Thursday, June 30, 2011

Persuasion 2007 Review

After rereading Persuasion, I was temporarily sidetracked (as you can tell) by the appearance of Cary Fukunaga’s Jane Eyre adaption online. However, I haven’t forgotten my promise to continue my Persuasion week. After the review of the novel, I left you with a taste of its newest adaption. There are two other adaptions as well that may or may not be reviewed (I haven’t decided yet) depending on how I feel after revisiting them. I’ve revisited the 2007 for the second time now and since it is, after all, the version that I referred you to, I think it only fair to review it for you.

I don’t think that any of you need a recap of the plot, so in order to save time I think I’ll just plunge headfirst into the review of the movie (if I may call it such). The 2007 is a healthy two hour adaption starring Sally Hawkins as Miss Elliot, the twenty-seven year old destined for spinsterhood and Rupert Penry-Jones as the handsome and passionate Captain Wentworth.

Whenever I watch an adaptation of Persuasion I really like to focus on the two leads. If they aren’t casted correctly, then why does the rest even matter? The story is basically built around the chemistry between the two. Fortunately, I didn’t have to worry about a lack thereof. Sally Hawkins was a great (though I’m sure perhaps a little older) Anne Elliot and Rupert nailed my image of the look and manner of Captain Wentworth.

Here I might add that I’m glad I saw Persuasion before I saw Jane Eyre. I remember watching the ’06 version of Jane Eyre and then somehow stumbling on the early adaptation of The Tenant of Wildfell Hall and all I could think about when watching Tara Fitzgerald on screen was “MRS. REED!” Thankfully, I saw Sally Hawkins as the humbly charitable Miss Elliot before she turned into the heartless female dog that ruined Jane Eyre’s childhood.

Sally Hawkins played Anne Elliot just the way I had imagined her. Though she is mature in many aspects, she is always unsure of herself. After allowing herself to be persuaded by Lady Russell when she is nineteen, Anne’s confidence is seriously shaken. It only gets worse as her beauty declines and her age increases. Though she’s quick to take control in meeting the needs of others, she isn’t assertive enough to put her foot down and take care of herself. Sally captured that timidity better than I expected her to. It’s often hard for older women to play girlishly bashful characters.

Oh, Captain Wentworth! Don’t we all want one? He seems to be the perfect male lit hero. He has all the essentials. Who could do justice to this handsome, ardent, rather embittered, and yet gentle character? Rupert Penry-Jones, that’s who! Every once in a while you find an actor that fits his character SO well that you feel a sense of sameness. For example, Richard Armitage IS John Thornton. Colin Firth IS Darcy. Gregory Peck IS Atticus Finch. These are the actors that inhabit their roles so fully that we can’t separate them from the people they play. Now I add Rupert to that list, because he IS Captain Wentworth. (That statement is always open for discussion because I know some people are probably shaking their heads.)

The chemistry between Sally’s Anne and Rupert’s Wentworth was palpable without them even touching. I don’t remember a lot of physical contact in this adaption, but I remember passionate gazes, intense stares, and subtle glimpses between the two characters that made my heart leap.

With all that emotional chemistry, one might think that the first kiss would send fireworks. In my opinion it was quite the contrary. The kiss (to my surprise and distress) was at first an immediate negative. If any of you have seen it, it took forever! We see every tremble and movement of Sally’s mouth (not in a disgusting way) and this blatant passion, yet she withholds the kiss for so long! Such was my first impression when watching the adaption. Since, I have taken a different view. The point of the kiss was that it “took so long.” It stood to symbolize the constancy of Anne and Wentworth’s affection. They have been separated eight years, and now they are finally coming to this kiss. They are savoring the moment, reflecting on the many years it took them to get to where they are. Once you appreciate their struggle the kiss seems to fit perfectly into their story.

Sally and Rupert created a solid core for the movie, and everything else fell in place around them just as it should. The screenplay was done beautifully, preserving all the dialogue from the novel but managing to add an original flavor to suit a modern audience. The plot flows smoothly with perfect pacing. What’s not to like?

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Not in Heaven Yet, but Getting There!

Oh, my dearest bloggers! I try to shy away from religious phrases and such because I know that not everyone shares my beliefs and because I started this blog to have discussions on Literature, NOT religion. But I can't help myself. I am in a state of happiness. I have to say it!

"God is GOOD!"

What propelled me to make a religious exclamation and post the word "heaven" in my title? Cary Fukunaga's 2011 version of Jane Eyre has leaked to the internet. I have just logged off from watching it free. Imagine the state of euphoria I'm in, readers!

First off, let me give some immediate disclaimers. If you haven't seen the movie yet, don't try and look this up and watch it just because you want to be cheap and save some money. The movie is worth the ten dollar ticket, and is MUCH better expressed on a cinema screen than on a fuzzy 6 inch "youtube" style DivX player.

There's also only one site (or at least one that actually works and doesn't infiltrate your computer with viruses) that shows the movie in its entirety, and it comes at a price. The quality isn't good at all. It was watchable, but not to a very high extent. In fact, fifteen minutes into watching it I had to turn off my Gateway laptop and log onto my mother's macbook that has better screen quality. If you don't have a mac (the clarity of a mac screen is a great deal better than any other brand) then I would suggest you don't bother watching it.

The audio is also out of sync. Their lips are moving before they actually say their lines, and that will distract you throughout the whole thing. Therefore, if you haven't seen the movie yet DON'T try to find it. You're better off without it, and seeing the adaption on a fuzzy screen with screwed-up audio is worse than not seeing it at all because it ruins the feel of your "first time" movie experience.

For those who have seen the adaption already, it all depends on how you can cope with the glitches. I'm so obsessed that I just HAD to see it even with the obvious downsides it presented. It wasn't all that bad. I still had tears come to my eyes (whereas in the movie with a good screen and perfectly tuned audio, I was sobbing), and this will be enough to hold me until the DVD comes out. But I'm not going to watch it again. I don't want to ruin my "DVD" experience, the same way I don't want to ruin the "first time" experience for those who haven't seen the movie at all.

All in all, heaven is fifty-nine days away for me. Before the video leaked, it seemed like a grueling century. Now I think it's a bit closer. :)

"Devil in the White City" Review

Today's book review can't really be termed "English lit" related. It's a relatively new nonfictional piece that was published a few years ago. Before I get into that, however, let me provide the "preamble" as to why I'm reviewing it. As June is coming to its end and summer begins its usual decline back into the school-year, summer reading becomes a nuisance to the minds of lazy teenagers. This is the part of the summer where we must all discard our carefree attitudes and buckle down once more to read the piles of books forced upon us by our AP teachers.

As a result, most of my friends who haven’t picked up a book unless forced (or thanks to the genius of sparknotes haven’t picked one up at all) come rushing to me, the avid reader, asking for help. I sift through summer assignments pretty well. Most of them are pieces of Literature I enjoy reading or have read before (for example, our assignment for this year is reading Huckleberry Finn, which isn’t a stranger to me in the least). However, to “normal” teenagers who don’t enjoy the pleasure of reading the way I do,  help is always needed.

Cue Bonnie, the girl to which everyone runs when summer reading becomes eminent. I’m always being asked to “explain this” or “translate that.” It’s funny how people only appreciate your talents when they come in handy for their own personal use. Anyway, my best friend Ashley is a smart girl who I’ve a habit of helping with her summer reading. It’s been a tradition we’ve developed for the past few years because I always enjoy helping her and I don’t mind her taking credit for my work because she goes to a different school. She’s also the only one of my friends who genuinely appreciates my passion for reading rather than just try to flatter me in order to get her assignments out the way.

This year, the teachers at Ashley’s school threw a curveball at their students. To hell with assigning the students books that they don’t wish to read! Make them pick out their own books. The only problem is that one of them has to be nonfiction. Poor Ashley barely reads fiction, let alone stuffy biographies and nonfictional histories. So of course, the very day she got her assignment by email, she called me and asked me for suggestions. Giving her a fictional piece to read was easy. I told her to choose either Jane Eyre, North and South, or Pride and Prejudice. Each of these are books that I have extensive knowledge on and can assure an “A+” with. The problem this summer was finding a nonfictional book.

Here you may gain new insight into your fellow blogger: I absolutely despise nonfiction. I love writing that expands the imagination and takes one away from reality, or into a place where reality is at least better. Nonfiction does none of these things for me so I’ve always shied away from reading it unless forced. However, just last year I ran into a paperback that transformed my view of it forever. This book captivated me from beginning to end in a way that I thought no nonfictional piece would ever be able to.

I recommended Ashley to read The Devil in the White City.

Set in Chicago in the 1890s, this bestseller interconnects the stories of two men whose lives were both catapulted into fame by the 1893 World Fair. One is the genius architect behind the whole structure of the fair, called the “White City.” The other is one of the first infamous serial killers in America. He uses that same fair to entrap and kill young women.

Author Erik Larson uses his impeccable research to thread together a story that knocked my socks off. The fact that the book is actually nonfiction makes it all the more admirable. This book is not only a history of one of the most famous fairs in the world and the people that went there, but a story about connections. This masterpiece gives insight into the depths of human nature and how even the lives of the very best are intertwined with the worst.

I’m sure that this is not a book that most of you are familiar with. I don’t remember how I found it or what drove me to read it, but I know that I don’t regret it in the least. It turned out to be one of my favorite reads. It moved something inside of me. Before, I thought that nonfictional pieces were just facts spat out onto a page. After reading The Devil in the White City, I am grievously remorseful for my thoughts. Erik Larson combines the research and “reality” of nonfiction with the artistic beauty of the best fictional works.

                                                                        --Bonnie

Sunday, June 26, 2011

"Persuasion" by Jane Austen Review

First off, I hope that all my regular visitors like the changes I've made to the blog. Now that I'm getting a lot more support, I need to help make my blog more appealing. Please feel free to spread the word about "For the Love of Lit" to anyone who you think would be willing to listen! I broke my neck all day trying to figure out how to add tabs to the top of the page and finally figured it out. I've now categorized all my posts under those tabs to make them more accessible to you. Now, after taking a break and looking with a sense of self-satisfaction on the results of my labor, I’m ready to get back to what I do best; and that is reading and writing.

Today’s review is (in case you didn’t look at the hot-pink post title above) on a personal favorite of mine, Persuasion by none other than Jane Austen. I’m sure that it seems like a new facet of me, the girl who spends most of her time dwelling on the gothic romances of the Brontes. It’s actually quite the contrary. If it hadn’t been for Jane Austen, I never would have tapped into the passionate world of the Brontes. In theory, it was actually Jane Austen who laid the foundation for my passion for literature. Persuasion was the first (unabridged) classic I ever read, and thus plunged me into the rich world of literature. It is for that reason that I owe the book (and its Author) my undying gratitude, which I now seek to express by reviewing it. J

For all of you who are unacquainted with the book, Persuasion follows a heroine by the name of Anne Elliot, the daughter of the rich but rather prodigal baronet, Sir Walter Elliot. As the middle child of the family, Anne is often disregarded by her father in favor of her elder sister (who resembles him) or her younger sister, Mary, who has made a favorable marriage. Anne is lonesome and now seems destined for spinsterhood at the age of twenty-seven.

The reader now becomes more acquainted with Anne’s past. At the tender age of nineteen, she fell in love with the handsome naval officer, Frederick Wentworth.  Despite her passion for him, Anne rejects him after her mother’s old friend Lady Russell persuades her that his lack of wealth will hinder their relationship. Wentworth leaves with the navy, embittered by Anne’s weakness of mind and enraged by Lady Russell’s part in his rejection.

Years later Wentworth and Anne are thrown together again, both in completely different circumstances than they were before. Anne’s father is now short of money and forced to rent his house to Wentworth’s sister and brother-in-law (the Crofts) while Wentworth has been made rich by his success in the war. His newfound wealth makes him a desirable match in society, and Wentworth is now continually sought after by many pretty young women. Anne is now forced to watch as the man she rejected, but still passionately loves is constantly flattered by admirers in front of her.

Persuasion’s plot buds as Anne and Wentworth’s mutual affection is in danger of being once again severed (this time forever) by Lady Russell’s persuasion and Wentworth’s seemingly fond attachment to an eager admirer. Almost eight years after their engagement has ended, the two main characters must now re-endure the same struggles of their childhood. Faced with the same decisions, Anne must determine to assert her strong passion for Wentworth and gain confidence in herself.

This novel was captivating. I hold it superior to all of Jane Austen’s prior works (even the much acclaimed P&P) in every aspect. Austen wasn’t the gloomy and brilliantly passionate writer that the Bronte’s were, but her use of irony was the best in the English language. She doesn’t fail to serve up another delicious helping of it in Persuasion. This book delves into the complexities of love and constancy. In a post I did a while ago, I explained that I didn’t enjoy Jane Austen’s novels as much because they often presented a lack of conflict for me. Persuasion, however, proves otherwise. Here, two characters are separated not only by the “usual” conflicts of society, but by time itself. Time is a pretty rigid antagonist.

Comments are always welcome. For all of those who haven’t read the novel (which I doubt isn’t that many), put it at the top of your reading list. It’s hard not to enjoy this book. The irony is (as always) entertaining, and literary devices are always in abundance whenever you’re reading Jane Austen. This is not just a simple romance, but a beautifully written work of art. This is Jane Austen at her best. It’s a shame that it had to be her last.

                                                                        --Bonnie
P.S. As always, I normally follow up a book review with a review of it's adaptions. Just for your viewing pleasure, here is Sally Hawkins (aka Mrs. Reed 2011) playing Anne and Rupert Penry-Jones (SWWOOOONNN) as Wentworth.