </div>LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-25625201478033075672012-07-31T07:49:00.000-07:002012-07-31T07:49:03.402-07:00Weekly Lit Quote 7/30/12-7/36/12<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">"For echo is the soul of the voice exciting itself in hollow places"</span></blockquote>
--Michael Ondaatje (<i>The English Patient)</i> </div>LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-33594241423507196722012-07-26T07:38:00.003-07:002012-07-26T07:43:25.504-07:00Jane Eyre 1952 and 1957<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
There are 10 basic English adaptations of <i>Jane Eyre</i> that are widely available to the world, stretching all the way back to the first talkie version in 1934. From various sources, I had heard that there was a 1952 and 1957 TV adaptation, but after snooping around the internet for any chance to watch it or even buy it, I fell short and was resigned to keeping the two adaptions out of conversation.<br />
<br />
It didn't stop me from being a little curious, however, so last night I tried again and this time I didn't come out empty handed. In fact, I found the proposal scenes of both. I thought some of you JE enthusiasts might be interested, so I took the liberty of sharing.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://vimeo.com/27665623" target="_blank">Jane Eyre 1952</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://vimeo.com/19368606" target="_blank">Jane Eyre 1957</a><br />
<br />
<br />
Ok, so they're absolutely horrible. If I had to rearrange all of the previous comparisons and rankings of <i>Jane Eyre </i>adaptations I've done in the past, you might find that the 1934 has moved from it's perpetual spot in last place. I could give some bit of credit to the '52 because it was surprisingly true to the source material (however horribly the lines were delivered and disregarding the fact that you can barely see anything because of the screen quality), but the '57 was ridiculously unfaithful and altogether so strange that all I could do was laugh.<br />
<br />
Suffice it to say that I understand why these two adaptions were hidden in obscurity for so long. They weren't worth the trouble of going to find. </div>LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-77148406239813588122012-07-23T08:35:00.003-07:002012-07-23T08:36:29.501-07:00Weekly Lit Quote July 23 - 29 2012<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;">This weeks two quotes (I couldn't choose between them) are from the 1995 adaptation of Frances Hodgson Burnett's <i>A Little Princess</i>, directed by Alfonso Cuaran. </span><br />
<div>
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">"Magic has to be believed. That's the only way it's real." --Captain Crewe (Liam Cunningham)</span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;">"I am a princess. All girls are. Even if they live in tiny old attics. Even if they dress in rags. Even if they aren't pretty, or smart, or young. They're still princesses. All of us." --Sara Crewe (Liesel Matthews</span>) </blockquote>
<br />
This film is truly inspirational. If you're looking for something uplifting, I would really advise you give it a watch because there is so much you may learn from this film.</div>LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-25531652826973961972012-07-20T08:03:00.003-07:002012-07-22T06:52:39.272-07:00"Frankenstein" by Mary Shelley Review<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Why haven't I read <i>Frankenstein </i>sooner?<br />
<br />
Sometimes I feel this overwhelming apathy when it comes to picking up books I know I should have read by now. I read books on my own terms, whether every self-proclaimed lit lover has read them or not. For some reason, I just never had a sense of urgency when it came to digging my face into <i>Frankenstein</i>. I think it had something to do with the fact that it's used as in allusion in so many other books/movies/etc that the novel itself almost screams "cliche."<br />
<br />
But the day did come when I felt that overwhelming motivation to read <i>Frankenstein,</i> and it came yesterday morning when I looked at the calendar, noted when school started, and hyperventilated because I was incredibly behind on my summer reading. Nothing works as potently as the fire of procrastinated summer reading under the butt.<br />
<br />
Yesterday, I journeyed via two planes and a four-hour drive back to my home from a college tour in St. Louis, and knowing that I had to get a good head start on the book in order to keep reading, I delved straight into it on plane #1 while the lady next to me indulged her fantasy in <i>Fifty Shades of Grey</i>. By the end of the first flight, I was a third of the way through. I finished the second third on the next flight, and the last bit I read on the drive home. So mission accomplished, summer reading back on track, and Ari the lit lover is supremely happy.<br />
<br />
For all of you who aren't acquainted with the specifics of Frankenstein and have only the stigma of a monster with a crowbar through his neck that the average human has, let me first address a common misconception: Frankenstein is not the monster. I've heard the monster called "Monster Frankenstein", but I don't remember seeing him being called such in the novel, so I'm not sure that's correct. The named Frankenstein is the narrator, who begins his story in the most seamless and normal of ways; a history of his mother and father.<br />
<br />
Victor Frankenstein comes from the noble roots of a loving family. His father is a doting husband and daddy, his mother is a fragilely beautiful woman with the tenderest compassion, and he is the first child to whom all love and caresses are given. As he grows up, his family becomes larger. His parents adopt a strikingly beautiful and well-tempered little girl to bring up as Frankenstein's sister and potential wife, and afterwards more children follow. Frankenstein matures happily and normally, but one hitch in his character is revealed plainly from the start.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEM2Nlz85lll24uLb88qKmTqRYAfrmEcUHVvtEA0rZjLIOrmnQlAms91eoCV3C8ZiqGtdBqMZjGMADfIWXHpX9aNij4oyRCd4KELGrjG88t2IRvm08vibIqTf8HpVqw8kTK61wYVjgwos/s1600/frankenstein.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEM2Nlz85lll24uLb88qKmTqRYAfrmEcUHVvtEA0rZjLIOrmnQlAms91eoCV3C8ZiqGtdBqMZjGMADfIWXHpX9aNij4oyRCd4KELGrjG88t2IRvm08vibIqTf8HpVqw8kTK61wYVjgwos/s400/frankenstein.jpg" width="276" /></a>Frankenstein is allured by the source of life and the natural philosophy and chemistry behind how Adam came into being from nothing. Captured by the works of discredited ancient scientists, he keeps within him this inborn desire to change the world by finding the key to life and becoming a creator. As he studiously proves himself the best scientist in his college, he begins fashioning a human that might change the face of science. Driven by some kind of animalistic obsession for glory, knowledge, and success, he finishes his creature and jump starts it to life, only to regret that he created such an ugly thing and rue the fact that he breached the limits of scientific knowledge. The monster escapes, and initially Frankenstein's guilt seems almost dissolved until the thing he created comes charging back into his life causing misery wherever his creator goes.<br />
<br />
The audience finds that the monster is not the illiterate, unintelligent brute that movies and allusions paint him to be, but rather an articulate and eloquent user of words. He insists that he is not bad by nature. In fact, he aspires to be a noble and loving creature like the people the world smiles upon. He is lonely, however. His vile appearances make him incapable of receiving human sympathy, even when his heart is loving and his deeds are good. He turns to Frankenstein, the creator that hates him, for one last plea for happiness by asking the scientist to fashion him a mate that might love him and provide him company since humanity has determined to spurn him and the creator who was supposed to love him has turned his back on him.<br />
<br />
There is, however, a certain hitch to his proposal. The monster insists that if he is given a companion to act as a source of love and similitude, he will peacefully resign to the deepest jungles of South America and never be heard from again or cause any harm or grief to any living creature. But if Frankenstein chooses <i>not </i>to give him a mate, the monster swears to avenge himself by terrorizing him and everyone connected with him so that Frankenstein might feel the wretched loneliness that the creature himself has been fated to live with forever. The conflicted Frankenstein must choose to either perform a revolted task in order to save his family and friends from what he created (while potentially releasing another danger into the world) or not comply with the brute's request and see those he loves plagued by the freak of nature to which he gave life.<br />
<br />
This novel is a breath of fresh air for anyone in search of a short and invigorating read. I wouldn't rank it amongst my favorite pieces of literature, but I would happily read it again if the opportunity presented itself.<br />
<br />
The thing about Frankenstein is that it was one of the first. It is the sci-fi/horror novel that set the standard for the genre. It's the stuff of legend. But, when you strip away that piece of overwhelming information and just read it for what it is--a book--it is solid, but rather unspectacular in my opinion. The plot is enticing, but predictable. The literary elements are all there where they should be. The protagonist has all the components of the average dynamic main character. Mechanically, it is just a good book. But there is nothing that ups the ante and makes it the incredibly conflictual and paralyzing tale that everyone paints it to be.<br />
<br />
On the other hand, I don't mean to say that I didn't like the novel or didn't appreciate it. I found the underlying content to be very interesting and quite thought-provoking. Frankenstein's creature provides an outside view of humanity and asks basic questions that we all ask ourselves throughout many points in life. How can humans be so filled with nobility, goodness, and kindness, and then at times prove to be the most barbarous and unfeeling species? The monster's relationship with his creator also has a strange resemblance to the conflicting sentiments humans feel in relation to a God or what they believe to be the spring of life. Frankenstein causes one to reexamine the basic questions of life and revel in thought. But perhaps, as Frankenstein himself asserts, that is the potential danger. </div>LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-57959505483775027592012-07-07T19:49:00.003-07:002012-07-07T19:49:57.865-07:00Under Construction<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
There are obviously some facelifting experiments being conducted on the blog right now. I figured that it was time for change, so I'm just dabbling with this and that until I find something that sticks. The basic white background will stay the same. It'll be mostly the header and the font coloring that I'll be messing with. Sorry to those who don't like the white, it just makes everything seem spacious and simplistic. </div>LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-21481970701484564362012-07-03T22:01:00.002-07:002018-05-16T17:56:20.156-07:00Jane Eyre 2006 Review<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<h3 style="background-color: white; color: #7f7f7f; font-family: Calibri; margin: 0px; position: relative;">
<i>Edit May 16, 2018:</i> For updated and added reviews and content, visit my new website <a href="http://litloverscorsetlaces.com/" target="_blank"><span style="color: black;">Lit Lovers & Corset Laces</span>. </a></h3>
<div>
<br /></div>
I had a feeling after posting my new poll that this would win out. I'm happy though, because I've been itching to review this for a while. All I needed was the proper excuse to put my lazy fingers (and brain) to work and pull myself out of this horrible writing lull into which I've fallen. Nothing excites me more than <i>Jane Eyre </i>reviews.<br />
<br />
So, to commence my usual off-topic and slightly longwinded preamble, I'll start by saying that this is the first adaption of the novel that I ever saw. Ever. And when I found out that countless others existed, I was about as excited as a little kid overdosed on caffeine (to say the least). The miniseries was running late on the BBC during a sleepless night and I feasted my eyes gladly. I watched the first portion one Sunday, the second part the next, and then immediately ordered the DVD. I'm well versed on every detail of this adaptation. After all, before the 2011 version came and stole my heart, this is what satisfied me most.<br />
<br />
<u>Casting: </u><br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEilt_hJmCsosJYaxLUoTBCXmWnDNYn9NM7LKby3wWNpjCZTyOrGdCKyxngYWcpGmcycUxLJWP2qXOhdHLb_n3kR2q6cNLOFYD1vCHTzoFj9fUbgR-liUSWAlYSCx-QbhuJsIX168vpeb3A/s1600/tumblr_l3bpbjgHrE1qc7y61o1_500.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="313" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEilt_hJmCsosJYaxLUoTBCXmWnDNYn9NM7LKby3wWNpjCZTyOrGdCKyxngYWcpGmcycUxLJWP2qXOhdHLb_n3kR2q6cNLOFYD1vCHTzoFj9fUbgR-liUSWAlYSCx-QbhuJsIX168vpeb3A/s400/tumblr_l3bpbjgHrE1qc7y61o1_500.png" width="400" /></a><b>Jane:</b> Ruth Wilson is a perfect choice for various reasons. The duck-like lips, lightly freckled cheeks, and darting eyes are all separate facets of the Jane that I personally visualize. Wilson possesses a unique and "sharp" beauty by which the Jane in my imagination is defined. Her ability to naturally imbue the character with that innate sense of self-respect and autonomy while also managing to capture the vulnerability and loneliness of the character when demanded is, without a doubt, stunning. Her imperfections only arise in the technicalities. She's obviously too mature to pull off being eighteen, too tall to earn the "little" description, and sometimes from certain angles even too extraordinarily stunning to merit the "plain" illustration. But then again, if we <i>Jane Eyre</i> fanatics pay too much attention to Jane's physical attributes then we'll never like an adaptation. Ruth Wilson does, however, do a great credit to the mental and emotional aspects of the character. Her Jane is composed, visually strong, and unafraid of those who try to intimidate her. She maintains all these essences of the character while also managing to make Jane a person that modern women can somehow relate to. The only downside I could find--and perhaps this is just me being picky--is that sometimes Ruth appears much too comfortable with Rochester in their first few conversations. I'm very particular about the first conversations between the two characters in an adaptation because they essentially set the groundwork for the rest of the film or miniseries. Jane is not supposed to be timid, but at the same time I wouldn't describe her as a person completely at ease. She and Rochester are both extremely guarded; jaded by their previous knowledge of a cruel world. By the second conversation I think Ruth's Jane is already getting too familiar with Rochester.<br />
<br />
<b>Rochester:</b><br />
Like Timothy Dalton and Michael Fassbender, Toby Stephens is much too sexy. Even beneath those brown hair extensions and 19th century muttonchops he is decidedly swoon-worthy. Once again, I make allowances for that. Who doesn't like a little extra sex appeal in a Rochester?<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4wihu8EHFb8QJXD4oeow0hTfUqTXt16tLmzpcvGYRGLn432x2ZDAK5lqTL3wnDJ0H7t6U7xgd7GUCcgDMvcVhaPLUx_tDV9GGmQ9aVhyphenhyphenwTMgEy9tUwSxWopVB_tNiZtGzZ6Vv2CdYKO8/s1600/tumblr_l3f23i1AHq1qc7y61o1_500.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4wihu8EHFb8QJXD4oeow0hTfUqTXt16tLmzpcvGYRGLn432x2ZDAK5lqTL3wnDJ0H7t6U7xgd7GUCcgDMvcVhaPLUx_tDV9GGmQ9aVhyphenhyphenwTMgEy9tUwSxWopVB_tNiZtGzZ6Vv2CdYKO8/s400/tumblr_l3f23i1AHq1qc7y61o1_500.png" width="358" /></a> Toby Stephens is great. He is the "bad boy" Rochester; the actor that reminds the audience again and again that Rochester's record is not squeaky clean. He plays the world-weary cynic perfectly (with extra help from lines like "I've been all over the world, Miss Eyre, and it's vastly overrated"). Toby isn't afraid to dive straight into the character and emphasize aspects of Rochester that other actors chose to gloss over in the majority of other <i>JE</i> adaptations. He boldly signals to the audience that Rochester isn't the image of some morally upright Romantic hero. He takes care to bring the defects of the character to light; his shameful sexual rap sheet, his spoiled and all too flattered ego, and his suave way of manipulating Jane's emotions (seen when Blanche comes to town). I love this projection of Rochester because it creates a stark comparison to the man he gradually becomes when Jane enters his life and alters things. That take captures one of the essential keys of his love for Jane. On the other hand, Stephens' portrayal of Rochester could be taken by some critics as not nearly as deep as it should be. If you don't look at it the way I just described, from the surface all you might see is a natural "pretty boy" persona that over-romanticizes the character. So from the same performance you might gather two completely polarizing viewpoints. This isn't a statement to take away from Toby's portrayal, but merely a warning not to rely completely on what I've said here.<br />
<br />
<b>St. John: </b><br />
Boy, did I love Andrew Buchanan as St. John! He is hands down my favorite portrayal of the character; perhaps because he adds an element to St. John that actually resembles a human being. After all, that is what St. John is. He's a cold, chauvinistic, "holier than thou" human being, but a man nonetheless. Every other actor who has portrayed St. John (to me) has either had about as much personality as driftwood or is cold enough to freeze over the Sahara. And St. John isn't cold. Quite the contrary. "He has a heart; [Jane has] seen it overflowing with passion...he just keeps it buried in stone with a tenacious willpower." Buchanan is that description manifested in reality. When St. John professes his love for Rosamund Oliver, everyone sees that flash of passion and the proof that he is capable of great warmth. In another second, however, he is back to the unbendingly pious antagonist we all love to hate. Great performance.<br />
<br />
<b>Others:</b><br />
Adele: Annoying. Didn't like this one at all.<br />
Fairfax: Solid performance. Not my favorite, but very close. A very nice maternal figure.<br />
Mrs. Reed: Tara Fitzgerald's bitterness permanently marked her as evil in my mind. Great.<br />
<br />
<u>Screenplay/Cinematography/Soundtrack/Costumes: </u><br />
This is where the words of praise begin to see a decline. The screenplay is my major qualm about this adaptation. The dialogue is just not faithful enough to the novel. It's much too modernized, and because of the absence of the original language, that extra spark that could have been failed to ignite in this version. Then there's the problem of missing and fabricated scenes. For example, the conversation after Mason's injury, which isn't exactly integral but is definitely something worth keeping, is gone. Then there's the highly controversial leaving scene, which has been moved to Jane's bedroom, stripped of all Bronte's dialogue, and converted to a steamy kissing scene completely unlike the novel. Of course, I love seeing the physical chemistry between Toby and Ruth, but it doesn't do Jane's character justice and artistic license shouldn't go as far to alter such an essential part of the novel in that way. It's especially disappointing to feel so harshly about the screenplay because I enjoyed Sandy Welch's script from the 2004 BBC <i>North and South </i>miniseries and I had my hopes set high.<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMOXcXwNvU3a77siqVtT2QEg1C12D9QH0QnJw1n2Tz3Y7MiLM1OR_bvHhZrt4Mtx1JKVTEJjUw5TGmAykZ_gzKzvAhCDvXLGuHwUCBcMqeXXTyGkke9asdRNA-dxZpDkIlK1pSd2hcZco/s1600/tumblr_ly1uknVbux1qzu6rfo1_500.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="223" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMOXcXwNvU3a77siqVtT2QEg1C12D9QH0QnJw1n2Tz3Y7MiLM1OR_bvHhZrt4Mtx1JKVTEJjUw5TGmAykZ_gzKzvAhCDvXLGuHwUCBcMqeXXTyGkke9asdRNA-dxZpDkIlK1pSd2hcZco/s400/tumblr_ly1uknVbux1qzu6rfo1_500.png" width="400" /></a> There isn't much to say about the cinematography. It isn't very good, but then who really expects it to be? It's a BBC miniseries. Then again, it still could have been better. I did like how the director and camera crew made great use of the landscape surrounding Haddon Hall.<br />
Soundtrack. I didn't really notice it that much, but once I actually took the time to listen to it I didn't like it. Much too dainty for a gothic novel such as <i>Jane Eyre. </i>However, there are various sound samples during some particularly gothic scenes that change the tone and add an extra scary edge to the miniseries. This is the first adaptation to really take a peak into the "horror story" side of the novel since the 1944 and the 2011 film followed suit.<br />
Costumes: Ok. Not amazing. Not bad. Once again, were we really expecting much from a low budget miniseries?<br />
<br />
<br />
I believe I've already voiced them beneath the individual categories, but just to clarify, my only major problem with this adaption is the screenplay. That's a major letdown, but despite that, the 2006 JE is a solid adaptation. It has, debatably, the largest following of any adaption. A lot of that has to do with placing. This miniseries was released in the prime of a younger generation of <i>Jane Eyre </i>lovers. For lit lovers my age that were too young to appreciate the '96 and '97, the '06 came at a time when we needed it. I'm not the only one who's able to credit the '06 for pointing me to prior adaptions. This is, overall, the JE that ushers to a younger crowd. Toby and Ruth have a raw and realistic emotional chemistry that speaks to everyday people and makes this particular version of the novel one that reminds readers that 19th century literature can still connect to the modern world. Yes, it sacrificed some of the beautiful language in order to prove that point, but it is nonetheless endearing. Like any other adaptation, you have to learn to appreciate it for its strengths.<br />
<br />
Please Comment and it's great to be back again. Love, Ari.<br />
<br />
P.S: Just for our mutual viewing pleasure...<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcD9CLimBtwJJY8Z22aJuyOGTFFQ3W5f1THmGjhsMVupou8qiCZdCW0jJCiz2DuRfGFA3KlCEW9rAvGz59lYBOiBqfLlqs3w0o49AARYSVlZgT-WD_qK-T2YER-4UnSal38Tvcjkqf6wM/s1600/tumblr_m068sj4yRc1qbg3tzo1_500.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcD9CLimBtwJJY8Z22aJuyOGTFFQ3W5f1THmGjhsMVupou8qiCZdCW0jJCiz2DuRfGFA3KlCEW9rAvGz59lYBOiBqfLlqs3w0o49AARYSVlZgT-WD_qK-T2YER-4UnSal38Tvcjkqf6wM/s1600/tumblr_m068sj4yRc1qbg3tzo1_500.jpg" /></a></div>
<br /></div>
LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com17tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-87478774681256057472012-06-21T17:59:00.001-07:002012-06-28T14:35:59.090-07:00Anna Karenina 2012 Trailer Released<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
I love the moments when coincidental thoughts become reality.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Since the moment I first heard that Joe Wright (one of my favorite directors) was working on a new adaptation of <i>Anna Karenina</i>, I've been excited-- even despite the fact that I could never define my opinion on the novel. I was--and still am--however, certain that whatever novel Wright touches turns to cinematographic gold and is always a distinct pleasure to watch. The project was announced ages ago and I periodically checked up on it, always delighted to find the occasional new screen cap or newest update. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
For a while I let the film drift to the corners of my crowded mind until literally two days ago when I was pondering what I wanted to post for you guys. <i>Anna Karenina </i>came to mind for a fleeting second, reminding me that a trailer for the new film was just about due. Two days later, here it was. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/3yUo9YbuinI?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
First thoughts? Once again, Kiera Knightley seems to be a physical miscast. But then again, she wasn't the ideal physical representation of Elizabeth Bennet or Sabina Spielrein either. The only movie in which I believe she was the perfect representation of the character was <i>Atonement. </i>However, as is usually the case with Miss Knightley, she does have the potential to alter my previous preconceptions of the character through her performance. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The person that I'm really interested in is Jude Law. Just from the trailer alone, I can already feel a superb performance brimming over. Perhaps it's just the nip-tuck trailer job that makes Karenin seem more capable of receiving human sympathy, but I have a great notion that Jude Law will finally make Karenin seem like a true rival to Vronsky. Not a sexual rival--he was never meant to be that--nor even a romantic rival, but the kind of character that reminds us why Anna was so torn in the novel. I've seen countless adaptations of the book and no one has yet to do it. It's always been easier for filmmakers to characterize him as a cold and unsympathetic husband who pushes Anna out the door and makes it painfully clear to the audience why she entered an affair. I've personally always believe that there is more to Karenin than that. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Vronsky...ehh. He seems ok. He's perhaps the most overrated romantic "hero" in literature, so I don't really like talking about him. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The costume design will be perfect. The only thing left to wonder is if Dario Marianelli will find his way onto the soundtrack.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Oh, and I love Matthew McFadyen's mustache! (Don't act like you didn't notice it). </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Feel free to comment!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-64626199453958154932012-06-19T07:56:00.001-07:002012-06-19T07:56:34.619-07:00Hello there!<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
I'm back after taking perhaps the longest blogging hiatus in my comparatively short blogging career. In fact, I remained silent through my first blogging anniversary! It's a shame, I know, and I feel horrible because I promised myself that I would never neglect blogging in the face of academic adversity, but til now I hadn't even seen what "academic adversity" looks like. Through April and May I found myself hopelessly entrapped within the confines of piles of homework that barred me from the internet for weeks at a time. Add that to the fact that I rarely spent time at home unless it was to shower and sleep. My life had uprooted itself from the comfort of my bedroom to the unpleasantly decorated walls of my high school, where I was constantly running from one classroom to another preparing for either AP exams, end of year exams, SATs, or ACTs.<br />
<br />
I was writing all the time. The keyboard was always at my fingertips, and when it wasn't the pencil was undoubtedly in my hand. I never thought this would happen to me, but it's true. After writing becomes compulsory, the joy of doing it for fun fades. My brain was working at full capacity, my fingers were always in movement. By the time I got home, the last thing I wanted to do was blog. I couldn't even read. I just wanted to sleep.<br />
<br />
Lit Lovers & Corset Laces has been barren for these last few months; distressingly so. But the sun of my Junior year has set, and now I am hovering in that two month night before the rise of the radiant sun that signals my last year of high school. This little resting period will be filled with countless adventures to share with you guys. My family is embarking on a college tour around the country to various destinations that I've expressed interest in. And where there is travel, there is always time to read and write. Reviews will be coming again, as I've already gotten back into my comfortable role as a bookworm. I just finished a quick reread of <i>The English Patient</i> yesterday and have moved on to <i>Lolita </i>by Vladimir Nabokov. After that, my summer reading list demands that revisit <i>Frankenstein</i> and brush up on my <i>Wuthering Heights. </i>Hopefully, there will be a lot to keep you guys entertained in the months to come.<br />
<br />
I'm really glad to be writing to you all again. I don't think I realized just how much I missed you.<br />
<br />
<br /></div>LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-67344463744904942572012-05-22T17:52:00.001-07:002012-05-22T17:52:47.049-07:00The Great Gatsby Trailer Has Been Released!<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Initiating fangirl scream. </div>LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527055233332626167.post-50986385651238592882012-04-21T14:58:00.002-07:002012-07-22T16:49:19.068-07:00Jane Eyre 2011 Anniversary Review<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<b><u>Preamble...A very long preamble. </u></b><br />
I know I promised this weeks ago, but I never got around to writing this review because last-minute schedule changes left me with absolutely no time on my hands. I didn't forget, though, and now with the third quarter behind me and the ability to utter a large sigh of relief, I feel much better equipped to write a thorough review.<br />
<br />
Perhaps it seems borderline insane to write two reviews on the exact same movie, but I'm determined to make it a tradition on this blog because <i>Jane Eyre</i> 2011 was essentially the catalyst of a major life change for me. (Yes, I know it sounds melodramatic.) A year ago, my family took the trip to Charlotte, North Carolina to celebrate my grandfather's birthday. After doing some cinema research, I was able to ascertain that the (then) new version of <i>Jane Eyre </i>would be premiering at a local art house theatre the very night we came into town, and I desperately begged my parents to let me see it. They sacrificed crashing in their beds after four hours of travel to watch it with me, and for two hours I was mesmerized by Cary Fukunaga's adaptation of <i>Jane Eyre. </i>During the car ride home, I was silent for almost ten minutes straight before an effusive flow of words began gushing out of my mouth.<br />
<br />
"It was amazing!"<br />
<br />
"Wow!"<br />
<br />
"The look he gave her!"<br />
<br />
"'Awaken then!'"<br />
<br />
After countless exclamations, I paused, expecting some kind of profound remark from one of my parents. All I got was, "I'm glad you liked it." And from my mother: "I liked the other one better. But that beard was hideous."<br />
<br />
I had to face it then that my parents would never quite understand the depth of what I saw in <i>Jane Eyre</i>; would never fully be able to comprehend the way reading a piece of English literature was such an indescribable thrill to me; would never be able to hold enthusiastic discourse about the different facets of Rochester and the true significance of St. John.<br />
<br />
No one really shared my passion for the novel, or for English literature at all. Yet, I felt the urge to tell someone or find some place where I satisfy my enthusiasm, so I came to Blogger. One of my first posts was a review of the movie, and it set an enriching and cathartic journey in motion that began with only two followers and thirty seven views and has now grown to thirty followers and 2,000 views a month. So by reviewing the film again, I'm not trying to be obsessive (even though that does have a minor hand in it), but rather I'm attempting to show my gratitude for the film, the experience, and to you guys.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Casting: </u></b><br />
<u>Jane:</u> I've revisited this movie several times since that day I wrote that first review, and each time I watch it I'm progressively more convinced of Mia Wasikowska's suitability for the role. I was in love with her then, and left completely awestruck by her ability to infuse outward subtlety into a character so rich with emotion and yet still be able to portray the burning fires beneath the skin. To this day, critics continue to call Mia's performance wooden, but there are just as many who recognize the skill she displays and many were disappointed by her Oscar snubbing. When walking into the theatre last year, I was afraid that I might not be able to see Mia as Jane. Her previous roles in <i>Alice in Wonderland </i>and<i> The Kids are All Right </i>struck me with the fear that I would be scarred by my prior knowledge of her. I was proved wrong, though, and quickly discovered that Mia inhabited the role of Jane Eyre. She becomes the character, and it resonates through every flicker of the eye, gesture of the hand, and movement of her body. Her age makes the casting accurate; her maturity makes it true to the character, and her overall respect for the sanctity of the novel and its protagonist (voiced numerous times in her interviews) adds something that an average actress would not have been able to capture. Jane Eyre really becomes relatable, and even though her performance is remarkable because of its sublime undercurrents, the audience can feel every fluctuation of her emotions.<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIvymAJkPm9H6UY4uwVx0kAt-1JHnJpItwnI_FDPnAWrwjQ3qZyUsg_V1xYZTa5bklNXzp_w0GDJOeMJgLsSmpX7GlZWB6R6gRCtZWo196Ud1HtbqhRfhUNPUdZE0_-Y0lxA5orJdm1cc/s1600/tumblr_lw2gzcc0Ns1qzu6rfo1_500.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="350" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIvymAJkPm9H6UY4uwVx0kAt-1JHnJpItwnI_FDPnAWrwjQ3qZyUsg_V1xYZTa5bklNXzp_w0GDJOeMJgLsSmpX7GlZWB6R6gRCtZWo196Ud1HtbqhRfhUNPUdZE0_-Y0lxA5orJdm1cc/s400/tumblr_lw2gzcc0Ns1qzu6rfo1_500.png" width="400" /></a><br />
<u>Rochester:</u> I hadn't been previously acquainted with Michael Fassbender before the announcement that he was slated to play Rochester, so I plunged into weeks of copious research, watching other films he had appeared in and listening to the interviews he gave about his approach to the character. At first, I was ambivalent about the decision to cast someone so attractive in the role, but after seeing the movie I realized why Cary Fukunaga selected him. Fassbender is morphed into a slightly unattractive Rochester, but as the film progresses he becomes more handsome, as if the audience is witnessing his transformation the same way Jane is. Fassbender encompasses many of Rochester's facets: the changeableness, the outright rudeness, the aggression but also the tenderness, the passion, and the flirtatious charm. I'm not saying that he's perfect, however. Fassbender takes Rochester's polar extremes and incorporates each into his performance <i>with moderation. </i>He's not <i>as</i> aggressive, rude, and changeable as the "real" Rochester. Somehow, I preferred this approach to those of previous actors, though. The actors before him tended to focus themselves on one aspect of the character. Orson Welles was the commanding Rochester, George C. Scott was the fatherly Rochester. Michael Jayston was the eccentric one, Tim Dalton was aggressive, and Toby Stephens was sensual. Fassbender didnt execute each of these to the extent the others did, but he balanced them all better than the previous men.<br />
<br />
<u>St. John</u>: Even though I loved the way Jamie Bell actually made St. John seem human rather than just an icy clergyman who does nothing to rival Rochester, outwardly, he didn't fit the "Grecian profile" image I might have imagined. Appearances aside, I enjoyed him. Jane once described St. John as not necessarily heartless, but too intent on burying his emotions. I could detect the manifestation of that description in areas of Jamie's performance. In a scene of particularly intimate conversation, he speaks briefly about having fallen in love. His voice becomes soft, his countenance a bit vulnerable. But he turns it off quickly, and follows with the words, "I scorned this weakness. I fought hard against it and I won." My regret is not seeing Jamie enough. St. John's part didn't have much time to develop.<br />
<br />
<u>Others:</u> Dame Judi nails Mrs. Fairfax in an underrated performance that got absolutely no attention. But then again, a stellar performance is almost expected from Judi Dench at this point in her spectacular career. Sally Hawkins was lovely (well, as lovely as Miss Reed can be) in the short time she graced the screen. Little Adele was so cute! The Rivers sisters couldn't be more perfectly cast. The only qualm I have is regarding Imogen Poots as Blanche Ingram. Her appearances fit the part without a doubt; she's absolutely stunning. There was still something lacking, however, and it might simply be because the audience didn't see nearly enough of her to recognize her as a real rival for Rochester's affections.<br />
<br />
<u><b>Screenplay/ Cinematography/Soundtrack/Costumes: </b></u><br />
<u>Screenplay</u>: Moira Buffini did not disappoint me. There were some obvious deviations from the book (as is common in every adaptation) but what I appreciated most was how Moira made sure to preserve the dialogue, unlike the 2006. There were a few people with gripes about how she chopped out the gypsy scene and condensed the leaving scene, but if you look at the numerous other adaptations of the novel, you'll realize that none of them really ever incorporated those scenes except for the 4 hour BBC productions. There's also a lot in Moira's script that didn't make it into the final production of the movie because of time constraints. (The movie already pushes two hours as is). For anyone interested in really seeing the genius of Buffini's script, you can purchase the movie tie-in version on kindle or kindle software <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Jane-Movie-Edition_Vintage-Classics/dp/0307744221/=ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1335044291&sr=1-1" target="_blank">here</a>. The screenplay is located at the end of the novel. Buffini succeeded in preserving the aspects of the source material that most fans love, but she also added some original ideas that I would have loved to see come to fruition on the screen. What didn't wasn't her fault.<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQ8OriMfW-Em6F7ZDuq-yYfp07rtZrXoWP9sFlOzC7b8CWpPT3qjGw9GZVAyOSndVS1On5YByd_8m77b12RG7GW3rSYqOdFVfFC7LLSdfzumbB2Sr6RFt73_iUd5FhtnIQrphAA_gUpdo/s1600/tumblr_lwx02qlAf01qzu6rfo1_500.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQ8OriMfW-Em6F7ZDuq-yYfp07rtZrXoWP9sFlOzC7b8CWpPT3qjGw9GZVAyOSndVS1On5YByd_8m77b12RG7GW3rSYqOdFVfFC7LLSdfzumbB2Sr6RFt73_iUd5FhtnIQrphAA_gUpdo/s1600/tumblr_lwx02qlAf01qzu6rfo1_500.png" /></a><br />
<u>Cinematography: </u>Absolutely breathtaking. This adaptation truly makes cinematography an art that requires adherence to the source material as well. The atmosphere created by the lighting and camera work is realistic and truly visceral. Cary Fukunaga said in multiple interviews that most of the time throughout the movie, no artificial light was used. The cinematographers worked with the shadows and darkness by filming by the light of the fire and candelabras on set. In a film with no voiceovers to give the viewer a clear insight into Jane's thoughts, the filmmakers used her environment as an external manifestation of her feelings. Outdoors, the landscaping is filmed with an artistic but realistic hand that emphasizes Jane's isolation. There is no romantic sweeping camera like that in <i>Pride in Prejudice, </i>but the film work is just as breathtakingly beautiful.<br />
<br />
<u>Soundtrack:</u> What can I say? Dario Marianelli is a genius. I bought the entire soundtrack and still listen to it on a regular basis. It's one of my favorites from him. The key to providing music for this film was to mirror Jane's thoughts without overpowering or romanticizing the world she lives in. Marianelli was the perfect person to bring in for the job. You can give all the tracks a listen on Youtube. My favorites were <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfQnqLbYET0" target="_blank">"Awaken"</a>, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxZZ-nlprec" target="_blank">"In Jest or Earnest"</a>, and "<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzZ7nbI2FyU" target="_blank">The Wedding Dress."</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiszck4Vy4vefl4DlD1zRm0Eaff52EsHzae7K-NhZ-FZzsgb3ijRaRq7GgE8NpFo-2Ca5iUSdC-rzQjGYx5sv-t4QT952n5MVyasT4YPVbyps-fBOxH5EWaEO2kDfJfG92kRpmP8ooOdGM/s1600/tumblr_m2qkfo6IAI1qzu6rfo1_r1_500.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiszck4Vy4vefl4DlD1zRm0Eaff52EsHzae7K-NhZ-FZzsgb3ijRaRq7GgE8NpFo-2Ca5iUSdC-rzQjGYx5sv-t4QT952n5MVyasT4YPVbyps-fBOxH5EWaEO2kDfJfG92kRpmP8ooOdGM/s1600/tumblr_m2qkfo6IAI1qzu6rfo1_r1_500.png" /></a><u>Costumes:</u> Nominated for an Academy Award, so obviously they must be good. But one must really take the time to notice the detail to appreciate the artistry.<br />
<br />
<u><b>Negatives:</b></u><br />
The one thing that takes away from the film is the swiftness with which it progresses. Grant it, two hours is not a lot to work with when you're condensing a five hundred-page novel. I would have liked to see more time spent on the brutality of Jane's childhood and a little more emphasis placed on her visit back to Gateshead. Two scenes were left out (of the movie, not the script) that were really instrumental in the pacing of Jane and Rochester's relationship. The first was that garden scene in which Rochester gives us some insight into his past with Adele's mother (it's included in the deleted scenes of the DVD). The second was the tearing of the veil, which was also thrown into the deleted scenes package. These clips are both on Youtube as well.<br />
<br />
<br />
Despite these quirks, this adaptation continues to be my favorite because of how balanced it was. Every aspect of the film worked together in perfect unison. The characters each had perfect chemistry and did great jobs with their parts. The cinematography added an extra aspect to the movie that echoed their performances. The costumes and soundtrack fit flawlessly into the story. Which <i>Jane Eyre </i>adaptation a person likes will always variate based on the personality of the individual, of course. Before I came across this movie, I had submitted to calling the BBC 1983 and 2006 my favorites; the 1983 because of its adherence to the source material, the 2006 because of the chemistry between characters. But when this version came out, I realized what I had always wanted in a <i>Jane Eyre </i>adaptation that none of the others ever had--artistry. This was an adaptation where just as much effort was put into being true to the book's description of Jane's surroundings and the tones in her environment as it was into the dialogue and the characters. That's really important, because so great a portion of the novel is dedicated to these details. Fukunaga, Buffini, Goldman, and Marianelli took <i>Jane Eyre </i>and made it a visual piece of art, and I as an intense fan of the novel I appreciated that tremendously. You can say what you want about the actors or the infidelities of the screenplay, but no one can question the visceral quality of the music and the cinematography and its connection to the original story. Whenever I watch this movie again, I always rediscover why I loved it so much since that first night I saw it a year ago.<br />
<br /></div>LitLoverhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00821079080870387396noreply@blogger.com10