Books Made into Movie: The Hunger Games

Okay, I do know what you're thinking. Yes, I just saw The Hunger Games at 1:30 today, or, 2, since there's a freaking half hour of previews. Speaking of the previews, I have two things I cannot resist mentioning. Thing the first: why are Edward and Bella all disgusting in the sun together and not sparkly? Thing the second: in what topsy-turvy universe is Kristen Stewart more attractive than Charlize Theron? Summation of my thoughts of the previews: Kristen Stewart = THE WORST. She ruins everything.

 Charlize looks so shocked, because the mirror has clearly just told her an April Fools' joke.

 Which would you choose?

So back to The Hunger Games. Anyway, I had my reasons for waiting to see it, which I won't bore you with now. Having waited so long, I did have a slight idea what to expect, despite having tried to avoid reviews like the bubonic plague. Basically, I heard it was pretty faithful to the book, and that the worst part was all of the shaky camera-work.

To a large degree, I agree with what has already been said, but I do still feel the need to put my own analysis out into the blogosphere. I guess a good place to start is with the biggest complaint, the shaky camera technique which big use is made of. While I do not like shaky camera, I do think they did a good job with it. What was cool about it was that the camera was only shaky in District 12 and in the arena. In the Capitol it was nice and smooth, which really makes a nice commentary on how different the Capitol is from the other locations. If it had been shaky throughout, I would not have been so happy.

As to changes, I only noticed two major ones, both of which I think are at least decent changes to make. Likely, I missed some, as I read the book three years ago and my memory is awful. The first change was that Katniss 'purchased' the mockingjay pin in the movie, whereas, in the book, she was gifted the pin by a girl in her class, the mayor's daughter. I don't remember the girl's name even, and do not feel moved to look it up. This was a good change. There's no reason to introduce this girl's character for the film, since she wouldn't serve any other purpose.

The second scene, which I am both glad and a bit disappointed that they changed, was at the very end. In the book, the dogs that are released when there are just a couple of tributes left are clearly the already deceased tributes. This was so effing creepy. Creepy like whoa. In the movie, they're just scary dog monsters, which greatly resemble the Wolves of Isengard sans fur. I'm glad I didn't have to see the weird people dogs, and I can see why that might be tricky to get across to the part of the audience which had not read the book, but was also a bit saddened to see such a large deviation, especially since it will matter later...again.

This...only less furry. Maybe a less bat-like nose.

Now, the actors. Basically, I thought they all did a pretty fantastic job. There certainly wasn't anyone that ruined it for me. The worst choice, in my opinion, would be Gale, since he was not as attractive as he was in my head, but he was alright. Peeta actually really worked for me, but may have been a disappointment to some of the Team Peeta folks, since he was both quite short and not especially attractive. He did, however, look fairly like how I imagined Peeta, although I think my Peeta had curly hair, although that may have been of my own devising. Really, I haven't heard too much about the casting, except about Katniss and Rue.

Speaking of Katniss and Rue, WTF were people smoking when they complained? Many folks have mentioned that Jennifer Lawrence was too skinny to play Katniss. I think that's BS. Lawrence did a really good job, both with being cold and being emotional. She certainly isn't fat, but she's not a stick either. What meat she does have on her bones is clearly muscle. Honestly, the Katniss in my head was muscular and skinny, so she did a pretty great job. People who thought she would be fatter, think about how little the folks in District 12 had to eat, even those families lucky enough to have a hunter like Katniss or Gale. Note: even Katniss was starving at some points, like when Peeta gave her pig bread.

Tell her to her face she was too skinny. I dare you.

Amandla Stenberg has received some hate...for being black. I don't want to belabor this point, which has been already made many times over, likely more succinctly and completely than I could hope to do, but I have to say something anyway. Rue is black in the book, so she should be in the movie. Not only that, but Stenberg was perfect. I hate children, and even I thought she was completely effing adorable. Also, Stenberg managed to pull off looking like a twelve-year-old that might stand a really slight chance of surviving. She was awesome, and that's all I needed to say.

That is one precious moppet.

I would also like to take a moment to applaud the fact that they didn't over-romanticize Peeta and Katniss. The cave scenes in the book were not especially romantic. And, thankfully, the full awkwardness of their predicament is captured in the movie. That really could have been a dealbreaker for me, if they had gotten that wrong.

The movie may have been a two and a half hours long, a full hour longer than the average film these days, but I was never bored and it did not feel that long. They definitely captured the most important aspects of the book and I do not feel at all betrayed (as I did by the Harry Potter movies, the last two of which I have not even watched). I'm not sure if this film would make sense to someone who did not already know the story from having read the book. If you have read the book, it's definitely worth a watch.

Books Made into Movies: The Color of Magic

Terry Pratchett fans will be thrilled to know that the film is every bit as nonsensical as the book. Additionally, this film has some pretty stellar casting, even if some of it does not seem to have been used to greatest effect. I'm also pretty sure the luggage does not get to be as much of a badass as in the book. Sadly.

Hey Look! It's the librarian

Sean Astin definitely looks the part of the tourist Twoflower. His outfit makes me laugh over and over again. And, of course, no one has a better sad face when he realizes that people have lied to him than Samwise, I mean Sean.

I shudder to think what fandom will make of this.

Other awesome actors to be found in this film are Tim Curry, Jeremy Irons and Christopher Lee (who voices Death...it's the role his voice was born to play). Obviously, this miniseries is likely never to be popular with any people who do not dearly love science fiction generally and, likely, Terry Pratchett particularly. Thus, I like to imagine that all of the people involved in this production chose to make this film because of their dear, dear love for the Discworld. This could be wrong, likely is, but I do not want to know.

Let's do the Time Warp so I can feel young again.

The book is definitely better, but, hey, it's fun to watch movies, and I think this is about as good as the movie could be. Honestly, a lot of things in Discworld are going to be hard to film well. For instance, the luggage is much more intimidating than it can ever look on a television. And the world, implausible as it sounds, is even harder to accept when you're watching water perpetually fall off the edges.

Books Made into Movies: The Republic of Love

I read and reviewed The Republic of Love just a few months back. Even so, my memory is such that I only remember the overarching story and am a bit hazy on the details. Thus, I cannot speak to anything but general points on how well this book was adapted.

I just love this banner.

The biggest problem, one that there really was no escaping, was that I just don't care for the guy they cast as Tom. He lacks some of the verve I expected from Tom and I also pictured Tom as being a bit more youthful. He's in his forties, but does he have to look every day of it? Fay, on the other hand, is completely lovely. She is adorable and could totally do way better than both Tom and her prior boyfriend. Then again, she is obsessed with mermaids.

His face is ugly, but at least he's in shape...

Speaking of the mermaids, there isn't much speaking of mermaids in the film version. The reason for cutting all of the information on her scholarly endeavors is an obvious one, but does make the film more of an out and out romance, rather than a women's fiction kind of deal similar to the work of Barbara Kingsolver and the like.

Here's why they cut the mermaid stuff: it's really creepy.

From a plot point of view, this film was pretty true to the book, from what I recall. Some of the elements seemed a bit disjointed, and I doubt I would have understood them, had I not vaguely remembered what was happening from having read the book. An example of this is Fay's relationship with Onion. The story made a decent film, but not one I see being popular with most viewers.

Books Made Into Movies: Practical Magic

I first saw Practical Magic not too long after it came out, although that viewing was not especially memorable. While I liked the movie, it didn't make much of an impression on me and, overall, I thought it was kind of silly. Then one night during my high school years, I watched it at about 2 AM and I was in the precise mood to watch it. Ever since, it has been dear to me.

Just from looking at the cover,
you can tell that it's kind of a bad movie...

As a movie, Practical Magic is a bit silly, a bit romantic and a bit scary. It's a good one for the period right before Halloween, a nice blend of comedic absurdity and drama. Plus witches. As an adaptation of the novel, the writers clearly took some liberties. Many, many alterations were made to the story, although the overarching drama of what to do with the body of Gillian's ex remains mostly the same.

The casting was pretty good, except that Gillian was supposed to be blonde.
Oh well. She acts like one.

The rest of this post will essentially be detailing the main changes made in adapting the book to film format. There will be some spoilers for the book, so I would recommend reading the book first, if you care.

• While it is true that Gillian and Sally were picked on as children, they became quite popular when they got to the age where kids start dating, because they're beautiful. This didn't happen so much in the movie.
• As children, Sally and Gillian vow never to fall in love. In the movie, Sally even goes so far to do a spell to make herself fall in love only with an impossible man, one that can't exist, thus making it impossible for her to meet him. This does not happen in the book at all.

If I am the perfect man, why am I so ugly?

• In the book, there are no midnight margaritas, which are the most awesome part of the film.

My friends and I actually do this. The question is:
why are we not doing this right now?!?

• Sally's first husband was not magicked up for her by the aunts, as claimed in the movie.
• Only the aunts really seem to do any actual magic. Most of the rest seems to be incidental. In the movie, however, they all do spells and actively have magical powers.

But at least in the movie, they can have one heck of a party with a corpse!

• The movie takes place almost entirely in the environs of the Aunts' house. However, in the book, Sally moves out and lives in a different state after the death of her first husband.
• In the movie, Sally's kids are young, both probably under 10; in the book, the youngest is 13.
• The Jimmy plot line was all accurate, up to the point where his spirit inhabits Gillian's body.
  

They probably added this so they could make sweaty Nicole Kidman writhe on the floor.

While a lot of changes were made, I do think the movie stays fairly true to the spirit of the novel. I really think the main departure in meaning they made was in having the magic be so much more of an intentional thing, rather than magic realism.

Btws, this never happens. What is this?

Books Made Into Movies: Wuthering Heights

The Masterpiece Theater Version (2009)

Before its expiration date on Netflix Watch Instantly, I made time to watch the Masterpiece Theater adaptation of the novel. I read the book during my junior year of college (for fun) and, despite almost all of the characters being completely despicable people, I really enjoyed it. The writing was beautiful and the story quite dramatic.

See. Look at those dramatic faces. Heathcliff has an excellent pout.

This adaptation, from what my pathetic memory can recall, does a really good job sticking to most of the salient points. The characters, for the most part, look just like what I had imagined them to, although I imagined Linton the elder being more sickly and ugly, but oh well. Heathcliff and Catherine did a great job, especially.

It's hard to hate Andrew Lincoln after his cuteness in Love Actually.

The biggest difference I noticed between the book and the movie is that they removed the frame story with the man who moves into the neighboring house and is told this story. Getting rid of this is a really good choice, because it really adds nothing to the tale and would likely just be boring and confusing for the film's audience.

Honestly, the reason I know they changed things, though I know not what, is that most of the characters were at least a little bit sympathetic at times, which they super were not in the novel. I'm pretty sure they glossed over a lot of the completely awful things Heathcliff did, especially as a child, instead focusing on the way he was abused by the other guy.

This movie ALMOST made me ship them.
But then I remember the crazy.

I am sure other things are missing, but, all in all, it seemed like a really good adaptation. It runs just about two and a half hours.

Books Made into Movies: Where Angels Fear to Tread

After a couple of months without a Books Made into Movies feature, I am suddenly on a roll. I read Where Angels Fear to Tread last year. Going into it, I was really excited, because I thought it sounded a bit like A Room with a View (my favorite movie and one of my favorite books, also by Forster), what with the English ladies going on vacation in Italy. It really puzzles me how E.M. Forster can write an incredibly beautiful, moving clever romance (A Room with a View) and also write a story where everything just keeps getting worse and worse all the time (Where Angels Fear to Tread). I did not much care for the book, and the movie was just the same.

Watching this movie may make you look this distressed.
That, or, being surrounded by chilluns, as happened to this poor lady.

Since there was a fair amount of time that passed between my reading and my viewing of the film, I can't speak to any specific details being correct or incorrect, but the gist of it was most definitely the same. One of the main thrusts of the novel is the appeal of the Italian man (Brief explanation: a widow goes to Italy with a cousin (?) and marries a much younger Italian man very quickly.). All of the Brits are at first opposed to him but are charmed by his simple Italian ways. Well, I'm not buying any of it. He is an abusive asshole and is not in the least okay.

For those who can't read it, the box says:
"Only one thing could come between Lilia and her Italian lover...her in-laws."
The copywriter clearly has never read this book or seen the movie.
Either that or they mixed this up with Monster-in-Law.

The ending of the film, and perhaps the book as well, was exceedingly awkward. It was fairly apparent that there was no good, satisfying way to wrap up this story. A number of the main characters are dead, so you're left with two people saying goodbye at a train station. Honestly, they're the only ones I kind of like, but they're obsessed with the Italian and will never get together (and I honestly do not remember if they are related, not that being cousins stopped folk back then).

If you like stories about how women lived terrible lives way back when, then you will love this. Marriage is bad, widowhood is bad, spinsterhood is bad, motherhood is bad. There's no escape. Actually, this is one of those stories where bad things happen so unremittingly that by the end I'm laughing at the absurdity of people's actions and the ridiculous accidents they cause.

Take my advice and watch A Room with a View instead. It's a better made movie too.

Now that's what I'm talking about.

Books Made into Movies: I Am Number Four

Generally, I do not write a review of a movie based on a book unless I have already read the book, since that allows me to do an evaluation of the adaptation that has been done. With that said, in all honesty, I have not read I Am Number Four. I read all of four pages and knew that there was no way I was going to be able to read it all; it was just that awful.

The movie was as terrible as I expected. Why did I watch it if I knew I wouldn't like it? Well, the preview that they showed during the long episode of Glee (because of Dianna Agron) looked bad but fun. Unfortunately, I did not find the movie fun. It skittered between terrible and boring. The dialog in the film seems every bit as uninspired as what I encountered in my exceedingly brief foray into the novel. The characters, too, are flat and uninteresting (and mostly unattractive, with the exception of Dianna Agron). Whether these things were caused in part by bad acting or whether the screenplay was just so awful there was nothing the actors could do, I can't say.

We're totally in high school. Who says we're not?

One seriously irritating thing about this movie is that they wanted it to be really dark during the scenes taking place in dark spaces or at night. This is all authentic and all, but the reason filmmaker's rarely do this is because the audience can't see. When you're watching a movie, seeing what's going on is generally the point. Darkness can be used for dramatic effect, but a lot of the action scenes took place in the dark, except for John's shiny hands.

Speaking of the shiny hands, what the heck is that for a power? I mean, super strength and speed is definitely cool. But for his super special legacy, he gets flashlights for hands? They're high wattage, but still. The Australian chick got some sort of super sword/gun/weapon thing that completely owns the enemy with a little slice in addition to being flame retardant and he has shiny circles on his hands?

My Super Hero Name will be...hmm...I know!
The Torch, you know, cause in Britain flashlights are called torches?
Oh that's taken? Tarnation. Alright, Mr. Flashlight it is then.
Theme song: "This little light o' mine. I'm gonna let it shine."

The enemy aliens, Mogs, are strong and creepy looking, true, but I had trouble taking them seriously. They speak with each other in these grunts and wear stupid cloaks and generally seem to be moving very slowly. I don't know. They're just not awesome bad guys. Or, maybe, the reason I did not find them intimidating was that in one of their first appearances, a Mog menacingly buys like 37 turkeys from the grocery store. This is never explained. I suppose I am to assume that he is going to do something nefarious with the turkeys, but there might just have been a good sale on or maybe Mogs just really freakin' love turkey. Grocery shopping is not scary, so maybe not a good way to introduce the villain, kay?

Choosy aliens out for domination of the human
race choose Butterball.

Altogether a lackluster and lame film. That's my opinion anyway. One of my coworker's was rhapsodizing about how much fun it was, so you can take my reaction or leave it.

Books Made Into Movies: Kimi ni Todoke

Kimi ni Todoke is a manga series about a girl who bears and unfortunate resemblance to Sadako from The Ring. Even worse, her name is Sawako, so people just call her by the character's name. Sawako is awkward and nervous, which results in her hiding behind her long dark hair and making inadvertently scary. Because of this, people really are scared of her and do not want to get to know her. This changes when Kazehaya, a popular, outgoing guy notices her and works to draw her out of her shell.
I realize that this summary of the plot sounds a little bit She's All That, but it's not at all. He just gets a crush on her as she is and has no desire to change her; he's got it bad. That's one of the things I really like about this story. Unlike most pop culture, American or Japanese, it's usually the girl who has to nurse a crush throughout the plot line just waiting until the other person will have feelings for them. In this story, it's the boy that pines for the unsuspecting girl. It makes for a nice change.

He even likes her when she looks like this.

The film was definitely better than the manga, even though the latter continues after the couple has gotten together. The changes in Sadako's character happen so incredibly gradual in the manga that most of the time it feels like nothing's happening and is super frustrating. Here, she makes steady, realistic progress, learning to smile and convey her emotions to others.

Look at his super cute smile!

Mostly, this film was just super, super cute. Words can not express the adorableness of these characters, who looked just like their manga counterparts; that was some seriously awesome casting. Well, I guess Kazehaya doesn't look quite the same, but he's really cute, so who cares! If you like the manga, you should definitely check out the film; it will give you another fix while you wait for the next volume to be released in English.

Books Made into Movies: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

I read The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo at the end of last year, so rather than recounting my opinions on the novel again, I'll just link to the review. The film does a remarkable job, overall, of capturing the plot of the exceedingly long and dense novel into two and a half hours. They had to cut a lot obviously, but Stieg Larsson wrote a lot of back story, which, while vaguely interesting, does not need to be in the film for the viewer to know what's happening.

I don't know what's going on in this cover, but I like it.

The actress playing Lisbeth did a good job, but I was not impressed with Blomkvist, perhaps because he seems far to ugly to have been such a player (mean, but true). Of course, in the film, he's not a player. This is the main change they made in the film adaptation. In the novel, Blomkvist has sexual relationships with three different women, while here he only has one with Lisbeth. They are clearly making their relationship more romantic than Larsson wrote it. I think that's kind of absurd, but what can you really expect, since audiences want a love story?

I like her best when she's hacking, Well, that and getting revenge on those who have fucked with her.

Having seen this film, I now know that I cannot watch the sequels until I read the novels, as I have the strong feeling that I would have trouble making it through the sequels if I already knew the exciting plot twists. Getting there could be a while, as my book queue is pretty full. This was a good adaptation of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, if not a new favorite movie, and I do plan to watch the other films eventually.

Perfectly Heartless - Charlie Mole

Much Ado About Nothing

Author: William Shakespeare

My friend and I, being rather nerdy and unusual people, decided that the perfect way to conclude a night of beer drinking and pub food eating was to read Shakespeare aloud. The obvious play to begin with was Much Ado. The only way to read a play is to read it aloud, and there really should be different voices for different characters.

In our reading of the play, I realized just how much the play is inextricably linked with the movie version for me. My reading of certain characters totally stole from the actor's interpretations, just as my friend's did (especially the scene where Benedick talks funny while wearing a mask to find out what Beatrice really thinks of him). I also realized that, even though it has been a year or two since I watched the film, I can say with an exceedingly high rate of accuracy exactly which lines were and were not included in the movie.

Another thing I noticed that I had failed to pick up on before was that Beatrice and Benedick really are the main characters of the piece. I always assumed that Claudio and Hero were because all of the main ado was all about them. This assumption came from childhood, so I never reevaluated until just now. Now, I noticed how the play both begins and ends with discussion of Benedick and Beatrice, how many speeches Benedick has (more than Claudio does), and just how little Hero gets to speak. This was an obvious thing, but childhood assumptions can be difficult to overturn, because you inserted it in your brain as a Fact.

Much Ado About Nothing will always be one of my very favorite plays, Shakespeare or otherwise, even though Claudio (who was one of my first loves that I now rather regret...oh, Robert Sean Leonard's lazy eye I failed to notice) is kind of a lame jerk. Beatrick (as their couple name would be) are seriously some of the best characters that ever were. I will always love them, especially because I picture Emma Thompson and Kenneth Branagh. Today's song is devoted to the terrible things Claudio does and also the silliness of the play.

Books Made Into Movies - Kimi wa Petto

Or, perhaps more precisely, manga series made into television series, but I prefer to stick with the naming convention. I read and reviewed the manga, called Tramps Like Us in the US version, a while back, and have just finished watching the ten episode Japanese drama, thanks to the magic of the internet.

For the most part, the television series is very true to the characters and the plot, although, unsurprisingly, some things were cut. The most notable difference was the addition of a character, a meddling psychiatrist who has his own love problems, which are somewhat similar to Sumire's. I usually hate small dogs, but the psychiatrist guy has a really cute chihuahua (apparently they can be adorable with fur!).

Look how similar the characters look!

Overall, I think I preferred the manga to the show, but it was definitely nice to watch, and certainly worth the fairly minimal time commitment. Certain plot lines that were abandoned, like Hasumi's misadventures in Hong Kong, were not at all missed. On the other hand, I thought the longer written series allowed for a more natural and meaningful connection to develop between Sumire and Takeshi.



The only part that really disappointed/irritated me was the ending. Rather than go with the ending from the series, which I really rather liked, they did something different. Of course; isn't that always the way? I suspect this may have resulted from the abbreviated timeline; perhaps the characters did not seem ready for the commitment of the actual ending yet. Still, not as satisfying.

Fans of the manga will definitely want to check it out. Also, if you're into kdrama or Japanese drama, this one is worth a watch.

Books Made Into Movies: Death Note

I want to preface this review by saying that you need to take my opinion here with a few more grains of salt than usual. I learned pretty quickly that I did not much care for the film and may, perhaps, have ceased to pay very much attention. For this reason, I shall endeavor to keep the review short and comment only on aspects of which I am sure.

Did you know that Shinigami only eat apples?

Although I have not actually read all of the Death Note manga, I have read a fair chunk of it and have also seen the anime. Yet again, this may be cheating, but it's my blog so I'm going to call that enough. What I enjoyed about the manga and the anime (at least for the first half of the series) were the incredible mind games played by L and Light. They are so incredibly intelligent that I really loved watching them try to outdo one another.

I will take this potato chip. And eat it!

One of the best things about Death Note is watching Light's devolution from an incredibly intelligent high school student with a bright future to an absolutely insane, power-hungry, out of control guy. When Light first gets the Death Note (a thing which is not really explained in this live action adaptation), he intends to use it for good. He kills folk in an attempt to get people to stop committing crimes, because they know Kira is watching.

This adaptation does not show the coolly calculating part of his personality, skipping to the insane side that just wants to take over the world. A series that should have you rooting (at least at the outset) for the murderer at least a little bit, much like with Boondock Saints, instead has you thinking about how much you hate his face and how lame and childish he is.

Attractiveness and effects fail.

On top of that, the actor playing Light lacked charisma, which is pretty darn essential if you're going to trick people into trusting you. The effects used to produce Ryuk were not especially good either, as shown above. Needless to say, I will not be continuing on to the next two films in the series.

Books Made Into Movies: Jane Eyre (2011)

Last night, I went to see the new Jane Eyre movie, because, even though the book isn't one of my favorites (and Mr. Rochester is one of the folks I would like to punch in the face), I love period pieces. My opinion of the film is somewhat mixed. Overall, I liked it, but I had some serious reservations about some of their decisions in how to cut down a very long novel into a two hour film.

This movie cover is so pretty!

Perhaps most glaringly, Jane spends approximately 10 minutes at Lowood School. She does meet Helen and experience her traumatic loss, but I don't know how much sense that would have made without being familiar with the book. The teacher who was so kind and influential is entirely missing from the film. The fact that Jane became a teacher is referenced only by the fact that the students said "Goodbye, Miss Eyre" as she departed for Thornfield.

Also missing from this new version are: Lowood school getting improved, Mrs. Poole (her love for booze is referenced but she never appears and neither does her creepy laughter) and Mr. Rochester's cross-dressing as a gypsy fortune teller. I particularly lament the loss of the latter. Now, they totally would have had more time for some of these missing plot elements had they not shown the scene where freaked-out Jane runs away from Thornfield TWICE. It is shown at the beginning of the film (and I was a little bit bored) and then it was shown again in context. Argh! Show a clip maybe to establish that this is where those scenes fit in the timeline, but trust the audience to remember what they saw but an hour ago!

Not being a Rochester fan, I have always been open to finding some goodness in St. John. So it's really no surprise that I really liked him (up to the point that the filmmakers remembered he had to be kind of awful and he decided to be a missionary). I do know that St. John in the novel was a cold jerk and do not think Jane should have chosen him (nor should she have chosen the film version that went crazy with missionary passion). Up to that point though, he was kind of funny and very supportive. And he looks like a younger Rochester. And he's not married. Win-Win-Win. Am I right? If they didn't want me to like St. John, maybe they shouldn't have chosen Jamie Bell.

Muttonchops can't stop my adorableness.

The movie did help me realize another reason why I do not ship Jane and Rochester (and why, I personally feel, the book would have been better if Jane ended up alone...by choice). What makes Jane a great character is her independent spirit, her strength and the power of her imagination. This is what Mr. Rochester values (at the same time as he tries to control her). Rochester commented at one point that Jane rarely smiled or laughed, and that when she did she would really be something. This is what makes me worry about their relationship: she never took (figurative) flight with him. He does not make her able to be openly herself, the willful spirit beneath the calm facade.

Even I almost think this is cute.

Still a pretty good adaptation and a beautiful movie. Plus, Rochester didn't creep me out like he usually does (which is probably points off on sticking to the novel, as Rochester is supposed to be physically imposing and dark, but is also a plus, because he seems less like a pedo). Jane Eyre fans should definitely check it out, as should fans of pretty cinematography and period pieces.

Top Ten Film Adaptations of Books

There will be some really fantastic book-based movies missing from this list. I decided that I need to have read the book as well as seen the movie to judge whether it is a good adaptation or not. These are the best of those I have seen and read to date. In trying to decide what movies would make my top ten, I realized that I own a lot of movies based on books. A whole lot. Narrowing my list down to ten was tough, but them's the rules. However, I never said I couldn't offer honorable mentions: Everything Is Illuminated, Mansfield Park, Chocolat and Casino Royale. So here goes.

10. Bleak House (2005) - Starring Anna Maxwell Martin, Denis Lawson and Carey Mulligan

Making Dickens into a two hour movie is pretty much impossible, because there are a ton of characters and even more pages of lots of stuff happening. Having read Bleak House last year, a rather arduous process, I can rightly say that the plot is really intricate. This is why Dickens' works tend to be turned into miniseries like this one, which clocks in at 510 minutes (over eight hours). Intimidating, I know, but so so so worth it. I have watched this in one long sitting (well, with some bathroom and food breaks) a couple of times. The actors will be familiar to people who watch British shows, but the only one who will be really familiar to most Americans is the woman from the X-Files, who puts in the worst performance in the film (and gets to be on the cover for the film). There is much betrayal and melodrama, but I for one find it superb. The movie definitely moves the plot along better than the novel, which I might not have liked if I didn't already know and care about the characters.

9. I Capture the Castle (2003) - Starring Romola Garai, Rose Byrne and Bill Nighy

I really love myself the Brits. They just make such marvelous dramas and comedies (well, except when they don't...I have been betrayed a few times). I reviewed the book by Dodie Smith just two days ago. The novel is good, but the movie made me care more about the characters. The dramas are easier to comprehend when you can really look at the people involved. Plus, the film itself is incredibly gorgeous, not to mention some of the actors (why hello, Henry Cavill).

8. The Lord of the Rings (2001-3) - Starring Elijah Wood, Sir Ian McKellan and Viggo Mortensen

These movies are great. I loved them long before I loved the books, although I did discover their glory while I was in college. Of course, in my exploration of the novels, I found some of the weaknesses of the film versions (most obviously, in the character defamation of Faramir), which is why they are this far down the list. Still, they will always be a favorite. The cast, the location and the music were all perfect.

7. Twelfth Night (1996) - Starring Imogen Stubbs, Ben Kingsley and Helena Bonham Carter

Twelfth Night is my very favorite Shakespeare play, so it should perhaps come as little surprise that the movie found its way onto my list. This movie is not super well known, which is again unsurprising. It probably didn't have a huge budget, even though it did nab some big names (Ben Kingsley's performance is pretty divine). While I do not much like Imogen Stubbs, who plays Viola, or the man who plays the Count, I still adore this charming film. There is just something so right about it that I cannot put into words. I suspect it has something to do with the supporting cast.

6. The Importance of Being Earnest (2002) - Starring Colin Firth, Rupert Everett and Frances O'Connor

They did pretty much everything right in the production of this film. Certainly the cast is top notch, although it also earns my only complaint. The only element of the film I am at all irritated by is Reese Witherspoon's portrayal of Cecily. She's not British and this bothers me. Sometimes her accent seems a bit off and I can't help but think, why not cast a Brit? That said, if you pass up this film (or this play) you are cheating yourself from an incredibly delightful experience.

5. Howl's Moving Castle (2004)

Since this film is animated, I couldn't put the cast list on, as it depends on whether you go with the subbed or dubbed version. I have never been an anime snob and have always chosen based on which I like the voice actors better in. For this movie, I always go dubbed, because Howl is Christian Bale, which is, frankly, fantastic. He makes a great broody hero. Both the book and the film are exceedingly charming, funny, dark, romantic and fantastical, even though they do have their share of differences. I was surprised at the number of changes made from the book, but I think they worked.

4. Sense and Sensibility (1995) - Starring Emma Thompson, Kate Winslet and Hugh Grant

Yay! Jane Austen! It pleases me no end that almost every Austen novel has a fantastic film adaptation. Sense and Sensibility is not among my favorite of her novels, but this film is among my utmost favorites overall. The reason the movie version is so astounding is, quite simply, the cast. Everyone captured their character perfectly. Take Emma Thompson, a regular firebrand for example. She perfectly plays a rather tightly wound, risk-avoiding sister. Hugh Grant plays a seriously awkward guy, but manages to retain some charm (but in a different way from his usual). Look out for Hugh Laurie as an irritated husband! The
cinematography is amazing too.

3. Anne of Green Gables (1985) - Megan Follows, Colleen Dewhurst and Richard Farnsworth

This film and its sequel are perfect. Really by this point in the list, there is pretty much nothing bad I can say about these movies. They have taken excellent books and made movies that perfectly capture the novel, both in the plot, the characters, the look and the heart. With Anne of Green Gables, they really captured Anne. She is just as real and as much of a kindred spirit to the viewer as she is to the reader. This miniseries is worth the four hours anytime (and another four for the sequel!).

2. Pride and Prejudice (1995) - Starring Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle

Yeah, yeah. This is such an obvious choice. It's so in vogue to be obsessed with or hate P&P right now. I don't care. I have loved the book and the movie since my very first encounters with them and do not expect that to change. Ever. Colin Firth makes an excellent Darcy (and as one my college friends mentioned he is 'the sexy,' which certainly doesn't hurt). Jennifer Ehle, unlike some lip-puckering waifs I could mention, is a perfect Elizabeth. She exudes all of the charisma and spirit that Elizabeth has. This miniseries (only five hours...short right?) is almost perfect; there's a reason a number of the actors from the 2005 version imitated their predecessors.

1. A Room with a View (1985) - Starring Helena Bonham Carter, Julian Sands and Maggie Smith

There is no way I can describe this film well enough to do it justice. Suffice it to say that this is my favorite film of all time (so far anyway). Everything is perfect. Especially the kiss scenes, which are some of the best you will find in pop culture anywhere. Promise. Warning: full male nudity.

When you see this, good things are soon to come. I wish my Italy trip was like this. :-p

P. S. Kelly at The Book Tarts also did a post on this earlier this week. Check it out for some completely different recommendations.

Books Made Into Movies: Battle Royale

One of the things in life that I love almost as much as reading is watching movies or television shows. Imagine my excitement when good books are translated into another medium! Of course, that joy is tempered with a whole shaker of salt, as I have seen so many wonderful books turned into crap films (Timeline, Harry Potter, The Time Traveler's Wife, etc.) and do not want to get burned again. I both eagerly await and greatly fear the upcoming Hunger Games film. Anyway, the newest feature on my blog: reviews of movies based on books!

Having read the novel Battle Royale, the next step was to watch the film, which I obtained from Netflix yesterday. Those looking for some gore will definitely find it here, although perhaps less than might be expected. Many of the bloodiest scenes have been cut from the film for the sake of time, including some martial arts and a car chase. Still, there are plenty of bullets flying, and landing in human flesh (over and over, because people in films need to be shot approximately twenty times before they can die).

Most interesting to me were the elements that had been changed from the book version. There were a surprising number of changes, even given the cuts that would be necessary to turn a 600 page book into a two hour film. There were two massive changes (and a number of somewhat insignificant ones), neither of which I felt did much good for the plot.

1. Rather than including some back story about Shuya, the protagonist, the opening sequence shows a teacher get stabbed by a student running by. A girl picks up the fallen knife and hides it behind her back as the teacher limps off. A message tells the viewer that the teacher quit after this. Having not had an introduction to the characters at this point, this scene is incredibly mind-boggling. Nothing like this occurred in the novel, so I really didn't know what to make of it. Throughout the film, the secret is revealed (although there was no real need for secrecy and the why of it remained completely unclear). Apparently, Nobu (Yoshitoki Kuninobu, Shuya's best friend) stabbed Kitano (the teacher) and Noriko Nakagawa picked up the knife. Later, Kitano is their teacher on the island. Not sure why this was added, except to explain the weird relationship between Kitano and Noriko, which was creepy, stupid, and less cool than the original ending.
2. Kazuo Kiriyama (sporting an awesome Carrot Top hairstyle) and Shogo Kawada (now three years older than everyone else) are both transfer students. They join the class on the island. In the book, Kazuo has gone to the school with everyone else for years and is the established leader of the thug group. Shogo transferred in at the beginning of the year. While it doesn't matter too much with Kazuo's plot line whether he knew everyone already (except for it being really odd that Izumi Kanai was hanging out with the class thugs at the southern tip of the island), it really screws with Shogo's character arc. There is really no reason for the movie Shogo to act as he does. And there was even less of a reason to change when the characters transferred.

I know Kazuo doesn't care about his hair, but really? This is what they went with?

These issues were a bit annoying, but overall the movie stuck to the book on the whole. Some of the weapons were changed, but all of the ones used to kill were left the same. Actually, thinking back on it, I suspect they changed the others to add in some humor (poor Shuya with his pot lid). A couple students died differently than in the book, but they were minor characters and it hardly mattered. The other unfortunate aspect of the film was that the actor chosen to play Shuya lacked the charisma the character is meant to have (which explains why so many people really like him).

Verdict: not as good as the book, but still quite interesting. Worth the watch, if you can deal with violence. Most of the violence is so over the top it wasn't too bad to watch. I am actually finding the manga version of the story harder to watch. I will be passing on the sequel to the movie, which sounds pretty terrible.