Temporary Hiatus!

I know I've been a little spotty on posting over the lats few weeks, and I know it'll continue for another few weeks.  But I've got a very good reason:  We are moving - FINALLY!!  After 3 years and almost 4 months (but who's counting) we are finally headed outta Irwin!

To be totally honest, we have already moved.  We are no longer in the isolated, beyond-the-edge-of-nowhere, lost-in-the-CA-desert, little post that we've been stuck at over the last 3 years.  I write this post from a Chick-Fil-A in TX!

Yes, I know that TX will still be a world of oddities (it is TX, after all), but it's a whole lot closer to the weird little version of normal that we know and grew up in.  For example, I'm in a Chick-Fil-A!  Aaah, back in the land of sweet tea, humidity, chicken biscuits, and hair that's actually allowed to curl (as opposed to being flat-ironed within an inch of its life).  Apparently, no one has curly hair in SoCal...  but that's another soapbox entirely.  This place is not The South that we're used to - as mentioned, it is TX, which is different from anywhere else on earth - but it's a heck of a lot closer to our version of Normal than the SoCal desert ever was!  :)

But, as I said above, it'll probably be another few weeks to get everything in the house totally unpacked and set up and have everything back to running like it should.  Be patient, and I promise I'll have stories of the move and the new house and all sorts of similar goodies!  As for now, boxes of kitchen dishes await...

Knitting and Crochet Blog Week: Wildcard

Just for fun!  I know it's way after the end of the knit-along, but as I am just about finished with this particular sweater (finally!) and it fit with the wildcard topic, I decided to use it as a jumping-off point.

Wildcard – Embellish the story

Embellishments come in all types and forms. Some are more than purely decorative and form a practical function – pretty buttons are as much part of holding a garment together as mere decoration, and some are just there to give a piece an extra ‘something’. Blog about an embellishment, be it a zipper, amigurumi eyes or applique patch which you are either saving to use or have in the past used to decorate a project with. Write about whether you are a very  minimalist kind of knitter with classic lines and timeless plain knits or whether you love all the bells and whistles or sticking sewing and otherwise attaching decoration to your pieces.

 For embellishments, I'm  rather simple.   Nicky Epstein inspires me, but at the same time can be so totally over-the-top bobble heavy that... I cringe, for lack of a better explanation of my reaction.

The embellishments that I do like are pretty classic.  I love clean lines in a sweater, with more subtle design elements than all-over color or bobbles or similar.  Within a piece (as opposed to added-on zippers or buttons or patches or whatever), I like trims at the cuffs or on facings on a cardigan; or accent elements like a well-placed cable or lace or intarsia panel.  Those are the reasons I like Nicky Epstein - her "edge" series of books is a great inspiration for edging ideas to give something more classic a more personal touch.  Norah Gaughan is a favorite designer for that reason - a lot of her designs are pretty classic pieces, but reinterpreted to give them something a little more.

For added-on embellishments, I like buttons.  Buttons can be such a tiny touch of personality to a piece, or a a show-stopping focal point.  Which is where I bring in the sweater I have almost finished:  Cumulus.  I know I started this one way back in November, and the knitting did just about all get done in the KniSweMoNo time frame, but I want to re-work the pockets in a lighter yarn (let's face it, my hips don't need any more bulk) and I also had to search for a good set of buttons for this piece.  So, a few little things preventing it from being a totally FO.  The buttons are proving quite a challenge - the color of the yarn is Pewter, but it's a soft grey color with blue and purple undertones.  In other words, an impossible color to match!  If I use a solid color, it gives the yarn a soft tinge in that color.  Black or purple buttons made it look much more purple than grey, and grey buttons just plain didn't match.  White didn't seem to work either, too stark a contrast, and I couldn't find metal buttons I liked in the right size.  Being a super bulky yarn, the pattern calls for enormous buttons!  So I needed to find 2 inch buttons that worked with a completely unusual color!  It was quite a challenge until I found a set of big enough shell buttons at the LYS in Apple Valley.  The shell buttons have so many subtle colors swirled together that they work beautifully with the crazy yarn.  Score!  Now I just need to figure out how to do those pockets, then attach the buttons, and this piece'll be all done!

Review: Wicked

No, not the musical.  The original book.

Plot: This is a revisiting of the Oz stories, but this time told from the point of view of Elphaba (better known to the world as the Wicked Witch of the West). To summarize (from Publisher's Weekly, courtesy of Amazon):

Born with green skin and huge teeth, like a dragon, the free-spirited Elphaba grows up to be an anti-totalitarian agitator, an animal-rights activist, a nun, a nurse who tends the dying, and, ultimately, the headstrong Wicked Witch of the West in the land of Oz. Maguire's strange and imaginative postmodernist fable uses L. Frank Baum's Wonderful Wizard of Oz as a springboard to create a tense realm inhabited by humans, talking animals (a rhino librarian, a goat physician), Munchkinlanders, dwarves and various tribes. The Wizard of Oz, emperor of this dystopian dictatorship, promotes Industrial Modern architecture and restricts animals' right to freedom of travel; his holy book is an ancient manuscript of magic that was clairvoyantly located by Madam Blavatsky 40 years earlier. Much of the narrative concerns Elphaba's troubled youth (she is raised by a giddy alcoholic mother and a hermitlike minister father who transmits to her his habits of loathing and self-hatred) and with her student years. Dorothy appears only near novel's end, as her house crash-lands on Elphaba's sister, the Wicked Witch of the East, in an accident that sets Elphaba on the trail of the girl from Kansas, as well as the Scarecrow, the Tin Woodsman and the Lion, and her fabulous new shoes. Maguire combines puckish humor and bracing pessimism in this fantastical meditation on good and evil, God and free will, which should, despite being far removed in spirit from the Baum books, captivate devotees of fantasy.

This is an interesting read, though not necessarily an enjoyable one.  It wasn't an easy read for me, either.  There were sections of the book that I was honestly just forcing myself to get through.  It's a very thick book, and could have been trimmed a bit - one of those less-is-more sort of feelings.  Some of the back story, and some of the details just seemed totally extraneous and, quite honestly, vulgar or gratuitous.  I'm not one for censorship (it's not like the book needs to be banned because of it) but at the same time, sometimes details or scenes add nothing to the plot or characters, and are just there to be there, no point to them other than to further the tense, dark, downtrodden feeling of this Oz.  Which, honestly, could have been captured without those scenes.  Those scenes just irritated me, and I had to force myself through such sections of the book. And it seemed too, that the details, even those important to the story, could have been trimmed.  A lot of the details and subplots did get tied together, albeit 250 pages later, but that didn't change that there felt like a lot of extra pages to slog through.

It also felt like Maguire couldn't decide what sort of book he wanted it to be.  It was part fantasy, part political maneuverings, and part philosophical discussion, but I'd always seen it marketed like a lighter piece of reading, a more 'traditional' fantasy sort of piece.  So, yes, I admit that did set me up for a let-down, as I certainly wasn't expecting something this dark.  The political back-and-forth dealings of Oz would put any modern day government to shame - this is not Judy Garland's Oz.  You have societal repression of certain groups of citizens deemed 'inferior,' you have class conflicts, you have politicians corrupting youth and organizing murders to further their aims - and that's just off the top of my head!  Maybe if I'd been expecting a more dystopian Oz, I would have been more prepared for the world Maguire had created.

Elphaba is a really good character, however.  I think the parts that dragged the longest were the ones that drifted away from her (like the first few chapters, which focused on her parents, neither of whom were particularly sympathetic characters).  It would have been easy to make this a lighter book and just write off Elphaba as a purely 'wicked' character.  Instead, it's a much deeper story.  A lot of Elphaba's actions show how 'treason is a matter of dates.'  Elphaba disagrees with the Wizard's rule, and tries very hard to bring about change against injustices that she sees.  She is brave, intelligent (much more so than many of her fellow characters), and a very well-rounded character.  Had she been successful in her efforts, then she might not have been seen as so Wicked.  The book makes you think too, about fate, as Elphaba tries very hard against a system that has seen her as a curse since birth (she is green, after all).  She has tried to further her causes despite setbacks and separation from her family and loved ones, and to no avail.  Yet Dorothy is plopped down in the middle of it all and things just work her way.  This makes Elphaba's story a pretty complex one emotionally, as you don't know how much to root for her, and already knowing the Oz stories, you also already know her ultimate demise.

Overall: 2.5 of 5.  It kept my interest, mostly.  I don't think it'll be a reread for me, and I'm not in a hurry to have it on my shelf, but I didn't dislike it either.  Would've liked it better without some of the extra unnecessary sexual details, and if I'd been prepared for a much darker world than the Oz I was familiar with. 

Review: Tangled

Another I missed in theaters (curse this isolated place!!) and just finally got to see: Tangled.

 

Plot:  A Disney-fied version of the Rapunzel story.  That's the short summary :)  Yes, the one all the buzz is about.  And rightly so.

Everyone keeps talking about this as a 'return' to the older style of Disney movies, and I can see what they mean.  The sidekick characters, the little running jokes, the music (yay for Alan Menken!), being more story and less adventure movie (though there is adventure too).  It's still got a modern touch (more little jokes than say, Snow White) but it's not Treasure Planet.  And for sidekick characters, I liked the chameleon - his little hands were adorable!  

I liked the voices in this one.  Mandy Moore has the pipes for the musical numbers, without sounding too 'pop-y,' if you know what I mean.  And even when she speaks, she sounds like a bubbly young personality, but not irritatingly so.  I loved her bipolar reaction sequence to escaping the tower - too funny!  The lead male is suitably fun and quippy, no Snow White's Prince here. (Favorite line:  "You broke my smolder!").  But the one I really liked was Donna Murphy, the villainess's voice, Mother Gothel.  I reeeeeally liked her song, "Mama Knows Best."  She's won two Tonys, and the experience certainly shows!  And as a side note, how many different Disney movies are there where the villain has the best song??  Just think about it! 

Visually, it's beautifully rich and detailed.  Like Sleeping Beauty, with the feel of old paintings or illuminated letters.  It's CGI, not old style animation, but they didn't let the computer overwhelm the picture, if you know what I mean.  Does that make sense?  Something about the texture, I think...

Overall:  5 of 5.  Beautiful animation, cute characters, good music. Kept me watching and I laughed out loud several times.  One I definitely want on my shelf.  And on repeated viewings, it might even rival Beauty and the Beast as my favorite Disney movie.  Yes, I liked it that much!

And just because I liked the character posters for this one :)

Review: Red Riding Hood (the book this time)

Yes, it's a book too.  And it came to our library here just in time for me to read it before going to see the movie!  Again, Red Riding Hood.

Plot:  Just like the movie, a reinterpretation of Red Riding Hood, only with werewolves and a love triangle.

Don't miss out on the extra chapter online.  If you're planning on watching the movie too, the movie does include the extra chapter, but the book does not.

Looking at comments on Amazon, a lot of people were furious about the ending of the book.  The book does end at a cliffhanger.  The extra chapter includes a resolution, matching what was filmed in the movie.  I thought that was annoying, having to read the end of the story online after reading the book, but I didn't hate it like some commentators did.  But then, I got this from the library and didn't pay for it, so that might help.  To be totally honest, though, I liked the open ending of the book better than the resolution provided in the extra chapter.  For all the mystery and build-up of the story, which was very well-done actually, the resolution in the extra chapter felt very simplistic and a little rushed, a bit of a letdown, really.  Almost too neat for the way the story had been developed.  It seems like both a marketing ploy, so that people still want to come and watch the movie without the surprise having been ruined, and at the same time a bone tossed to the tween demographic who wouldn't be able to handle an open ending.

The book itself is not a hard read.  It is a simple Young Adult (YA) book, after all.  I cranked through it in about 5-6 hours.  Came home from work, curled up with it under a comfy blanket, and finished up that evening.  Granted, it was one of those days where I wanted to escape into a good book, but it still wouldn't take a reader all too long to finish this one.  Nice fluffy read, and we all need those from time to time.  Anne has Trashy Romance Novels, I have YA fantasy.  :)

Overall: 3 of 5.  Not a classic, even for young adult fiction, but it was a fun little read.  Not one for the shelf, though.  I enjoyed it much more than the movie, so this is a repeated message: read the book, don't watch the movie.

Review: Red Riding Hood (the movie)

Part of a movie-filled weekend a few weeks ago - our little theater had a weekend full of movies I wanted to see for once!  I spent a lot of time at the theater that weekend.  :)  I kicked it off with Red Riding Hood.

Plot:  The premise is a darker twist on the traditional Red Riding Hood story.  Teen-aged Valerie lives in a medieval town plagued by a werewolf (the Wolf).  She is caught in a love triangle, while the Wolf  meanwhile starts attacking people in the village again after decades of relatively peaceful coexistence.  A werewolf hunter, Father Solomon, arrives in the town and starts looking for the Wolf amongst the townsfolk.  Valerie is quickly recognized as special in the eyes of the Wolf.  She faces suspicion and accusations from her friends and family, while trying to find who the Wolf really is.  And yes, she wears a red cloak and has a grandmother who lives in the woods.

I did not like the girl who played Valerie.  She looked much as I had pictured her when I read the book, but had absolutely no emoting ability.  She has those big wide eyes, but most of the time just had a stare, mouth slightly agape.  I've seen bits of her work in other pieces, so I know Amanda Seyfried can do much better, but there was just nothing to her Valerie.  A few flashes of emotion, but nothing to make the character warm or believable.  And especially when compared to the book; there,Valerie is a clever, independent sort of person, wanting more than her little town presents her (think Belle in Disney's Beauty and the Beast) and honestly torn between her feelings for the two men interested in her.  Instead, she seems rather vacant here.

I didn't like the guy who played Peter either.  (I did like the use of Peter as a name in a story dealing with a wolf though).  His way-too-modern hairstyle bothered me, for starters.  Where does he get that much hair gel in a tiny village deep in the forested mountains anyway?  And the fact that he's supposed to be the dashing, handsome, passionate love that she's turning down her betrothed to run away with... Just look at the pictures at the bottom there.  Who would you choose?  I guess it's like every version of A Tale of Two Cities that I've ever seen - the devoted-yet-still-rejected guy always seems to be the more handsome one.  Honestly, Robert Pattison in the Twilight movies produces much the same reaction from me - "Really?? He's the handsome one sweeping her off her feet?"

Thinking of those two characters, there seemed to be little chemistry between the leads.  The love triangle was there more because everyone talked about it, rather than actually feeling it.  I guess it goes with the whole superficial feel of the movie.  There were definitely scenes which could have been much more moving - several deaths, the love triangle, etc - which never really stirred a beat.

The writing felt anachronistic.  Not that the characters were using slang, but the speech patterns of the characters especially felt decidedly modern.  Not "I am going marry your daughter" but "I'm gonna marry your daughter," less enunciated, more modern-teenager sounding.  I didn't like it.  Sometimes it was the writing itself, sometimes the delivery, but it felt jarring in several conversations.

The movie felt very rushed.  Even without having read the book, the beginning of the movie felt ridiculously hurried and choppy.  The pace settled down a little once Father Solomon arrived in the town, but  it still felt like things were empty and glossed over.  And after having read the book as well, I know they were leaving tons out that helped with the explanations and eliminated that rushed feeling.  And at the same time, wasting time with her far-away thoughts (the repeated image of Valerie and Peter walking on a snowy mountaintop with her in an impractical 20-foot long cloak was ridiculous) - scenes not really necessary, when they didn't spend time with scenes which would have helped the story more.  I'm all for eye-candy in a movie, but a good treatment of the story helps too.

Some thoughts on camera work - were they trying to avoid a higher MPAA rating by shooting all stabbings looking up the sword at the attacker?  It was already PG-13, so would showing the sword stabbings have been that much worse?  As it is, you don't actually see anything.  Not that I'm a violent little ghoul who wants to see stabbings, but it was very odd camera work and I didn't like it.

And a continuity error... Suzette's scars were not visible in her last scene in the movie, even though a point was made about how she would be disfigured by the injury.  Just something I noticed.

Now for some things I did like...

I did like the idea, the story itself.  I really like re-imagined fairy tales and classic stories.  The princess who's ordinary, or not set on being married off to the prince who slays the dragon.  Several of my favorite books are along these lines (The Enchanted Forest Chronicles by Patricia C. Wrede, The Ordinary Princess by M. M. Kaye, Bridget Jone's Diary by Helen Fielding...)  This was the first time I'd seen Red Riding Hood tackled in this light, and I did like the story.

I like Gary Oldman.  He played Father Solomon as a man driven to protect in what he feels is the right way, but becomes mislead by his mission.  He wasn't quite as evil as I felt he became in the book, but Oldman made it work.  And I liked Julie Christie too.  Both of these actors have enough experience to make the characters believable, even with weak writing.  A few acting bright spots in an otherwise unremarkable casting effort.

Overall: 2.5 of 5.  Not bad, but not good.  Not even so-bad-it's-good.  Felt more like a rushed made-for-TV adaptation of a book - average acting overall, and kinda a rushed, choppy feel to the flow of the story.  Read the book instead.

 

HERE BE SPOILERS

I did and didn't like the ending. The actual book is left open-ended, though if you want closure, it is available online (more on that in another post though).  Here, they did go for the closure route, following the plot of the bonus chapter.  That was OK (I actually preferred the openness of the book) but I did like the last scenes, noting the aftermath of Father Solomon's visit, and how everyone's life continued after the Wolf came and left.  I guess to say I like the aftermath scene, but not the resolution of the Wolf mystery?

Review: Easy A

I missed this one when it came to the theater on post, so was very excited about it reaching our little library.  Up this week:  Easy A.

Plot:  After a little white lie about losing her virginity gets out, a clean cut high school girl sees her life paralleling Hester Prynne's in The Scarlet Letter, which she is currently studying in school - until she decides to use the rumor mill to advance her social and financial standing (summary courtesy of IMDB).

The acting was good.  Thomas Haden Church and Lisa Kudrow are both solid in roles as faculty in Olive's school, both funny and sad as their stories developed.  Patricia Clarkson and Stanley Tucci were hysterical as Olive's parents - not too involved, or too stupid-and-insensitive as teen movie parents tend to be.  They are intelligent, quirky, and honestly concerned about their kids - you know, real people.  The adult characters in general were pretty well rounded for a movie of this sort.

The standout, though, was Emma Stone as Olive.  Because her narrative drives a lot of the movie, it was important to have a strong female lead, and Stone handles it well.  She also has a very expressive face, making her range of emotions pretty genuine, and entertaining to watch.  I loved watching her play with her singing birthday card; just seemed a very real thing to do.  I'm looking forward to seeing what else she chooses to act in in the future.

The writing was great.  An actual vocabulary was used (somewhat rare in a teen-based comedy, in my opinion).  Yes, there was some swearing in there too (it is PG-13, after all), but there was some intelligence as well.

Yes, it's probably technically a romantic comedy, as the couple does get together at the end, but that wasn't the focus so much as just Olive's adventures and misadventures. So, a mildly romantic comedy, instead of a Romantic Comedy, if that makes sense?  Which is good, as the male lead (don't want to say hero, as his role wasn't that big) was pretty generic.  Really just there to give some closure at the end of the movie, I think.  Still, a relatively minor character being pretty generic and dull isn't as big a downside to a movie when the lead is so entertaining.

Overall:  4 of 5.  Very clever comedy, with an interesting heroine.  And Emma Stone seems a good up-and-comer to watch.  Can definitely see this one on the shelf.