We all delight in seeing our favorite books brought to life on the big screen. We cringe at casting. We scoff at release dates. All the while, we're gearing up to see if the director's vision lives up to the world we've conceived in our own imaginations. Sometimes it does...and sometimes it doesn't. We could lament the movies that don't measure up, or we could return to the books for a re-read, possibly with a slightly different mind-set. All's fair when it comes to artistic vision, right?
Today, I'm featuring the following movie:
Title: The Fault in Our Stars
Director: Josh Boone
Stars: Shailene Woodley, Ansel Elgort, Nat Wolff, Laura Dern, Sam Trammell, Willem Dafoe
Release date: June 6, 2014
Based on: The Fault in Our Stars by John Green
Hazel and Augustus are two teenagers who share an acerbic wit, a disdain for the conventional, and a love that sweeps them on a journey. Their relationship is all the more miraculous, given that Hazel's other constant companion is an oxygen tank, Gus jokes about his prosthetic leg, and they meet and fall in love at a cancer support group.
Okay, my friends. Most of you have read the book, so none of this will be new to you. But just in case you're the one person on my friends list who hasn't read the book or seen the movie yet, there will be loads of spoilers from here on out. So, ya know, if that kind of thing bothers you, you should probably stop reading here. Okay? Okay.
I went with my sister on Saturday to see TFiOS because we'd listened to the book together at some point last year and we both loved it. I've since listened to it several more times, and each time, I think I found a new favorite part. So, obviously, I was a little worried that this movie wouldn't hold a candle to the book from which it was adapted. But it did. It so did. Mendy even thought so, and she's pretty freakin' hard to please. She's also maybe a bit cold and unfeeling, as she didn't shed a single tear during the whole dang movie, while I was a hot, embarrassing mess. OR, when she ran from the theater the second the credits started rolling, it could have been because her fake eyelashes were floating down her cheeks on rivers of TFiOS-inspired tears. I guess we'll never know, since in my haste to follow her, I managed to drop my phone somewhere in the row in front of us and the lights hadn't come up yet.
The general consensus afterward, though, was that it was a beautiful, heartbreaking movie, and it was one hell of a nearly-true to the book adaptation. The feels were all there. The pivotal moments remained. The witty dialogue, for which John Green is known, was there in spades. There was only one scene I remember being cut, and it was the one where Augustus is arguing with his mother to go to Amsterdam. And I totally get why that was eliminated because it really added to the sting of finding out Gus was sick on that bench with Hazel Grace. I'm sure there were other scenes missing, but as I said, the pivotal moments made it, and that's crucial to any adaptation, but especially this one. TFiOS fans can get downright rabid in their vehemence that this film adaptation remain as true to the book as possible. As a fan myself, I think the movie was pretty damn close to the book I've loved more each time I read it.
Like so many others, I was nervous about the casting. Brother and sister in one movie, only to be cast as lovers in another. That might not have been such an issue, had the release of both movies not been scheduled so close together. Honestly, I still can't speak to that because I haven't seen
Divergent yet, but after seeing them in TFiOS, it's obvious they have chemistry. But I think that chemistry could also be conveyed in a sibling bond, the way they joke and jab at each other in this movie. I think Ansel Elgort is the
perfect Augustus Waters. I'm still not sure Shailene Woodley was the Hazel Grace Lancaster I had pictured in my head, but she was well-cast nonetheless. And Nat Wolff as Isaac...so adorable. When he's breaking the trophies in Gus' room after Monica breaks up with him because she's too chicken sh!t to see him through his surgery, he is so acutely Isaac in that moment. I
never would have envisioned Willem Dafoe as Peter Van Houten, but it worked. And I still despised his character as much in the movie as I did the first time I read the book. I understand him to an extent, but that doesn't mean I have to like him, not after he treated Hazel Grace -- his biggest fan -- so atrociously.
The funny thing about this movie is that all the parts that I thought would be my favorite scenes -- Hazel leaving the Venn diagram for Gus, Gus telling Hazel that he is in love with her, the kiss in the Anne Frank house, the egging of Monica's car -- none of those compared to the scenes that just generally showed the chemistry between these two characters. Like, when Gus is blatantly staring at Hazel from across the circle at the group therapy session. It was silly, it was cute, and it was kind of swoony in a juvenile sort of way. And it wasn't the kiss in the Anne Frank house that I found so delightful...it was the two sick kids climbing all those stairs, trying for some semblance of normal in the face of what Van Houten had just done to them. So many beautiful moments...I honestly don't know if I could pick a favorite anymore.
I'm an ugly crier. I shouldn't have seen this in the theater. But the rest of the audience looked as puffy and swollen as I did, so who cares, right? Except that everyone outside could pinpoint exactly who had just come from seeing TFiOS. Still, when my older sister asked if I'd read the book, would I recommend it because she was thinking of buddy reading it with her neighbor and then going to see the movie, I told her I absolutely would, even though she "hates sad crap" and doesn't like sad movies. (How am I the only sister who isn't emotionally stunted?) Because it's not just about the sad, emotional bits. It's about
all the feels. All that snappy dialogue and those beautiful moments. It's about dealing with life, pain, and death, and coming through it. So, yes, I highly recommend it.
If you've read the book, I think you'll love this movie. If you haven't read the book, you're going to hate John Green as so many have already complained, but then you'll read the book and you'll love him again. And you'll probably still love the movie. Or not. But either way, you'll remember this experience and know it's always better to have read the book first. But even reading the book first in this case can't save you from all the feels.
Were you a fan of the book? Have you seen the movie? How do you think it fares as an adaptation?
Tuesday, June 10, 2014
{Movie} Review: The Fault in Our Stars
We all delight in seeing our favorite books brought to life on the big screen. We cringe at casting. We scoff at release dates. All the while, we're gearing up to see if the director's vision lives up to the world we've conceived in our own imaginations. Sometimes it does...and sometimes it doesn't. We could lament the movies that don't measure up, or we could return to the books for a re-read, possibly with a slightly different mind-set. All's fair when it comes to artistic vision, right?
Today, I'm featuring the following movie:
Director: Josh Boone
Stars: Shailene Woodley, Ansel Elgort, Nat Wolff, Laura Dern, Sam Trammell, Willem Dafoe
Release date: June 6, 2014
Based on: The Fault in Our Stars by John Green
I went with my sister on Saturday to see TFiOS because we'd listened to the book together at some point last year and we both loved it. I've since listened to it several more times, and each time, I think I found a new favorite part. So, obviously, I was a little worried that this movie wouldn't hold a candle to the book from which it was adapted. But it did. It so did. Mendy even thought so, and she's pretty freakin' hard to please. She's also maybe a bit cold and unfeeling, as she didn't shed a single tear during the whole dang movie, while I was a hot, embarrassing mess. OR, when she ran from the theater the second the credits started rolling, it could have been because her fake eyelashes were floating down her cheeks on rivers of TFiOS-inspired tears. I guess we'll never know, since in my haste to follow her, I managed to drop my phone somewhere in the row in front of us and the lights hadn't come up yet.
The general consensus afterward, though, was that it was a beautiful, heartbreaking movie, and it was one hell of a nearly-true to the book adaptation. The feels were all there. The pivotal moments remained. The witty dialogue, for which John Green is known, was there in spades. There was only one scene I remember being cut, and it was the one where Augustus is arguing with his mother to go to Amsterdam. And I totally get why that was eliminated because it really added to the sting of finding out Gus was sick on that bench with Hazel Grace. I'm sure there were other scenes missing, but as I said, the pivotal moments made it, and that's crucial to any adaptation, but especially this one. TFiOS fans can get downright rabid in their vehemence that this film adaptation remain as true to the book as possible. As a fan myself, I think the movie was pretty damn close to the book I've loved more each time I read it.
Like so many others, I was nervous about the casting. Brother and sister in one movie, only to be cast as lovers in another. That might not have been such an issue, had the release of both movies not been scheduled so close together. Honestly, I still can't speak to that because I haven't seen Divergent yet, but after seeing them in TFiOS, it's obvious they have chemistry. But I think that chemistry could also be conveyed in a sibling bond, the way they joke and jab at each other in this movie. I think Ansel Elgort is the perfect Augustus Waters. I'm still not sure Shailene Woodley was the Hazel Grace Lancaster I had pictured in my head, but she was well-cast nonetheless. And Nat Wolff as Isaac...so adorable. When he's breaking the trophies in Gus' room after Monica breaks up with him because she's too chicken sh!t to see him through his surgery, he is so acutely Isaac in that moment. I never would have envisioned Willem Dafoe as Peter Van Houten, but it worked. And I still despised his character as much in the movie as I did the first time I read the book. I understand him to an extent, but that doesn't mean I have to like him, not after he treated Hazel Grace -- his biggest fan -- so atrociously.
I'm an ugly crier. I shouldn't have seen this in the theater. But the rest of the audience looked as puffy and swollen as I did, so who cares, right? Except that everyone outside could pinpoint exactly who had just come from seeing TFiOS. Still, when my older sister asked if I'd read the book, would I recommend it because she was thinking of buddy reading it with her neighbor and then going to see the movie, I told her I absolutely would, even though she "hates sad crap" and doesn't like sad movies. (How am I the only sister who isn't emotionally stunted?) Because it's not just about the sad, emotional bits. It's about all the feels. All that snappy dialogue and those beautiful moments. It's about dealing with life, pain, and death, and coming through it. So, yes, I highly recommend it.
If you've read the book, I think you'll love this movie. If you haven't read the book, you're going to hate John Green as so many have already complained, but then you'll read the book and you'll love him again. And you'll probably still love the movie. Or not. But either way, you'll remember this experience and know it's always better to have read the book first. But even reading the book first in this case can't save you from all the feels.
Monday, December 2, 2013
{Movie Review} Movie Monday #19: Catching Fire
We all delight in seeing our favorite books brought to life on the big screen. We cringe at casting. We scoff at release dates. All the while, we're gearing up to see if the director's vision lives up to the world we've conceived in our own imaginations. Sometimes it does...and sometimes it doesn't. We could lament the movies that don't measure up, or we could return to the books for a re-read, possibly with a slightly different mind-set. All's fair when it comes to artistic vision, right?
This week, I'm featuring the following adaptation:
Director: Francis Lawrence
Stars: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Sam Claflin
Release date: November 22, 2013
Based on: Catching Fire (The Hunger Games #2) by Suzanne Collins
I purposely didn't re-read Catching Fire prior to seeing the movie. I'm always disappointed when I do that because it makes it that much easier to pick up on all the things that an adaptation is lacking. But with this movie, I honestly don't think anything was missing. The power, the message, the emotion of the book...it was all there for the world to see in the movie.
Jennifer Lawrence is just awesome. I don't even really think I need to go into that because you've seen her act, you've seen the interviews, and you've seen her spaz out over meeting Jeff Bridges. She is the girl you want to be best friends with. Sam Claflin as Finnick was Finnick. Holy hotness! And lots of people are finally giving Josh Hutcherson the praise he deserves after his role in this sequel, but I've been a fan since Bridge to Terabithia. I cried like nobody's business at the end of that movie, and I know he'll have me crying again in Mockingjay.
Oh, and the costumes, especially Effie's...I think they were even more elaborate and gorgeous and just stunning this time around. I mean that twirling "girl on fire" dress in the first movie was amazing, but the dress with the mockingjay wings? That was beyond impressive. And the statement it makes! The costume designers on these movies are simply amazing.
I'm hoping to see the movie again with my sister to pick up on all the nuances I missed while I was fangirling the first time around. Also, she's pissed that I saw it without her, especially since I was the one who got her to read the series in the first place. Oops. =) But maybe I'll re-read before I see it this time. Just in case I really did miss something.
All in all, I thought the movie was absolutely brilliant. The cast and the acting were phenomenal, even better than in the first movie, and even though this movie isn't quite as sad and emotionally draining as the story in the first, my eyes still welled up a few times. These adaptations are really living up to the supremely high expectations the books set for them. My only complaint is that I wish the final book weren't being split into two movies. :(
Monday, November 4, 2013
{Movie Review} Movie Monday #18: The Great Gatsby
We all delight in seeing our favorite books brought to life on the big screen. We cringe at casting. We scoff at release dates. All the while, we're gearing up to see if the director's vision lives up to the world we've conceived in our own imaginations. Sometimes it does...and sometimes it doesn't. We could lament the movies that don't measure up, or we could return to the books for a re-read, possibly with a slightly different mind-set. All's fair when it comes to artistic vision, right?
This week, I'm featuring the following adaptation:
Director: Baz Luhrmann
Stars: Leonardo DiCaprio, Carey Mulligan & Tobey Maguire
Release date: May 10, 2013
Based on: The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald
First off, don't tell my husband I watched this without him while he was out at the deer lease this weekend. ;0) It's his favorite book and we were supposed to watch it together, but my sister came over and well, you know her obsession with Leo. Oops. Secondly, I had my reservations about this one, not because I didn't like Baz Luhrmann's adaptation of Romeo + Juliet, but quite the opposite. I really loved that movie when I was a teenager, and I still find myself watching it whenever I'm flipping channels and find it showing on cable. Also, I've never read The Great Gatsby. It was never a requirement for the Honors or AP English classes, and with all of the other reading I had to do back then, I never fit it in.
I really wish I'd read the book before I saw the movie, though. I thoroughly enjoyed the moral implications of this story, the focus on obsession and insanity, and I think I would have enjoyed it that much more if I'd read it first. Also, the dialogue at the beginning of the movie was quick and stunted and I never knew if the characters were participating in the same conversations because I was quite confused for a bit. Once the pieces started to fall into place, though, I had a better grasp on the quixotic way everyone seemed to speak to one another. But now I find myself wondering if that was all Baz Luhrmann's doing or if that's how it was initially intended in the book.
I don't have the fixation with Leonardo DiCaprio that my sister does, but I don't think a more perfect Gatsby could have been cast. Admittedly, I haven't seen the Robert Redford version, so I can't make a true declaration, but I was pretty convinced of DiCaprio as Gatsby. (I just hope this Baz Luhrmann/Leo DiCaprio pairing doesn't become like that Tim Burton/Johnny Depp thing...there can be too much of a good thing.) I'm not the biggest fan of Tobey Maguire after those Spiderman movies, but I actually found his performance in this movie to be quite good, as well. My dislike for Daisy's character hampered my opinion somewhat, but Carey Mulligan portrayed this spacey, lost woman quite well.
I was afraid that the soundtrack would also detract from the storyline, but I should have known better. It's really odd how well those beats complemented the feel of this roaring '20s story, but it worked. I'm not usually one to purchase soundtracks, but I'd definitely consider this one.
So. Good story. Great actors. Fabulous soundtrack. Beautiful choreography. Gorgeous costumes. Yep. It all amounts to one visually stunning movie that sounds as good as it looks. I hope my husband likes it as much as I did. :-P
Monday, October 7, 2013
Movie Monday #17: Oz the Great and Powerful
We all delight in seeing our favorite books brought to life on the big screen. We cringe at casting. We scoff at release dates. All the while, we're gearing up to see if the director's vision lives up to the world we've conceived in our own imaginations. Sometimes it does...and sometimes it doesn't. We could lament the movies that don't measure up, or we could return to the books for a re-read, possibly with a slightly different mind-set. All's fair when it comes to artistic vision, right?
This week, I'm featuring the following adaptation:
Director: Sam Raimi
Stars: James Franco, Mila Kunis, Rachel Weisz, Michelle Williams
Release date: March 8, 2013
Based on: The Wonderful Wizard of Oz by L. Frank Baum
My 5yo daughter has been harassing me to watch Oz since they started showing the previews again on Starz, now that it's hit cable. So, since the hubby had to work late on Friday night, me and the kiddo curled up on the couch and got our munchkin on.
So far as watching with a child, that experience was great. The movie was so colorful and vibrant and Katie just adored it. And it was a pretty movie, I'll give it that. But I felt that, as far as adaptations go, it was trying too hard to be evocative in the way that Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland was, and it just fell flat, especially with James Franco in the lead role.
Don't get me wrong, I like Franco. And I can almost see why he was cast as the conman his character starts out as, but he just never felt like Oz to me. Honestly, I don't know who I would have picked for that part, though. My favorite characters were his little lackeys on his quest to find the Wicked Witch: Finley and China Girl. I've always adored Zach Braff, though. China Girl was just all kinds of adorable, and I liked how her ailment in Kansas correlated with her distressing injury in Oz, and how unlike his persona back in Kansas, Oz was able to actually help her the second time around.
I loved that the parallels that exist between Kansas and Oz are still ever-present in this adaptation. Even if this prequel doesn't hold a candle to the original movie and the emotional ties I have with it, it was still an entertaining movie. Daughter has already asked if we can buy a copy so she can watch again and again, much like I rewound and rewatched that old VHS of mine when I was a little one. 'Course, there for awhile, it was 'cause I was trying to spot that crane/guy hanging after my older sister told me about it. Yep, we were kinda warped. =)
**I have never read any of the books in L. Frank Baum's Oz series, but it's on the list. Now that I have a little girl, I think it's high time we read them together.
Monday, August 19, 2013
Movie Monday #13: Vampire Academy: Blood Sisters
We all delight in seeing our favorite books brought to life on the big screen. We cringe at casting. We scoff at release dates. All the while, we're gearing up to see if the director's vision lives up to the world we've conceived in our own imaginations. Sometimes it does...and sometimes it doesn't. We could lament the movies that don't measure up, or we could return to the books for a re-read, possibly with a slightly different mind-set. All's fair when it comes to artistic vision, right?
This week, I'm featuring the following adaptation:
Director: Mark Waters
Stars: Zoey Deutch, Lucy Fry, Danila Kozlovsky
Release date: February 14, 2014
Based on: Vampire Academy by Richelle Mead
-----------------------------------
Rose Hathaway is a dhampir, half-vampire and half-human, who is training to be a guardian at St. Vladimir's Academy along with many others like her. There are good and bad vampires in their world: Moroi, who co-exist peacefully among the humans and only take blood from donors, and also possess the ability to control one of the four elements - water, earth, fire or air; and Strigoi, blood-sucking, evil vampires who drink to kill. Rose and other dhampir guardians are trained to protect Moroi and kill Strigoi throughout their education. Along with her best friend, Princess Vasilisa Dragomir, a Moroi and the last of her line, with whom she has a nigh unbreakable bond, Rose must run away from St. Vladimir's, in order to protect Lissa from those who wish to harm the princess and use her for their own means.
First things first, here's the teaser trailer that was just released:
Sunday, May 19, 2013
The Sunday Symposium: Adapting to the Adaptations
The Sunday Symposium is a weekly feature in which I'll be discussing various bookish topics and asking for your commentary, as well. This week, let's talk about books being adapted into movies and television shows, shall we?
Personally, when I hear that a book I've read, favorite or not, is being adapted for the silver screen or for television audiences, I'm initially excited. The thought of seeing a book come to life is exhilarating...but also unimaginable. And so, soon after talk of a movie is addressed, I find myself worrying that the movie could never live up to the preconceived notions I have from the book. (They rarely ever do.) Then the casting begins, and I'm left even less sure of the film's success in my own mind, let alone the thousands of other readers who will be weighing in.
But sometimes, TV and movie execs get it right, whether they remained true to the story or not. As with the CW's The Vampire Diaries. I only read the first two novels in the series, and to me, they were complete shite. There's no nice way to say it. I read them over the course of a couple of weeks at the gym, and in the end, I flat-out hated myself for it. And I swore I'd never waste my precious time watching a show based on such a farce of a story. But then I saw that Boone from Lost was a recurring character, and well, eye candy is eye candy. So, I gave the show a shot. And then I was addicted, much to the dismay of my husband. But that dismay didn't last long...he's as hooked as I am now, and we both kind of stared open-mouthed at each other after last Thursday's season finale. Did. Not. See. That. Coming.
Anyways, book adaptations...they can be a good thing, or they can be a really, really bad idea. There are a lot of aspects that affect the success, or lack thereof, of a book-to-screen adaptation. And it goes without saying that no two adaptations will have the same results. Obviously.
And what say you on the recent news that FOX decided not to pick up the series based on the Delirium books by Lauren Oliver? (source) I'm actually relieved about that one. With the slew of changes that the producers had decided to back, I was sure it would make for a pretty good tv show, but as an adaptation? It was going to be awful.
I know it will never work out this way, but I wish adaptations would appeal to the readers first and then to the masses. *sigh*
Any and all commentary, chastising, and public flogging is welcome, as per usual. And thanks for stopping by!
Current Giveaways
A Starry-Eyed Prize Pack!
Subscribe by Email
Follow Via Bloglovin
Follow Jen on Instagram
Jen's Currently Reading
Sabrina's Currently Reading
2019 Reading Challenge
Followers
Search This Blog
Ratings
Twitter
Quotes We ♥
Blog Archive
Labels
About Me
-
starryeyedjen
- I work with numbers by day, and I'm a mommy and avid reader by night. I'm a self-proclaimed Spreadsheet Queen, and I'll read anything you put in front of me. I seriously love all the books! And I adore audiobooks, too!
View my complete profile