Whenever I read a book, especially a really long one, I find myself completely absorbed and engaged. The world around me fades away, and all that exists are the words on the page. Occasionally I'll emerge, aware of the people talking around me, but my mind still occupied with the events of that faraway world that only exists in my--and the author's--imagination. But always I'll return, and read late into the night--repeating the mantra "just one more chapter" until my eyelids refuse to stay open. Nothing can take me away from my goal. I must finish. I must find out what happens. And eventually, I'll reach the final page, where the words don't reach the bottom and the blank space takes me by surprise. And I finally emerge, bleary-eyed, and look up at the world around me with a listless feeling. What now? I wonder. The next day, at my usual reading time, I sit down on the couch, ready to reach towards the coffee table to pick up what has been my most recent companion for the last week, only to remember that there's no more to read. It is finished.
For awhile, I'm not ready to start the next one, as the after-images of the last novel are still fading around me. The mystery and wonder of whatever world the author created has left an imprint on my mind, and I'm not yet ready to move on to a new place.
But eventually, the urge will come again. Something must be read. And a return to the library begins the process anew.
Friday, November 25, 2011
The Three Musketeers Does Not Need Explosions
A review of the novel and comparison of movie and book.
The 2011 film adaptation of The Three Musketeers begins with an exciting adventure in Venice during which the three Musketeers and Milady steal blueprints for an airship. There's lots of sneaking and bullet dodging, and it's absolutely ridiculous. Aside from the fact that a corset does not exactly allow for the flexibility Milady displays, there is no reason that The Three Musketeers needs this extra over-dramatization because the plot is exciting enough on its own.
I was finally persuaded to pick up the novel after seeing this most recent film adaptation of Dumas swashbuckling novel. The movie, ridiculous as it was, inspired me to read the book mainly to see just how off base it might be, although several people had recommended the book to me in the past.
Admittedly, it took a long time to read. It is 700 pages long, after all, which is no Count of Monte Cristo but still fairly formidable. Despite the length of time it took, it is undoubtedly a page turner and I spent many a night staying up past my bed time just to read "one more chapter" (which often turned into two, three, maybe even four...).
The plot has fencing, romance, intrigue, mystery, betrayal and even historical elements (which actually feature prominently as major plot points). I was surprised how brief the fencing scenes actually were. They were pretty much a one and done kind of deal, although this is probably much more realistic than long, drawn out sword fights. Any fan of history and any fan of action adventure will find themselves readily absorbed into the novel.
Athos is additionally smart, reserved, and has that quiet mysterious air that always makes for an interesting character. Actually, apparently many people like Athos the most of the four protagonists.
On the other hand, Dumas' representation of women is rather disappointing. Milady, while very intelligent, is conniving, evil and deadly. There are even a few scenes where Dumas suggests she has a man's soul in a woman's frail body. When her temper flairs, it is on the excuse that she is a woman, after all. Meanwhile, Madame Bonacieux, while giving somewhat of the impression that she is smart in the beginning of the novel, becomes incredibly, frustratingly stupid by the end.
There are obvious parts of the movie that require one to answer "No" to this question -- liking the flying airship. No, Dumas did not include a flying airship or a booby trapped library, and Milady was on no accounts supposed to be athletic and agile. However, I was surprised by how many things were close to the book. The movie actually only covers about a third of the novel, making me wonder if they have sequels planned.
They did substantially alter Milady and Athos' back story, which apparently seems to be a frequent thing to do and is rather frustrating. I don't understand the need to de-villify Milady's character. For example, in the book, she is forced by Athos to hand over the Cardinal's slip of paper that gives her the ability to do whatever she needs to do. In the movie, she hands it over to him freely, for no apparent reason that I could discern.
Also the movie removed the affair between the Queen and the Duke of Buckingham, and instead made the relationship between the King and Queen more like two bumbling teenagers hesitant of the other's emotions. As someone who hadn't read the books, I did actually like that subplot, although it is not really true to the novel.
The final thing to be said is that The Three Musketeers is fun enough already and does not need Hollywood's over dramatizations, like flying air ships and booby trapped libraries. It doesn't need extravagant action scenes with large explosions. Hollywood would do better to stay true to the novel.
I was finally persuaded to pick up the novel after seeing this most recent film adaptation of Dumas swashbuckling novel. The movie, ridiculous as it was, inspired me to read the book mainly to see just how off base it might be, although several people had recommended the book to me in the past.
Admittedly, it took a long time to read. It is 700 pages long, after all, which is no Count of Monte Cristo but still fairly formidable. Despite the length of time it took, it is undoubtedly a page turner and I spent many a night staying up past my bed time just to read "one more chapter" (which often turned into two, three, maybe even four...).
About The Three Musketeers
Dumas' popular swashbuckling tale was originally published in a serial format in 1844 from March to July. It is set in seventeenth century France and features many prominent historical figures, including King Louis XIII, his wife Anne of Austria, Cardinal Richelieu and the English Duke of Buckingham.
As a writer, I find it important to ask certain questions about novels which I love. The main one here is--what makes The Three Musketeers such a page turner, even centuries after which it has been written? The core of the answer is the plot, but having interesting characters is also an integral part of the recipe. For myself, I would also add that the language, or the narrative style with which the book is written, is also a key ingredient, but that may simply be due to my own personal partiality towards classical literature, which might not be found in today's common reader. These three components--plot, character, and language--are those which I find necessary in any truly good novel.
Dumas' popular swashbuckling tale was originally published in a serial format in 1844 from March to July. It is set in seventeenth century France and features many prominent historical figures, including King Louis XIII, his wife Anne of Austria, Cardinal Richelieu and the English Duke of Buckingham.
Plot
The book is fast paced, despite the length, and full of intrigue and mystery that practically turns the pages for you. Anyone familiar with any Musketeer movie will recognize the general plot set up: D'Artagnan, young and ambitious, heads from his home to Paris to become a Musketeer, and adventure ensues. In Paris, he runs into Athos, Porthos and Aramis by accident and, having offended each of them, challenges them to successive duels. Impressed by his swordsmanship, the three ended up taking D'Artagan in as one of their own, acting as mentors and friends. Meanwhile Cardinal Richelieu plots a scandal to dishonor the Queen, which the Musketeers attempt to foil. As enemies of the Cardinal and as members of the King's musketeers, there is always enough adventure to be found.The plot has fencing, romance, intrigue, mystery, betrayal and even historical elements (which actually feature prominently as major plot points). I was surprised how brief the fencing scenes actually were. They were pretty much a one and done kind of deal, although this is probably much more realistic than long, drawn out sword fights. Any fan of history and any fan of action adventure will find themselves readily absorbed into the novel.
Characters
The characters are interesting, something I always look for in a novel, movie, or TV show. D'Artagnan, who apparently is typically made out to be more of a lucky, bumbling hero (a la Harry Potter?) is actually quite clever and quite the strategist--necessary attributes for one who wishes to compete with Milady and live. Well, he would have to be, as he is based on the real lieutenant of the Musketeers.Athos is additionally smart, reserved, and has that quiet mysterious air that always makes for an interesting character. Actually, apparently many people like Athos the most of the four protagonists.
On the other hand, Dumas' representation of women is rather disappointing. Milady, while very intelligent, is conniving, evil and deadly. There are even a few scenes where Dumas suggests she has a man's soul in a woman's frail body. When her temper flairs, it is on the excuse that she is a woman, after all. Meanwhile, Madame Bonacieux, while giving somewhat of the impression that she is smart in the beginning of the novel, becomes incredibly, frustratingly stupid by the end.
Language
Even translated, the narration was beautiful and compelling (and of course, makes me want to read more classic novels. The way they wrote back then was like art). Actually, I plan to touch more on the language in another post. I happened to have picked up several copies of The Three Musketeers, so I got to choose which translation I liked best, which made me realize how important it is to find a good translation.Movie vs Book
Of course, there is still one very important thing left to consider, my whole reason for reading the novel in the first place. Was the 2011 adaptation loyal to the book?There are obvious parts of the movie that require one to answer "No" to this question -- liking the flying airship. No, Dumas did not include a flying airship or a booby trapped library, and Milady was on no accounts supposed to be athletic and agile. However, I was surprised by how many things were close to the book. The movie actually only covers about a third of the novel, making me wonder if they have sequels planned.
They did substantially alter Milady and Athos' back story, which apparently seems to be a frequent thing to do and is rather frustrating. I don't understand the need to de-villify Milady's character. For example, in the book, she is forced by Athos to hand over the Cardinal's slip of paper that gives her the ability to do whatever she needs to do. In the movie, she hands it over to him freely, for no apparent reason that I could discern.
Also the movie removed the affair between the Queen and the Duke of Buckingham, and instead made the relationship between the King and Queen more like two bumbling teenagers hesitant of the other's emotions. As someone who hadn't read the books, I did actually like that subplot, although it is not really true to the novel.
The final thing to be said is that The Three Musketeers is fun enough already and does not need Hollywood's over dramatizations, like flying air ships and booby trapped libraries. It doesn't need extravagant action scenes with large explosions. Hollywood would do better to stay true to the novel.
Notes: Because The Three Musketeers is a classic novel and the copyright has run out, you can usually download it for free on an ebook reader. You can also find The Three Musketeers at Project Gutenberg.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Bones' Season Seven Kicks Off to Fantastic Start
The verdict is in: the wait was worth it. Bones' season seven opener, The Memories in the Shallow Grave, was awesome.
Fans have waited for over five months since the season six finale, when Bones announced she was pregnant with Booth's baby. The season cliffhanger was probably the biggest in Bones history, and also happened to precede the longest wait between seasons in Bones history.
During the episode, fans tweeted their favorite quotes and moments, some of which include:
But enough about the fans -- IMHO, tonight's episode of Bones was awesome, and reminded me exactly why I love the series. Last year, I felt the series kind of floundered a bit, with a poor opening to season six and a mixed-up attempt to launch a spin-off series. Getting a strong opening like this couldn't have been more pleasing.
Bones and Booth were adorable, especially in the beginning of the episode, when they were making breakfast at Booth's. Their subsequent fight about moving in together fits in with Bones' character, and was a necessary tool to demonstrate her character development. She's come a long way since Season 1. Once upon a time she said she could never commit to a relationship, and yet here she is, saying, "I love you," and shopping for houses.
I will be honest, I can name some negatives. As far as the murder plot line goes, the show has becoming aggravatingly formulaic (I suppose all crime scene investigation shows do). I will admit that last season there was an episode or two that got outside the formula, but for the most part, every episode opens with an average citizen who stumbles upon a body. How often does that happen in real life? It would be pretty scarring. Then, we are introduced to two people who were close to the victim. Given their close relationship, they are questioned, but not seriously considered as suspects (or if they are, they are quickly dismissed). One of those two people is ultimately the killer. Obviously due to the one-hour time constraint, there's a limited plot structure. It would be silly to reveal who the murderer was too early. But it does get a little boring when you can predict who it was from the beginning.
Some fans also expressed confusion about the quickness with which Bones and Booth got together. Admittedly, it was subtle and fast. There was no dramatic realization and rush to kiss type of scene. Maybe this is disappointing to some, but I like it. It's Good. Let's break the formula.
Season Seven Predictions
It's going to be interesting to see how the writers navigate Booth and Bones' relationship as the season progresses. It's unusual for the main couple to get together before the end of a series. I love that they've done that in Bones. Not just because it's pleasant to see one of my favorite fictional couples get together, but because it's different from the typical TV show formula, and that's good. Mixing things up is good. Maybe the individual episode structure is formulaic, but the overall series structure is stepping away from the traditional way of TV story telling. Huzzah.
Plus, it allows the writers to explore different areas of tension in a relationship. Typically, the series would end with the couple getting together. And then what? Fans never get to see them being happy together. The pre-relationship tension is interesting, but so is actually making the relationship work. And this time, we get to see that. Because Bones isn't just going to be like "yay, Booth and I are together, now I will completely change and be a happy housewife." She's still Bones, there's still going to be conflict, and it's still going to be interesting.
I still predict that Hannah will return - Booth & Hannah's relationship was too serious and ended too abruptly. I think she'll be back.
Overall, it was a great return to the series, and has me excited to see where this season will take us.
Fans have waited for over five months since the season six finale, when Bones announced she was pregnant with Booth's baby. The season cliffhanger was probably the biggest in Bones history, and also happened to precede the longest wait between seasons in Bones history.
During the episode, fans tweeted their favorite quotes and moments, some of which include:
- "I'm not normal, I'm extraordinary." Bones
- "She is having that baby so the next generation have someone to make them feel dumb."- Wendell
- "I love you." Bones to Booth!
But enough about the fans -- IMHO, tonight's episode of Bones was awesome, and reminded me exactly why I love the series. Last year, I felt the series kind of floundered a bit, with a poor opening to season six and a mixed-up attempt to launch a spin-off series. Getting a strong opening like this couldn't have been more pleasing.
Bones and Booth were adorable, especially in the beginning of the episode, when they were making breakfast at Booth's. Their subsequent fight about moving in together fits in with Bones' character, and was a necessary tool to demonstrate her character development. She's come a long way since Season 1. Once upon a time she said she could never commit to a relationship, and yet here she is, saying, "I love you," and shopping for houses.
I will be honest, I can name some negatives. As far as the murder plot line goes, the show has becoming aggravatingly formulaic (I suppose all crime scene investigation shows do). I will admit that last season there was an episode or two that got outside the formula, but for the most part, every episode opens with an average citizen who stumbles upon a body. How often does that happen in real life? It would be pretty scarring. Then, we are introduced to two people who were close to the victim. Given their close relationship, they are questioned, but not seriously considered as suspects (or if they are, they are quickly dismissed). One of those two people is ultimately the killer. Obviously due to the one-hour time constraint, there's a limited plot structure. It would be silly to reveal who the murderer was too early. But it does get a little boring when you can predict who it was from the beginning.
Some fans also expressed confusion about the quickness with which Bones and Booth got together. Admittedly, it was subtle and fast. There was no dramatic realization and rush to kiss type of scene. Maybe this is disappointing to some, but I like it. It's Good. Let's break the formula.
Season Seven Predictions
It's going to be interesting to see how the writers navigate Booth and Bones' relationship as the season progresses. It's unusual for the main couple to get together before the end of a series. I love that they've done that in Bones. Not just because it's pleasant to see one of my favorite fictional couples get together, but because it's different from the typical TV show formula, and that's good. Mixing things up is good. Maybe the individual episode structure is formulaic, but the overall series structure is stepping away from the traditional way of TV story telling. Huzzah.
Plus, it allows the writers to explore different areas of tension in a relationship. Typically, the series would end with the couple getting together. And then what? Fans never get to see them being happy together. The pre-relationship tension is interesting, but so is actually making the relationship work. And this time, we get to see that. Because Bones isn't just going to be like "yay, Booth and I are together, now I will completely change and be a happy housewife." She's still Bones, there's still going to be conflict, and it's still going to be interesting.
I still predict that Hannah will return - Booth & Hannah's relationship was too serious and ended too abruptly. I think she'll be back.
Overall, it was a great return to the series, and has me excited to see where this season will take us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)