Book vs Movie: I Capture the Castle

True story: when I was a teen, I was OBSESSED with the TV show Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Like, unhealthily obsessed. And in seasons 4 and 5, my BFF Carol and I had huge crushes on Marc Blucas, the actor who played Buffy's college boyfriend. Like serious 'write fan letters, hang pictures in our lockers, hunt down his other movies, write notes about him' crushes. He was a total all-American boy beefcake. So, imagine my surprise when I'm browsing the Netflix instant library a few months ago and see his name in the credits of a BBC-produced film. I texted Carol immediately (because we still alert each other as to MB's whereabouts). And then I realized that I Capture the Castle is the book that's been sitting on my shelf in Nashville for years after my mom read it and passed it along to me.

Well, because I'm a book-before-the-movie type of person, I left I Capture the Castle and Marc Blucas patiently waiting on my Netflix queue until I headed home again and could grab my copy. I was actually excited to finally read it after all these years. My mom had recommended it to me back in my early college years or so, and the recommendation has only been reinforced since then; a fellow book club member who shares many of my reading tastes gave it the highest praises, citing it as one of her favorites.

Dodie Smith's classic is about a family living in squalor in an old English castle in the 1930s. Seventeen-year-old Cassandra guides us through the story via her journal pages. She's just on the cusp of childhood and adulthood and not quite certain where she belongs. Her older sister Rose longs for beautiful things and a rich lifestyle. Their father once wrote a great book but has been in a writing slump for years and refuses to get out of it. Stepmother Topaz is an eccentric soul, latching on to art and its creators. And little brother just tries to stay out of it. Life seems pretty mundane until two American brothers suddenly arrive  and stir things up (in a nutshell).

I think this was a case of my expectations being too high. I enjoyed this, I really did, but I just didn't see the magic that lots of people have found in the story. Cassandra was introduced as such a strong, independent character as opposed to her sister, a characterization that was reinforced throughout her journal entries. But eventually, I lost faith in her rationality. Cassandra was never as petulant as Rose, but I didn't hold them on such a different level by the end. Maturing as a result of new experiences is one thing; I think the point, by the end, was to show a stronger, more mature Cassandra, but I didn't like the path that took her there, nor felt she was the same independent girl who viewed the world with a naive fascination. And that's something I don't believe Cassandra would have lost, no matter her experiences.

After I finished the book, I finally watched the movie. Sometimes, I actually like the movie version better, as in the cases of Harriet the Spy, Atonement, and Julie & Julia. Minor plot shifts, the visualizations, or an actor's characterization can bring a new dimension to the story. But this one just didn't really add anything. I felt like I was seeing the same exact story I had just read. Maybe it was due to the fact that I wasn't totally enchanted with the story in the first place, but I probably could've skipped it. Except I got to enjoy MB on my TV screen once again. Ahhh.

The English and their drama

There's been buzz for the past few months, both in the blogosphere and beyond, about the English series Downton Abbey (aired in the U.S. as a PBS Masterpiece Classic), and I'm just going to contribute to that buzz. Colin and I discovered this mini-series off the recommendation of a friend, and, conveniently, it's available streaming through Netflix.

Downton Abbey follows the lives of the wealthy Crawley family, owners of the fictional Downton Abbey, and their numerous servants in the years just preceding World War I. With the sinking of the Titanic, along goes the two male heirs presumptive of Downton, and the Crawleys must determine who will become Lord Grantham's heir. Most of the heir drama centers around Lady Mary, the eldest of the three Crawley daughters, whose future husband will most likely become the heir. But they also mention a lot of stuff about an "entail" but I don't know much about English inheritance rules and therefore still don't really understand what all that's about.

On the servant side of Downton, hierarchy rules, from butler and housekeeper, to valet, lady's maids, footmen, housemaids,  down to kitchen maid. Each member of the Downton staff has their own story and their own history. A staff so numerous with sometimes clashing personalities has the ability to affect the entire house. The line between the Crawleys and their employee is clear, but that's not to say that relationships are cold, nor strictly formal. Friendships, loyalties, and frustrations abound.

So, ohmygod, is Downton addicting. We started the series last Sunday night and had finished all seven episodes 24 hours later. The plot lines are entertaining and just the right amount of drama. The acting is superb. The casting is perfection. Maggie Smith, always entertaining herself, as the Dowager Countess has some of the best one-liners that have graced my ears in a good long time.

If you like ensemble casts, watch this. If you're a booknerd and like stylized period pieces, watch this. If you like subtle English humor that often jabs at Americans, watch this. AND if you want to get hooked to a new series that is COMING BACK IN JANUARY ON PBS [or fall 2011 for our English friends] so you'll have something exciting to look forward to....watch this!

Seen any good movie adaptations lately?

My Netflix queue has been dominated by the Road to Avonlea series for the past four months (only two seasons left to go!), so I haven't seen too many movies lately. However, one new release I did break from Avonlea for was Ramona and Beezus.

As a kid, I loooooved the Ramona books by Beverly Cleary. I haven't read them in years, but I'm pretty sure I still would love them. When I was a kid, I loved Ramona for her spunk, her imagination, and for the shenanigans she seemed to always get herself into. I loved them for how Beverly Cleary could write so well about the awesome simplicity of being a kid—no drama for the sake of drama, just practical jokes, climbing trees, and frustration with school. In fact, I wasn't particular to the Ramona books; I loved all the Beverly Cleary books. Henry Huggins, Muggy Maggie—what a gift of alliteration!

Though I know now that Beverly Cleary wrote most of her books from the fifties through seventies, the stories are so timeless because I always pictured them in the present-tense (which was the early- to mid-90s when I was reading them). The characters, the setting, the situations are relative to kids of any decade, which is why I was happy to see Ramona and Beezus (though the appropriate order is still "Beezus and Ramona" in my head) make it to the big screen in, what I found to be, a successful fashion. [Sidenote: I vaguely remember a Ramona TV series from the 80s, and lo and behold, there was one, starring...Sarah Polley, star of Avonlea! Oh the coincidences in this post!]

Anyway, the 2010 Ramona and Beezus has a plethora of well-known actors, all of whom I completely ADORE, and was very enjoyable for this kid at heart. I recommend, for you and your kids!

Movie Review: Lost in Austen

I was thiiiiis close to just re-watching Clueless or writing about the Sense & Sensibility that I slept through half of for my last title in the Everything Austen Challenge, but I manned up and watched the 3-hour long Lost in Austen miniseries. Three hours...so daunting. But I'm so glad I decided to discover something new!

Amanda Price is a Jane Austen addict. Her idea of an excellent evening is sitting at home in a bathrobe with a bottle of wine reading Pride & Prejudice. She's read it so many times that she puts herself in the story and can feel the setting. She's in love with the elegance, the romance, and the custom of Jane Austen's England. But in the real world, she lives with her boyfriend Michael whose idea of romance is drunkenly proposing to her after a night out with the boys. When a girl claiming to be Elizabeth Bennett mysteriously appears in Amanda's bathroom, Amanda naturally believes she's finally cracked and is headed for the nut house. But then this Elizabeth Bennett shows Amanda a portal through the bathroom-wall-turned-door that leads to the very fictional world of the Bennetts in 19th century England. And naturally they have to switch places, right?

This movie was such a romp that I barely even noticed it was three hours long. With Amanda pretending to be a friend of Lizzy's visiting from Hammersmith, she begins to meet the entire cast of Pride & Prejudice and realizes she's entered at the very beginning of the story. But when Mr. Bingley starts to make eyes at her instead of Jane Bennett, Amanda quickly realizes she has to set the story on its correct path, a task that proves to be much harder than she could have ever imagined. The fun thing about this story is seeing how all the characters and events start to change from the original plot because of Amanda's presence. She finds out that there's much more to these characters and their world. No matter how many times she's read Pride & Prejudice, she still doesn't know the full story. 

I thought this a very witty, original story. I had guessed the ending a couple of times before the end but every time, something changed and I had to question my guess. So I'll just say that the ending is somewhat predictable, but you'll go on quite a ride before you get there.

Movie Review: The Jane Austen Book Club

I wasn't really expecting much from The Jane Austen Book Club. And by that I mean I didn't really have any expectations, good or bad. I went into it without having read the book and only knowing two of the zillion person cast. One was Emily Blunt, because I remember her from the poster. The other was Marc Blucas, because I have a long-standing game with a friend in which we call each other immediately when we spot him in a movie or show since our friendship developed from a mutual crush back in his days as Riley Finn on Buffy. Needless to say, I was pleasantly surprised with this movie of which I had no expectations.

The story is this: two women—Jocelyn (Maria Bello) and Bernadette (Kathy Baker)—decide to form a book club centered around Jane Austen to distract their friend Sylvia (Amy Brennemen) whose husband has just left her. They recruit Sylvia's daughter, Allegra (Maggie Grace), and two outsiders: Prudie (Emily Blunt), a high school French teacher that feels trapped in her marriage, and Grigg (Hugh Dancy), the only male of the group and an Austen virgin. They decide to read each of Austen's six novels and each member has to lead discussion on one specific title. Working through the novels, they begin to see how their own lives resemble a modern-day Jane Austen novel as they grapple with their own relationships or their lack thereof. 

The ensemble cast really worked in this movie. The dialogue seemed a little weak at first, but then it got into a flow and the characters had a chance to shine, both together and individually. That was the great thing about it—I knew them as a group and I knew them as individuals, because the script spent a little bit of time developing each character's own story. And it was just enough time, not too much that it took away from the group dynamic and not too little that these scenes focusing on one character seemed choppy and unnecessary. 

I really enjoyed this movie. I wish I knew Austen's works well enough to recognize which of the characters in the movie represented which of her characters, but that's a project for another time.

Movie Review: Pride and Prejudice (2005)

So, I believe I have officially decided to watch Austen-based movies for the rest of the Everything Austen Challenge. I have waaaaay too many books in queue that I just don't know if I'll get around to reading anything else, and with my handy new Netflix subscription, it makes the movie-viewing so much easier. Technically, this is my 5th item in the challenge; I watched Emma Thompson's Sense & Sensibility while drugged on Theraflu, and wow, I don't think I have ever been so groggy. I say that I remember it all, but really I probably just pieced together the segments I did see in between dozing off with the story I know from recently reading the book. Needless to say, I will not be writing a review of it unless I try watching it again.

Anyway...normally I don't really like to compare things [ie: an author's books, versions of a movie], because I feel that any work should be able to stand on its own. However, I viewed 2005's Pride & Prejudice mostly to compare to the 1995 BBC version I watched a couple of months ago. At this point I am very familiar with the storyline, so I was able to make some observations and comparisons outside of the basic plot.

• I thought this movie was cast very well. The ages of the characters made more sense to me. Keira Knightley was 19 when she made this movie, the age Elizabeth is in the book (I believe). Plus, Knightley is my age, so it just made sense to me and seemed more like a peer in the role. While Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth were both excellent in the BBC version, the fact that they are a generation older than me just automatically put their characters as older in my mind. Also in terms of age, I liked this version of Mr. Collins. Because he seemed closer to the Bennett girls in age, his personality was the biggest turn-off about it.
• The first half seemed rushed. I understand that was necessary to make it a studio movie rather than a miniseries, but I thought it took away from the full effect of story's development. I never got the same feeling of disdain that Lizzy had for Darcy.
• One of my favorite characters in the BBC version was Mr. Bennett. He was fantastic with his subtle, sarcastic remarks. I don't think Donald Sutherland as Mr. Bennett had as large of a role and he was nowhere near as funny with his sarcastic, under the breath remarks. Not his fault...the production just cut back on that character. I did like him in the end as he showed fatherly emotion.
• I thought Keira Knightley did an excellent job. She created (to me) a more realistic Elizabeth. Her emotion and cadence seem more believable and relatable, instead of trying to be 19th century proper.
• The ending! Completely different! No wedding was shown, but I enjoyed the brief scene of Elizabeth and Darcy post-wedding. Nice little romantic bow to tie up that two hour-long package.

While I thought this was an excellent movie, I think I prefer the BBC version for the sole reason that because it was longer, I was more involved and engrossed in the story. Plus, Colin Firth.

Movie Review: Becoming Jane

I decided to watch Becoming Jane as part of the Everything Austen challenge, but I'm kind of struggling in deciding what to say about it. I didn't love it. I didn't hate it. It just gave me a bit of amusement for a couple hours.

For those of you that haven't seen it, Becoming Jane stars Anne Hathaway as a young, pre-fame Jane Austen. She lives in the English countryside (surprise surprise!) with her parents and sister, and she's working on the manuscript for First Impressions, the novel that will later be known as Pride & Prejudice. She strikes up a very Elizabeth/Darcy-esque affair with a young Irish man named Tom (James McAvoy), who is a bit rough around the edges and nothing like Fitzwilliam Darcy.

Having just watched the BBC's 1995 version of Pride & Prejudice, I couldn't help but see the similarities between Becoming Jane and any other Austen work. But, of course, that is the point. You're supposed to see how this way of life and these events served as inspiration for Austen's characters, settings, and plots. 

My favorite part, by far, was the cinematography. It was the first thing I noticed and the aspect of the film that really stood out to me. I think it's almost safe to say that most Austen fans dream of the simplicity, tranquility, and beauty of 19th century English countryside, and Eigil Bryld (the Director of Photography) did a fantastic job of highlighting the setting. It reminded me occasionally of Terrence Malick films—long segments of one scenic shot after another. The film opened with such a montage, and I think it did a great job of setting the scene.

While Austen's writing has a great grasp on human emotion, I can't say the endings to her novels are always realistic. She writes the ending you want to read; things work out and people end up happy, almost a fairy tale ending. I like that this movie, because it was a bio-pic of sorts, stayed realistic, yet it points out that this is the point of books and stories—to escape reality.

Movie Review: Pride & Prejudice

The New York Public Library did not want me to finish this movie. I watched half; the library wouldn't let me renew; it took three weeks to get the DVD again, but I finally did it. Ha, library. I win!

I've always heard that the BBC miniseries is the version to watch of Pride & Prejudice. Colin Firth, and particularly his white shirt scene, seems to have become a part of Austenite pop culture. Anyone who swoons over fictional 19th century English men sings praises of this movie, particularly Bridget Jones (I'll save my commentary on the intentionally ironic casting of Colin Firth as Mark Darcy for another time). 

In high school, I was capable of watching all three CBC Anne of Green Gables movies in a row. And I did...a few times. That's about 10 hours. My attention span has drastically decreased since then. Somewhere in the transition to college and the real world, I gained the ability to fall asleep whenever I sit still, and watching movies, particularly 5-hour-long miniseries, got a bit harder. I thought it would take me days to finish this, but I got so into it that I finished it after only two viewing sessions. Thoughts:

• Jennifer Ehle (Lizzy) looks eerily like Meryl Streep in this movie. Also, she is apparently an American. Kudos!
• Whoever played Mrs. Bennett was fantastic, because she annoyed the hell out of me.
• I loved how Mr. Bennett had perfect comedic timing. He is the reason I believe Austen's wit is much better illustrated on screen than on the page.
• The angry daughter (Mary) was hilarious. She just looked so miserable!
• I was so excited to see Saffy from AbFab fame as the youngest Bennett daughter, Lydia. She cracked me up in the first half, and then her character got really obnoxious.
• I definitely already knew how Wickham and Darcy's relationship would pan out. Gee thanks Bridget Jones, for ripping off that plot line!
• Like in Sense & Sensibility, the openness of personal income astounds me.
• I enjoy Austen's strong female leads that rebel against society's norms.
• I need to visit English countryside.

I think I could watch this again and again. Especially on cold winter days or the rainy spring ones when you don't feel guilty about staying inside.  Call me crazy, but I don't see how the newer Keira Knightley version could compare.