‘The Fall’ or ‘Ways to make your eyes hug your brain #1’

(Possible spoilers for the 2006 film ‘The Fall’)

 

How often do you watch a film and not give two hoots about the plot because it’s SO PRETTY? I almost never do, but The Fall is a film which achieves this with ease. That’s not to say that the plot isn’t good – it is – but frankly the cinematography is so beautiful that it wouldn’t matter if it were terrible.

Released in 2006, there was very little fuss or advertising for this film, and yet it really should be considered a classic. Shot in more than 20 countries, the plot centres on the story being told by a man to a small girl as they convalesce in a hospital. What is particularly clever about this is that while it is the man who is narrating, it is the girl’s imagination we are seeing into, and so what she sees is coloured by her experiences. This leads to an occasional dichotomy between the narrative and the visuals, but subtly so, necessitating a certain level of focus to prevent slight confusion.

So yes, the plot is interesting, but as previously mentioned it’s the visuals which really set this film apart. From the first shot of the ‘story’, the film is a smorgasbord of stunning images – vast deserts, endless mazes, a particularly beautawful (not a word, but appropriate here) scene involving a sheet – and by the film’s conclusion you almost have retina burn from the expressive-contrasty goodness. It’s so pretty that I’ve apparently forgotten how to use words.

So if you feel like treating your eyeballs, go watch The Fall. Hopefully you’ll enjoy it as much as I did.

Much Ado about Whedon

“I’m bored. Let’s make a film.”

If most of us said that the result would probably be… less than stellar. When Joss Whedon does it? Let’s say that I’ve just spent the best part of two hours squeeing – in a very manly fashion, of course (and if you believe that you’ve clearly never heard an actual squee).

I should probably clarify that I’ve lately watched Joss Whedon’s version of Much Ado About Nothing. And yes, Whedon and Shakespeare really do go as well together as any rabid Whedonite would claim. Shot over a fortnight in Joss Whedon’s house, the film is a black and white spectacle, set in the present day but using the original Shakespearean script, and could also be described as a who’s who of the actors the director apparently keeps in his basement. I recognise almost all of the principal cast from Whedon’s other projects, and indeed given that the couple the film centres on are portrayed by Amy Acker and Alexis Denisof, one gets the feeling that the film is a nod to the closure that fans of Angel never got.

Actually, that’s not a bad idea. Excuse me while I update my headcanon.

If you’ve not seen Angel, not to worry, Much Ado is completely worth watching; Shakespeare is inevitably worthwhile, and this production is a shining example of how to do it right.

As a ‘rabid Whedonite’ myself, I also thoroughly enjoyed the opportunity to see his house (yes, the Architecture student is nosy about other people’s homes. Shocker.), which being in California is unsurprisingly Spanish Colonial in style. The walls of books get a thumbs-up, although there seems to be rather a large assortment of stairs in odd places. I’d look for floor plans but that might come across as creepy. And if you don’t give two hoots about architecture then you’re probably wondering why you’re still reading this.

So basically, go and watch this film now. If I’ve accidentally included spoilers then please accept my apologies, although since the play’s existed longer than you have I’m not sure anyone can really complain. Just like people who complained about being told Dobby died in the 7th Harry Potter film had no right to be upset since the books had been out for years. Yes, I’ve actually heard people complain about this. There’s Slowpoke is slow, and then there’s just plain ridiculous.

No go watch Whedonspeare. Go on. You have my permission to go.

Deary me, it’s been a while

Did you miss me? I missed you. All three people I’ve managed to browbeat into reading this nonsense – I know who you are, and I thank you.

So life happened. To be fair, considering that there have been times recently where I’ve been so busy that I haven’t slept in about 50 hours it’s not surprising the complete lack of updating I’ve done to this blog.  Yes, I’m trying to justify not posting more. Again. Don’t judge me.

But that’s done with for a few months, so here comes regular posting (I hope). No seriously, I’m really going to try and update at least once a week. Let’s see how this goes, shall we?

Oh, and I haven’t done much typing for weeks so I fully expect the standard of my English to be terrible. Please do point out errors, I really need the help.

The catharsis of writing: I cannot brain today, I has the dumb

It would appear that selective amnesia may have been occurring recently, causing me to forget that the original aim of this blog was to exercise my grammatical skills. I’ve been reading over my previous posts and noticed that I’ve been making up words right left and centre. Apparently, I get so caught up in offering my opinion that I forget the underlying reason for writing it down.

That said, since I’m enjoying rambling nonsensically, I may choose to let this issue go. As someone whose mentality could be described as ‘linguistically focused’, I find the process of writing highly cathartic, particularly when I am under pressure. I’m almost coming to look at it as a muggle’s pensieve, as it allows me to essentially externalise thoughts and points of focus which have been taking up valuable mental real estate.

A more logical explanation is obviously that writing simply allows me to focus on a particular subject to the extent that I can block out the background static, but the result is the same. I vent, and in the words of Hugh Bonneville’s character on 2012 ‘so that’s all good’.

Since this post has become a little… preachy… I’ll sum it up with a meme reference. ‘I cannot brain today, I has the dumb’ is a brilliant phrase which sums up some days perfectly, and which I’ve found can sometimes be rectified by writing something of no relevance to anything.

All that said, if I make any particularly egregious errors in my grammar/spelling/syntax, please do comment with a proposed correction.

 

Finally, I’m pleased to point out that I’ve managed an entire post without utilising parentheses. So maybe there’s hope for me yet.

Excuse me, authors, but would you mind giving us closure?

Another book-related post.  Be warned that it contains spoilers from ‘Inheritance’, the final novel in the ‘Inheritance Cycle’ by Christopher Paolini, and ‘The Last Guardian’, the grand finale to Eoin Colfer’s fantastic ‘Artemis Fowl’ series. There, fair warning. You can’t say I’m unreasonable.

I’ve recently been contemplating the incapability of some authors to leave their readers satisfied… ok, you got me. I’m just grumpy about finishing several series in a short space of time, and venting to reduce the withdrawal symptoms.

I make no secret of the fact that I’m a fan of happy endings. At the end of a series I even continue the storyline on in my head to achieve this. It’s for this reason that I refuse to read the ‘Buffy Season 8’ graphic novels, despite the fact that they’re officially canon, because I have happy endings for all nicely sorted out in my head, thank you very much. It involves a fair amount of debt on the behalf of the Powers That Be and hence the resurrection of several characters (sans repercussions, of course). And if you don’t like this, please vacate my headspace.

Of course, it doesn’t always have to be a happy ending. The Hunger Games isn’t an entirely happy ending, but then given everything the characters have been through, a blissfully happy ending would read as false. Or a hijacking of the text by an outside entity.  (See ‘My Immortal’, where some genius broke into the author’s account and killed off all of the characters. Apparently. I’ve never been able to read that far.) What’s important is that the story is given a true ending. As a reader, not only have essentially all of your questions been answered, you feel that the plot has come to a conclusion, and while you may be sad to say farewell to the characters, you are aware that you have reached a natural parting of the ways.

This is the skill of a good author – to leave the reader satisfied, if wistful for more. Which is why it is so vexing when an author fails to do this. I am, of course, talking about the ‘ending’ to Christopher Paolini’s Inheritance Cycle, although ‘brick wall’ would also be an accurate description. We knew from early on in the series that Eragon would be leaving Alagaesia forever, so we were prepared for that bit of depressing plot. What I’m annoyed about is the complete lack of a resolution of Eragon and Arya’s feelings for one another. There was a complete tease in the first book that suggested that they’d leave together, which left the author with no choice but to include that scene in the final book, before Arya returns to her people. In all fairness, it’s perhaps more realistic that the series should end this way, but then it is a fantasy series. Realism is not its purpose.

Still, I could allow a nice bit of poignancy if it weren’t for Angela. We are given almost no explanation as to whom or indeed what she is, and given that she is far and away the most interesting character, I actually screamed at this. To add insult to injury, Paolini states in the acknowledgments that many readers would like an explanation, but that it is ‘more interesting’ if we don’t get to find out, to which I have to call foul (I actually threw the book across the room – something I would never ordinarily do). It actually comes across as laziness on the part of the writer, but that’s just my opinion. If he were planning to write a separate book about her origins, I could understand, since it’s perfectly acceptable for authors to leave hints lying around their works that lead to a further series down the line. Just look to ‘the Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel’ for an example of this.

If, however, you plan on leaving a series permanently, then please take a leaf out of Eoin Colfer’s book. I realise that ‘the Last Guardian’ has only just been published, and as such Paolini couldn’t follow this directive, but all the same, there are a few authors who really should take note of this. Colfer provides the reader with a definite conclusion, leaving us in no doubt as to his stance on writing another book, but he does it in such a way as to leave us satisfied. In all fairness, he hasn’t always done this. The ‘Eternity Code’ was meant to be the final Fowl adventure, and it ended with the titular antihero having his mind wiped of all knowledge of the people. This made me grumpy. Of course, Colfer proceeded to write several more Fowl books, and now that the series has come to an end he has left at least one reader satisfied. I might have preferred a slightly different ending, but all in all it was very well done, and I have no desire to fetch a wet fish with which to strike someone.

So there you have it. Give us closure or beware my wrath and suchlike. Or if it’s a choice between a happy ending and having questions answered, at least make sure to choose one rather than taking the curmudgeonly option of ‘neither’.

A (very) belated hello to you, Geek and Sundry

The Internet has launched its newest salvo in the ‘no, you don’t need a television, just watch things online’ campaign. Felicia Day, (actress, musician, writer, producer, probable web deity – the list goes on, mother nature having apparently forgotten that she’s meant to share out the gifts) has launched a new Youtube channel, entitled ‘Geek and Sundry’ (loving the name, by the way). Apparently this is part of Google’s new web talent drive or something, but whatever the cause, the end result has been the creation of the equivalent of a television channel on the interwebs.

Though actually launched at Easter, time constraints on my part have meant that I’ve only just been able to start watching its content. And yes, it’s been difficult for me to restrain myself (cue tiny violin).

The channel consists of about five shows, with a new episode of each being uploaded on a set day of the week. On Mondays there is ‘the Flog’ (a Felicia Day vlog), wherein the web goddess takes part in various activities such a playing retro games, cooking and trying out various things she’s done in games e.g. blacksmithing. For anyone who’s played many RPGs, this is highly entertaining. She also lists a weekly ‘fave five’ – basically five new things she’s obsessing over online.

Other shows include ‘Sword and Laser’, which is essentially a book club, ‘Tabletop’, which is about tabletop games (duh), and cartoons based on Dark Horse comics.

Of course, while all of the shows are great (especially ‘the Flog’, which has introduced me to many fascinating new things), my real interest is ‘the Guild’, Ms Day’s first web series, which is truly brilliant (and that you should really go and watch right now. Go on. Youtube is just moments away). Quite apart from being highly entertaining, I owe ‘the Guild’ a debt of gratitude in that it introduced me to ‘proper’ web TV – i.e. scripted comedies/dramas as opposed to ‘reality’ shows.

And so we come in a very roundabout manner to ‘H+’ and ‘the Lizzie Bennet Diaries’. The former is a sci-fi drama about a future where nanocomputers injected into the nervous system send data directly to the nerves so that you don’t need to lug around hardware to go online (it goes wrong). The latter is a modern-day adaptation of Pride and Prejudice presented as a vlog – it’s hilarious, and well worth watching, the more so if you are familiar with the plot, just to see how various characters are presented. Incidentally I discovered this because it was an early Flog ‘fave five’ item. I can completely see why.

Another recent discovery (again because it was a fave five item – and yes, I can think for myself, but I see no harm in checking out stuff which comes highly recommended) is ‘Looking for Group’, a web comic which has had me in stitches on several occasions. Again, you really should try reading it.

Should I be getting paid for this type of advertising?

 

So there you have it. A hearty thank you to Felicia Day for her contributions to the online community, and I leave you with a Looking for Group quote:

 

FOR PONY!!!!!!!

So apparently the universe reads my blog

No, I’m not conceitedly suggesting that this blog is the most popular thing on the web. I’m saying that whatever is in charge of everything, be it the universe as an intelligent entity, fate, some deity or other, or Sod (see ‘Sod’s Law’) was clearly paying attention when I said I had no idea how we’d cope without the internet. And clearly has a rather dry sense of humour.

Why, you ask?

Because for several weeks recently I was without Internet access. It sucked. I’m not saying this to excuse my lack of recent posts – there were a couple of months when I just didn’t get round to it (yes, I’m lazy. Sorry). I genuinely had several weeks without a proper internet connection, and it was crippling. Think about how many of the things you do EVERY DAY require internet access. Email, insurance, coursework submission, even just finding bloody directions – they’re all geared towards online activity. It certainly made life interesting. And by ‘interesting’ I really mean ‘inconvenient’.

But that’s over now. I have the interwebs again. And so much web TV to catch up on. More on that in the next post.

On an unrelated note, and as an addendum to the whole book/film adaptation rant, I’d like to say that ‘Game of Thrones’ is brilliant. I’ve only just started reading the book, but so far the TV show seems to have stuck very closely to the source material, so bravo HBO. Although they did add a lot more rape than there is in the book. Didn’t really want to see that, especially since my mum also happens to watch the show.

Excess nudity aside, it really does seem to be a good adaptation. Please film faster.

A treatise on the adaptation of books into films

For those who have read all of my posts it is probably obvious that I’m a little (over)protective of books. Since you’re still reading you clearly find this amusing, so here’s a rant about adapting books into films. It was fun to write.

Before I get to the fun complainy bit, I need to point out that adaptations CAN be done well, particularly if the author is involved. The Lord of The Rings movies are an excellent example of a good adaptation (and yes, I am aware that Tolkien is dead – the first time I picked up my dad’s copy of LOTR the bookmark was an article about the death of the author). They may not have covered everything in the book, but given that it’s a thousand-page tome, I think we can forgive this. In fact, the only detail in the whole set of extended editions that grates is when (SPOILER) Gandalf has his staff destroyed by the Witch King. WRONG! In the book it is clearly stated that Gandalf the White is the most powerful being in middle earth, ‘with the POSSIBLE exception of Sauron’. He doesn’t even blink when the Witch King turns up. But one inaccuracy for dramatic effect isn’t too bad of an offence.

The Hunger Games was another movie which deserves praise; despite how anally retentive I am about details, particularly within books I like, this was a movie which was done as well as it could possibly be done. It lacks some of the atmosphere of the book, and Katniss is a little too perfect as a character, but these are issues which would be bloody difficult to correct. The books are written in the first-person present (i.e. from inside Katniss’ head), so we understand her flaws as well as experiencing events directly. This would be difficult to achieve in a film without becoming gimmicky, so I’ve let it go.

On the side of ‘adaptations gone wrong’ I could cite the Harry Potter films as an example of mistake upon mistake, but that would require the same number of pages as are present in all seven books. And half that number again to bitch about the quality of Daniel Radcliffe’s acting – I mean come on, he has about three variations on the same expression. In all fairness, I would like to say that the final two films were significantly better than their predecessors since the increased screen time allowed for more detail to be put into the films. Having said that, the plot was split in the wrong place – there wasn’t nearly enough book left for the final film, so they had to extend the final fight scenes ridiculously, when it was meant to be a single spell (and a lot of talking to demonstrate that Voldemort was really just a man).

And then we have Eragon and the travesty of an adaptation that was the Percy Jackson film. Where the Eragon film clearly didn’t believe in taking visual details from the book (Arya has dark hair, NOT blonde – a basic detail on about the second page – and Angela is middle aged and decidedly down to earth – not, no offence to Joss Stone, some spangly apparition in sequins), the Percy Jackson film didn’t even seem to believe in reading the sodding book. As a Percy Jackson aficionado, I take it as a personal affront when about the only detail they got right was the titular character’s hair colour. Pah. While watching the film I actually wanted to strike those responsible across the face with a wet fish. Maybe a bass. Or a Great White shark. Still alive. Teeth first.

But what about the Twilight Saga, I hear you ask? Well, as much as I hate to admit it, the films have a single point in their favour – they are very true to the books. The problem here is that the source material is itself shocking, something which also vexes me. The basic concept of the series, while unoriginal, is interesting in that Meyer created her own version of the vampire mythology. Yes, the sparkling is tacky, and if I had to nominate a particular ‘type’ of vampire to be the ‘correct’ one, I would of course choose those originating in the Buffyverse. Nevertheless, Twilight could have been a halfway decent novel if it had been just that – a novel, not a quartet. There isn’t enough mileage in the idea to merit four books, and so we got three books of whining and a single book of actual plot. Which of course makes the separation of the fourth book into two films completely unnecessary – essentially nothing other than an Alien reference happens in the first half, with everything of actual interest occurring in part two.

It’s at this point that I realise I’ve diverged from my topic, and am dangerously close to devoting an entire post to Twishite, so I’d better wrap things up here. In conclusion I’d like to say that since adapting books for film is such a delicate task, more care should really be taken to get simple details right. Hey, I could do that. Anyone want to offer me a job?

Why Suzanne Collins deserves a hug

You knew it was coming. I mentioned right in my first post – you can check if you like, I’ll wait – that I love the Hunger Games. The trilogy is actually my favourite set of books EVER, which coming from me is a surprising accolade as I can rarely choose a favourite anything for fear of causing offence. To inanimate objects. No, I don’t understand it either.

From the very first page of the Hunger Games I was hooked. I’d found a copy in the school library that was covered in red paint (an appropriate image, considering the subject matter), picked it up out of curiosity, and started to read. Within a paragraph I was intrigued. At the end of the second I withdrew it from the library. At the end of the page I ran screaming downstairs to find my other bibliophile friend to demand that she also read it. The response

“I already have it! The second is being released next week!!!”

had me in paroxysms of joy, and I immediately demanded to be second in the reading queue.

I should perhaps explain that our friendship is based on books – she lent me ‘The Looking Glass Wars’ when we barely knew each other, and we cemented our friendship with our mutual fury at the idea that people fold the pages of books (full details censored).

So I inhaled the first two books, and then waited in agony for months until the third was released, at which time I read it in an afternoon. By the end of ‘Mockingjay’ I was an emotional wreck. The sheer horror of what occurs to Katniss and the other characters, coupled with Suzanne Collins’ highly emotive style of writing (and believable flaws in the characters) results in a plot so gripping I literally couldn’t tear myself away. And (SPOILER ALERT) then there was possibly the best final line ever –

“There are worse games to play.”

which left me shell-shocked.

And so Suzanne Collins is one of my favourite people. On my scale of ‘inappropriate actions to take when confronted with a roomful of celebrities’, which at the low end includes beating certain authors with a shovel, she ranks at the high end, meaning that I would like to give her a hug while bawling out an unintelligible ‘thank you’ for her contribution to literature.

For those who are wondering, the cover/header photo is of a volcanoed marshmallow I had in Guatemala. Delicious.

Oh Internet, I do love you (even if you are taking over my life)

A few weeks ago, Wikipedia locked out its English-language pages in protest of SOPA/PIPA/ACTA (or whatever acronym is being used for those idiotic proposals). I was aware that this had happened. And yet, no fewer than FIVE times in an hour, my brain provided me with a random question, and I thought ‘no problem, I’ll just Wikipedia it’. And then I’d get to Wikipedia, see that horrific black screen, and remember.

This got me thinking – how on earth did we cope before the internet? I know we managed it, I remember being very excited when we first got it at home. And yet, I can’t seem to get my head around life prior to having access to the web.

Alright, I was probably only six years old at the time, if something of a precocious child. That may sound conceited, but given my insatiable curiosity and penchant for reading, I’m not quite sure how else to describe myself – apart from annoying, which is less than flattering. But I digress. As usual. The point I’m trying to make (in an admittedly roundabout way) is that, as a 90s child, I was around prior to the presence of the internet in every home, but am unable to conceive of what life was like without near-instant access to the sum of human knowledge. And illiterate cats with an apparent ‘cheezburger’ addiction.

Oh yes, I’m wittering about Lolcats. An internet phenomenon, one of which I have grown a little bored. Not that I’m complaining, you see it is thanks to Lolcats that I am aware of the Cheezburger Network, with its child site, Memebase. This brilliant website (hosted right here on wordpress – shameless plug) has given me many hours of mirth, from images of Angelina Jolie captioned with the phrase

“Kidnapping? I prefer the term ‘surprise adoption’.”

to the genius of Ragecomics and Demotivational posters. It’s a rare day that I don’t go on the cheezburger network, which I should perhaps be worried about, but then other people spend endless hours on Facebook, so maybe half an hour of laughter isn’t too bad.

And this is just the tip of the proverbial, planet-sized iceberg. Youtube is another dangerous website – you go on it intending to watch one video, and two hours later you’ve managed to get from a music video to farmers in wales herding fairylighted sheep into clever shapes on a hillside. I’m not kidding, this has happened to me – and, I suspect, to you. I should think that most of us have Wikipediaed (not a word, but given the addition of ‘to google’ as a verb into the dictionary, it could only be a matter of time) Protogenoi (primordial Greek gods), and half an hour later have found ourselves inexplicably reading an article about knitting, with absolutely no idea how we got there. No? Just me? Check your history the next time you use Wikipedia. You may be surprised.

In summation, the internet is brilliant. It revolutionised the way society functions. Given that this is a blog, I suspect that my opinion on the subject has been obvious from the start. But it bears repeating – I honestly don’t know how society would function if we lost the whole internet tomorrow. Let’s hope we don’t find out, or millions of people may start getting lolcat withdrawal symptoms.

As a postscript, I promise to try to reign in my use of parentheses. There were a few sentences in this one where I actually wanted to have sub-bracketed sections. Happily I managed to resist that urge. Because that way lies confusion and brain-meltyness. Also known as Further Pure maths.