Reviews Written By: A1IMNNBC4ME0NBprovided by Amazon.com |
 | ||
 | Father Brown: The Essential Tales | |
 | "beautifully written, with various insights into human nature" | 2009-03-04 |
| Father Brown: The Essential Tales is a wonderful collection of stories; each one is original, beautifully written, and rich with insight into human nature. Father Brown is an unassuming country priest, generally underestimated because of his odd appearance and quiet, pleasant manners. At the scene of a crime he often wanders in the background, out of people's notice; he watches for reactions, slips, little details that hardly seem important but are actually crucial. He observes people's characters and gently penetrates through lies, half-truths, dissembling and disguises. His years of listening to people's confessions have given him a lot of experience with varying human desires, impulses and motives. The crimes themselves are absorbing and often multi-layered; the characters are also sharply drawn and often given unexpected depths or surprising facets and traits. The insights into human nature are also not conventional or obvious - Chesterton doesn't stop at basic greed or rage, leaving those as the relatively simple explanations. He explores different elements of human behavior, the psychology and circumstances that underlie certain thoughts, complexes, and feelings. I also have to add that the writing is beautiful. There are so many instances of wonderful imagery, of metaphors that make the most ordinary objects vibrant and laden with meaning. It's the kind of writing that can be savored; it's delicious. The substance of the stories and the beauty of the writing engage the mind, the heart, the moral imagination and the senses. | ||
 | 84 Charing Cross Road | |
 | "warm, thoughtful and lovely" | 2009-01-15 |
| It took me fifteen or twenty minutes to get settled into this movie. It slowly drew me in; it kept tugging me along. With each letter written and savored I came to care more and more about the two main characters, and I wanted to know what would happen to them across the arc of their lives. The film chronicles the correspondence between Helen Hanff (Anne Bancroft), a New York writer, and Frank Doel (Anthony Hopkins), an employee in a lovely, musty old bookshop in London. Helene is an outspoken, outgoing and spirited woman - quite a contrast to Frank, whom we first see as well-mannered, polite and impersonal - "at your service, madam" and so forth - the consummate Englishman with an Englishman's reserve. They don't change radically over the next twenty years, but I felt I was continually getting to know them and the shape of their lives better; this holds true particularly for Frank, once glimpses are shown of his family life, his moments of humor with his daughters, his quiet communion at the hospital bed of a dying friend and colleague. The movie drew me into the atmosphere and character of Frank and Helen's lives - sun on the old New York brownstones, the smell of books in that old shop. On both sides of the Atlantic, the post-war world changes, and yet one constant in these characters' lives is their letters. And the books, of course. The movie made me thirsty for books, especially old books. Helen's enthusiasm and passion for them is infectious, and it's a rare movie that can convey a character's love of books without having the character come across as pretentious or pedantic. I enjoyed the gradual change in Helen and Frank's relationship, the way their friendship deepens. The movie dares to rely on simply that - words and friendship. There is no grand drama, no whirlwind romance; Frank is married and committed to his family, while Helen is busy with her writing and books. I could sense that they're kindred spirits, and under other circumstances might have fallen in romantic love and married, but whether that would ever have happened remains unknown. It's not even worth much speculation. What they share in this movie is so lovely that I came to enjoy it just as it was. | ||
 | A Little Princess (Unabridged Classics) | |
| "enjoyable, with some inspiring and important lessons" | 2009-01-08 |
| A Little Princess is full of appreciation for the simple comforts and joys in life. Exquisite attention is paid to the pleasure of warm food, warm fires, good books, and the company of kind, friendly people. And there's also the joy of imagination - one of the constants in Sara Crewe's changing fortunes. Both when she's wealthy and when she's a poor work-girl living in an attic, she uses her imagination to reshape the world around her, inspire and delight herself and others, and keep herself strong. The book can get a bit treacly at times and repetitive (particularly when we hear over and over how certain people look at Sara with near reverence); however, children reading the book might be bothered less by this than adult readers. Sara herself is wise far beyond her years. Though she has her moments of despair or temper (usually when others are being cheated or abused), an occasional misunderstanding, and perhaps an imperfect grasp of the kinds of things that inspire jealousy, she's almost always calm, good, self-disciplined and thoughtful, even when severely tested; not a typical child then, but of course a large part of what makes the story inspiring is how she keeps her dignity and character strong even when she's down-trodden. She helps those poorer and more miserable than herself, she doesn't whine about her troubles, and she keeps her chin up. I enjoyed the book as an adult, and I think kids would truly like it too. Miss Minchin, who runs the boarding school, makes for a good villain, and there are some sharp characterizations of other girls too - the plump and forgetful Ermengarde, Lottie who is in turns sweet and bratty, jealous Lavinia, and Becky, the scullery-maid, who's also a girl but has known nothing but poverty and hard work her whole life. There are a lot of important lessons on character in this book, and a lot of well-chosen and captivating details. | ||
 | Sweet Smell of Success | |
| "smart, sharp, thrilling, and made me shiver" | 2008-12-30 |
| I watched this film several months ago, and still the characters stand out sharply in my mind. Tony Curtis plays Sid Falco marvelously, as a man whose mind is quick with an excuse, an accusation, a bit of flattery, whatever the occasion calls for; this is a small, slick man, swimming around the ankles of larger and more powerful men. He knows he's an unscrupulous guy, but wants to work his way up the food chain. Sometimes you think he cares about going too far in his pursuit of fame and wealth - Curtis gives Falco moments of blank pause, expressions of troubled calculation - but he goes ahead anyway with every dirty plot he thinks will serve him well. As the cold colossus J.J. Hunsecker, Burt Lancaster seriously gave me chills; he delivers a brilliant and well-controlled performance. He's sharp and clean, with his powerful stature, squared jaw, and steely glasses; his speech is quiet and precise, and even his little gestures seem to send ripples through the room. I also quite enjoyed Susan Harrison as his sister, Susan, who's winsome and worn down, but still firm enough to try and get out from under her older brother's thumb; I liked how even though she's nineteen, she's got old, tired eyes, an older spirit. I loved the screaming bright lights and deep shadows of New York City, the energy that ran through the film in electric currents. I enjoyed peering into every bar and jazz club and seedy room that Sid Falco pops up in. I liked how Susan and her beau, a steady and honest jazz musician, seem to speak in clear, round tones while Falco's and Hunsecker's dialogue comes out in a sharp patter, full of quick sharp stabs and quiet turns of the knife. Amidst the poisonous words, the lies and slander, the jibes and jokes that lead to uneasy laughter, you wait and watch for someone with integrity to (hopefully) prevail. I loved how the film shows us the power of words (even just a few words) wielded effectively, whether for good or - in a lot of cases - for the purpose of destroying people. | ||
 | Sweet Smell of Success | |
| "smart, sharp, thrilling, and made me shiver" | 2008-12-30 |
| I watched this film several months ago, and still the characters stand out sharply in my mind. Tony Curtis plays Sid Falco marvelously, as a man whose mind is quick with an excuse, an accusation, a bit of flattery, whatever the occasion calls for; this is a small, slick man, swimming around the ankles of larger and more powerful men. He knows he's an unscrupulous guy, but wants to work his way up the food chain. Sometimes you think he cares about going too far in his pursuit of fame and wealth - Curtis gives Falco moments of blank pause, expressions of troubled calculation - but he goes ahead anyway with every dirty plot he thinks will serve him well. As the cold colossus J.J. Hunsecker, Burt Lancaster seriously gave me chills; he delivers a brilliant and well-controlled performance. He's sharp and clean, with his powerful stature, squared jaw, and steely glasses; his speech is quiet and precise, and even his little gestures seem to send ripples through the room. I also quite enjoyed Susan Harrison as his sister, Susan, who's winsome and worn down, but still firm enough to try and get out from under her older brother's thumb; I liked how even though she's nineteen, she's got old, tired eyes, an older spirit. I loved the screaming bright lights and deep shadows of New York City, the energy that ran through the film in electric currents. I enjoyed peering into every bar and jazz club and seedy room that Sid Falco pops up in. I liked how Susan and her beau, a steady and honest jazz musician, seem to speak in clear, round tones while Falco's and Hunsecker's dialogue comes out in a sharp patter, full of quick sharp stabs and quiet turns of the knife. Amidst the poisonous words, the lies and slander, the jibes and jokes that lead to uneasy laughter, you wait and watch for someone with integrity to (hopefully) prevail. I loved how the film shows us the power of words (even just a few words) wielded effectively, whether for good or - in a lot of cases - for the purpose of destroying people. | ||
 | Travels in West Africa by Mary H. Kingsley, ISBN 0486424901 | |
| "engaging, detailed, and full of wit and spirit" | 2008-07-23 |
| Mary Kingsley was a rare and remarkable woman - self-sufficient, brave, droll, friendly and open, with self-deprecating humor and a keen eye. Her writing conveys her strong character traits and makes for excellent reading. Travels in West Africa has a great sense of place; whether it's a coastal town, a slimy lagoon, a remote village or lake, Kingsley captures these places on paper and also renders striking sketches of all the people she encounters. Her writing is fluid and engaging and also has moments of great beauty; she was truly gifted with the pen. Her work is a mix of serious historical, cultural, and natural study, adventure tale, and personal journal. Dressed always in the typical garb of a Victorian woman (which actually saved her life at one point) she taught herself to navigate a native canoe, collected fish and botanical samples from spots in the remote African interior, observed and labored to understand native ideas regarding fetish and spirits, and generally went about full of wonder and with an open mind. She was able to appreciate people, even the most violent natives, as they were. She also got into quite a few scrapes, but wrote about them later with understatement and tongue-in-cheek humor. In all, a worthwhile and memorable read. | ||
 | Fields of Battle : The Wars for North America | |
| "a work of history and personal travel" | 2008-04-28 |
| In Fields of Battle, John Keegan writes about the major wars of North America and his own travels in the U.S. and Canada. Keegan's focus throughout is on landscape and geography - how the land has shaped the wars and influenced the location of forts and key battles and their outcomes. He also touches on how landscape is an essential element of national character and affects the way people think about time and space. The first chapter is a personal history of Keegan's relationship with America, starting with the American GIs who arrived in England during WWII, when Keegan was a young boy. He recounts his first long journey through the U.S., and his many trips afterwards, which took him to numerous cities, towns, battle sites, military academies, and academic campuses. Even as he moves on in later chapters to describe the major conflicts in Quebec between the French and English colonial powers, or the American War of Independence, Civil War, Native American wars in the west, and the invention of the airplane, he inserts his own recollections and personal observations of these places. I liked this element of Fields of Battle - the modern traveler walking on or through centuries of history. He likes to point out modern highways and bridges for instance that were once routes for whole armies and to describe what has changed or remained the same in certain places. He's quite good at creating atmosphere for the battles he describes, though I wish he'd also included more maps in the book - maps of battle sites and fortifications in particular; his descriptions could benefit from detailed visuals. Keegan is engaged and delighted with his subject matter. He conveys an understanding of war and a good grasp of the major military figures and their characters. Before reading this book I hadn't closely considered the connections between war and the details of landscape - particularly how certain sites kept cropping up as arenas of battle in a few wars decades or centuries apart, and why they did so. The book has given me a greater awareness of the history that exists in even the most ordinary or out of the way places. | ||
 | Dark Victory | |
| "all eyes on Davis" | 2008-03-25 |
Dark Victory is Bette Davis's show. She makes the movie worth watching. Her performance is so mesmerizing that sometimes it even distracts the viewer from the actual character she's playing; you're busy watching all the nuances of her acting while forgetting about everything else. Davis plays Judith Traherne, a carefree and vivacious young heiress. She lives on an estate with her best friend, Anne (Geraldine Fitzgerald), and employs a stable hand named Michael (Humphrey Bogart) to look after her horses. Yet even at the start of the movie there are signs of trouble, such as headaches and double vision. Though Judith doesn't want to think about these symptoms or let them dictate her life, she's eventually persuaded to see a specialist, Dr. Steele (George Brent). Davis plays Judith in a clever, vibrant, strong-willed way, and the performance doesn't feel cloying or melodramatic. Geraldine Fitzgerald also does well as the best friend, Anne. Though it's not a dazzling role, Fitzgerald still asserts her presence on the screen and conveys strong emotion without excessive displays or hysterics. Compared to Davis and Fitzgerald, the male actors in the movie just don't measure up. As Dr. Steele, Brent is too bland; he's not compelling as a romantic lead or as a brilliant doctor and scientist. As the stable hand, Humphrey Bogart made me laugh; he didn't look at all like he was enjoying himself, and his acting and accent were stilted. Still, it was fun to see him in a role that came before his more famous and talented portrayals of Sam Spade, Rick Blaine, and Fred C. Dobbs. Lastly, there's Ronald Reagan (the first time I ever saw him in a movie!) He doesn't do much - he plays a smiling young socialite who saunters around with a drink in his hand; it was funny seeing him like this, young and silly. Dark Victory is all about Bette Davis, who puts in a terrific performance and works well with the moving storyline of a young woman trying to get the most out of life before her imminent death. | ||
 | Dark Victory | |
| "all eyes on Davis" | 2008-03-25 |
Dark Victory is Bette Davis's show. She makes the movie worth watching. Her performance is so mesmerizing that sometimes it even distracts the viewer from the actual character she's playing; you're busy watching all the nuances of her acting while forgetting about everything else. Davis plays Judith Traherne, a carefree and vivacious young heiress. She lives on an estate with her best friend, Anne (Geraldine Fitzgerald), and employs a stable hand named Michael (Humphrey Bogart) to look after her horses. Yet even at the start of the movie there are signs of trouble, such as headaches and double vision. Though Judith doesn't want to think about these symptoms or let them dictate her life, she's eventually persuaded to see a specialist, Dr. Steele (George Brent). Davis plays Judith in a clever, vibrant, strong-willed way, and the performance doesn't feel cloying or melodramatic. Geraldine Fitzgerald also does well as the best friend, Anne. Though it's not a dazzling role, Fitzgerald still asserts her presence on the screen and conveys strong emotion without excessive displays or hysterics. Compared to Davis and Fitzgerald, the male actors in the movie just don't measure up. As Dr. Steele, Brent is too bland; he's not compelling as a romantic lead or as a brilliant doctor and scientist. As the stable hand, Humphrey Bogart made me laugh; he didn't look at all like he was enjoying himself, and his acting and accent were stilted. Still, it was fun to see him in a role that came before his more famous and talented portrayals of Sam Spade, Rick Blaine, and Fred C. Dobbs. Lastly, there's Ronald Reagan (the first time I ever saw him in a movie!) He doesn't do much - he plays a smiling young socialite who saunters around with a drink in his hand; it was funny seeing him like this, young and silly. Dark Victory is all about Bette Davis, who puts in a terrific performance and works well with the moving storyline of a young woman trying to get the most out of life before her imminent death. | ||
 | Dark Victory | |
| "all eyes on Davis" | 2008-03-25 |
| Dark Victory is Bette Davis's show. She makes the movie worth watching. Her performance is so mesmerizing that sometimes it even distracts the viewer from the actual character she's playing; you're busy watching all the nuances of her acting while forgetting about everything else. Davis plays Judith Traherne, a carefree and vivacious young heiress. She lives on an estate with her best friend, Anne (Geraldine Fitzgerald), and employs a stable hand named Michael (Humphrey Bogart) to look after her horses. Yet even at the start of the movie there are signs of trouble, such as headaches and double vision. Though Judith doesn't want to think about these symptoms or let them dictate her life, she's eventually persuaded to see a specialist, Dr. Steele (George Brent). Davis plays Judith in a clever, vibrant, strong-willed way, and the performance doesn't feel cloying or melodramatic. Geraldine Fitzgerald also does well as the best friend, Anne. Though it's not a dazzling role, Fitzgerald still asserts her presence on the screen and conveys strong emotion without excessive displays or hysterics. Compared to Davis and Fitzgerald, the male actors in the movie just don't measure up. As Dr. Steele, Brent is really bland; he's not compelling as a romantic lead or as a brilliant doctor and scientist. As the stable hand, Humphrey Bogart made me laugh; he didn't look at all like he was enjoying himself, and his acting and accent were stilted. Still, it was fun to see him in a role that came before his more famous and talented portrayals of Sam Spade, Rick Blaine, and Fred C. Dobbs. Lastly, there's Ronald Reagan (the first time I ever saw him in a movie!) He doesn't do much - he plays a smiling young socialite who saunters around with a drink in his hand; it was funny seeing him like this, young and silly. Dark Victory is all about Bette Davis, who puts in a terrific performance and works well with the moving storyline of a young woman trying to get the most out of life before her imminent death. | ||
 | Dark Victory | |
| "all eyes on Davis" | 2008-03-25 |
| Dark Victory is Bette Davis's show. She makes the movie worth watching. Her performance is so mesmerizing that sometimes it even distracts the viewer from the actual character she's playing; you're busy watching all the nuances of her acting while forgetting about everything else. Davis plays Judith Traherne, a carefree and vivacious young heiress. She lives on an estate with her best friend, Anne (Geraldine Fitzgerald), and employs a stable hand named Michael (Humphrey Bogart) to look after her horses. Yet even at the start of the movie there are signs of trouble, such as headaches and double vision. Though Judith doesn't want to think about these symptoms or let them dictate her life, she's eventually persuaded to see a specialist, Dr. Steele (George Brent). Davis plays Judith in a clever, vibrant, strong-willed way, and the performance doesn't feel cloying or melodramatic. Geraldine Fitzgerald also does well as the best friend, Anne. Though it's not a dazzling role, Fitzgerald still asserts her presence on the screen and conveys strong emotion without excessive displays or hysterics. Compared to Davis and Fitzgerald, the male actors in the movie just don't measure up. As Dr. Steele, Brent is really bland; he's not compelling as a romantic lead or as a brilliant doctor and scientist. As the stable hand, Humphrey Bogart made me laugh; he didn't look at all like he was enjoying himself, and his acting and accent were stilted. Still, it was fun to see him in a role that came before his more famous and talented portrayals of Sam Spade, Rick Blaine, and Fred C. Dobbs. Lastly, there's Ronald Reagan (the first time I ever saw him in a movie!) He doesn't do much - he plays a smiling young socialite who saunters around with a drink in his hand; it was funny seeing him like this, young and silly. Dark Victory is all about Bette Davis, who puts in a terrific performance and works well with the moving storyline of a young woman trying to get the most out of life before her imminent death. | ||
 | The Office - Season Two | |
| "one of the best T.V. comedies" | 2008-03-20 |
Season 2 is a string of consistently strong, funny episodes. There's sophisticated verbal humor, clever pranks and all-around great comedic pace and timing; the actors work wonderfully off each other in scenes that are allowed time to play out. The show does well with drama too (as seen with the Jim-Pam-Roy triangle), and Season 2 has given all of the characters, even the minor ones, a chance to develop and let their personal quirks and eccentricities shine; compared to Season 1, Season 2 has more of an ensemble feel, even though it still has a core of main characters. The main reason the show is so strong is that it's essentially all about the characters, and the humor is rooted in their personalities. Dwight Schrute, for instance, is a legendary comedic creation - to call him the strange, authoritarian office geek is not doing him enough justice. You have to see Rainn Wilson bring him to life, working off the wonderful scripts. Also, I recommend watching the blooper reel. It has some hilarious footage of Wilson cracking up while delivering Dwight's lines; he has a really infectious laugh and often laughs to the point of tears. The humor in The Office is fresh, often odd and unexpected, and definitely not politically correct. It seems like the cast has such a great time making the show; that playfulness comes across. This is a show that knows what to do with its characters, and knows how to seed drama, romance, and even heartbreak into all of the fun. | ||
 | Laura | |
| "elegant and engrossing" | 2008-03-16 |
| Laura Hunt (Gene Tierney) is a beautiful and intelligent woman with a successful career in advertising; by all accounts she's admired and well-liked and possesses many fine qualities. At the start of the film we learn that she's been murdered in her own home and that the detective on the case, Mark McPherson (Dana Andrews), has already found a few suspects to investigate. One suspect is writer and critic Waldo Lydecker (Clifton Webb), Laura's mentor and close friend who helped her launch her career and refine her style and taste. Another is Shelby Carpenter (Vincent Price), Laura's fiance; he's got some charm and an easygoing manner, but is also shiftless and morally weak. Then there's Laura's aunt, Mrs. Treadwell (Judith Anderson), who is in love with Shelby and not very discreet about her affection and their affair.
McPherson is a level-headed detective who finds an interesting way to keep calm as he deals with these people and the intricate stories they craft; he has a knack for asking the right questions and cutting through people's airs and posturing. As his investigation deepens though, he finds it increasingly difficult to remain cool and detached. He's been visiting Laura's home, looking through her clothes and belongings, reading her letters and private diary, and finding himself bewitched by her enchanting portrait. He's obsessed with her and likely falling in love with her too, even as he believes her to be a dead woman. Imagine his shock then when he sees her stepping into her home one night, nonchalant and clearly unharmed. The film is a treat in many ways. The script is clean, sharp and delivered well by all the actors. The actors are extremely well-suited for their roles. Price conveys both the shambling charm and fundamental cowardice of the fiance. Webb is terrific as the poisonous critic and Laura's possessive older friend. Tierney is stunning as Laura, bringing beauty to the screen and giving her character a kindness, gentleness and elegant restraint. Andrews plays out his character's emotions in an understated way, with subtle gestures and slight shifts of facial expression. In one brilliant scene, where Laura herself has become a suspect to the murder and his character is interrogating her at the police station, he conveys really well the shifts between the impersonal questions about her alibi and the more urgent, personal questions about her relationship with another suspect, who has essentially become the detective's romantic rival. The film doesn't need to show us a dead body or blood stains in order to create a chilling mood. The way in which the murder victim dies is brutal - a shotgun blast to the face - but the deed itself remains offscreen. The film creates its moods and builds tension through atmosphere and music, through intense and involving exchanges of dialogue, through well-placed details and, crucially, through interesting characters. | ||
 | Laura | |
| "elegant and engrossing" | 2008-03-16 |
| Laura Hunt (Gene Tierney) is a beautiful and intelligent woman with a successful career in advertising; by all accounts she's admired and well-liked and possesses many fine qualities. At the start of the film we learn that she's been murdered in her own home and that the detective on the case, Mark McPherson (Dana Andrews), has already found a few suspects to investigate. One suspect is writer and critic Waldo Lydecker (Clifton Webb), Laura's mentor and close friend who helped her launch her career and refine her style and taste. Another is Shelby Carpenter (Vincent Price), Laura's fiance; he's got some charm and an easygoing manner, but is also shiftless and morally weak. Then there's Laura's aunt, Mrs. Treadwell (Judith Anderson), who is in love with Shelby and not very discreet about her affection and their affair. McPherson is a level-headed detective who finds an interesting way to keep calm as he deals with these people and the intricate stories they craft; he has a knack for asking the right questions and cutting through people's airs and posturing. As his investigation deepens though, he finds it increasingly difficult to remain cool and detached. He's been visiting Laura's home, looking through her clothes and belongings, reading her letters and private diary, and finding himself bewitched by her enchanting portrait. He's obsessed with her and likely falling in love with her too, even as he believes her to be a dead woman. Imagine his shock then when he sees her stepping into her home one night, nonchalant and clearly unharmed. The film is a treat in many ways. The script is clean, sharp and delivered well by all the actors. The actors are extremely well-suited for their roles. Price conveys both the shambling charm and fundamental cowardice of the fiance. Webb is terrific as the poisonous critic and Laura's possessive older friend. Tierney is stunning as Laura, bringing beauty to the screen and giving her character a kindness, gentleness and elegant restraint. Andrews plays out his character's emotions in an understated way, with subtle gestures and slight shifts of facial expression. In one brilliant scene, where Laura herself has become a suspect to the murder and his character is interrogating her at the police station, he conveys really well the shifts between the impersonal questions about her alibi and the more urgent, personal questions about her relationship with another suspect, who has essentially become the detective's romantic rival. My one main quibble with the film was a desire to better understand Laura herself, and why she seeks out the company of the men in her life; the beginnings and ends of certain relationships seemed much more like plot contrivances than anything truly character-driven. Tierney and Andrews, while working well together, don't generate that crackle of tension and mutual attraction. Still, Laura is wonderfully well-crafted and atmospheric. The film doesn't need to show us a dead body or blood stains in order to create a chilling mood. The way in which the murder victim dies is brutal - a shotgun blast to the face - but the deed itself remains offscreen. The film creates its moods and builds tension through atmosphere and music, intense and involving exchanges of dialogue, and well-placed details. | ||
 | An Intimate History of Humanity | |
 | "interesting, but could have amounted to more" | 2008-01-20 |
| In 'An Intimate History of Humanity', Theodore Zeldin undertakes an ambitious project. He takes a broad look at a side of history often neglected in standard textbooks - the history of people's interior lives and interpersonal relationships. His hope is that people today can improve themselves and the world by gleaning lessons from history - lessons on meaningful communication, open-mindedness, creativity and curiosity.
The strengths of his book lie with his fundamental optimism in human nature. He doesn't believe that history has come to its end, and that there is no more room for true innovation of spirit and mind. His tone is kindly and curious; he does not write contemptuously of anyone. He believes that true change cannot be imposed by force from a government, that traits such as compassion, generosity and empathy cannot be legislated. Perhaps the best part of his book are the beginnings of each chapter. He structures his chapters in the following way - first he creates a portrait of someone in the present day (almost 100% of the time, this present-day person is a Frenchwoman). Afterwards, he links the issues and dilemmas of this Frenchwoman to what he sees as similar issues in the past. For example, after spending a few pages discussing a particular Frenchwoman's thoughts about relationships with men, he will sketch out some history on the relationship between men and women and how it has evolved. His portraits of the contemporary women are engrossing. Just as character studies they are interesting to read. The Frenchwomen he speaks to come from different walks of life, and he succeeds in rendering their complexity. What weakens his book is the nature of his forays into history. Because he touches upon so many topics, and devotes only several pages to each, it's difficult for him to discuss and develop his points in-depth. The facts he does present are interesting - he writes about various historical figures, texts and old cultural practices, and I enjoyed reading about people as diverse as Galen and Lady Murasaki. But his discussion of historical trends can be simplistic. He'll present, for instance, some evolving attitudes of British or Japanese aristocracy on the topic of love as evidence of how people's ideas of love can change. However he doesn't convincingly argue that these changes can be recreated (or are relevant) across the world, or all classes; I'm not always convinced that he chooses the best examples. He doesn't go deep enough into the roots of those changes, the broader historical and psychological circumstances (I would've loved reading a close comparison of two cultures faced with similar historical dilemmas, and their similarities and differences in how they evolved in respects to something like marriage or romantic love). While I'm certain that there are struggles and questions that human beings share universally, Zeldin's possible solutions to these struggles sometimes seems relevant to only a certain socioeconomic class or culture. Other times he'll raise an interesting point - for example, that India's ancient civilizations were often open-minded about foreign ideas, but that the society closed off different castes from each other... and then he just leaves it at that. Why not discuss the possible reasons for this further? Wouldn't that enrich our understanding of human nature and history? His definitions of various character traits and abstract ideas can suffer from fuzzy, superficial definitions. For instance, in his brief historical foray into 'compassion', he focuses a lot on medical care and then includes, disjointedly, some other arguments about the nature of present-day romantic relationships and interpersonal communication (he doesn't quite justify why he focuses on these facets of compassion in particular). At one point he writes about the length of time patients stay in hospitals and mentions that in Japan hospital stays are treated as "as a holiday from conformity and the rigours of ordinary life" - patients are seen as individuals, not as cases, they wear their own clothes, they have individually tailored treatments, and they love discussing all of their symptoms ("eighty-eight percent of the Japanese claim to be suffering from some kind of illness"). But there's a lot more going on here, psychologically and culturally, than evidence of compassion. He then talks about Sweden democratising compassion by providing everyone with care... while in another chapter he speaks of the limitations of care provided by the government, how it is often impersonal and mechanical rather than truly caring. This is just one example of the sorts of inconsistencies and superficialties that crop up in his book. The different sections of each chapter seem disjointed as well. It can be awkward, how he links the issues of a contemporary Frenchwomen to various cultural upheavals in the past (and why only Frenchwomen? I guess he's trying to show that even in modern societies you still find ancient dilemmas; although it would've been interesting if he had also interviewed women from cultures where the struggle between modern trends and older practices and beliefs is much more obvious). His transition from one chapter to the next (particularly towards the end of the book) is pretty stilted and forced. When he reflects on traits such as generosity, his argument oftentimes boils down to very obvious ideas, such as how generosity benefits from empathy and putting yourself into another person's shoes (and he simply says this straightout without necessarily bringing in compelling examples from history). His 'solutions' for the world's ills are often a repetition of 'be open-minded, curious, creative...' and while those are very positive and helpful traits, and while he does discuss some obstacles to the development of such traits, his arguments tend to smack of superficiality. He throws a lot of facts at you, but they don't always amount to an actual argument. Again, Zeldin's book is ambitious and it can be delightful. I like how he tries to search for the common dilemmas and hopes that humans share everywhere, and to be fair, there are times where he does make an interesting connection between modern and past problems. However, when he is not writing his absorbing portraits of modern women, his approach often lacks depth and merely seems to drift across various historical tidbits. | ||
 | The Price of Privilege: How Parental Pressure and Material Advantage Are Creating a Generation of Disconnected and Unhappy Kids | |
| "a practical and insightful book" | 2007-07-11 |
| One reason I was pleased with this book is that the author, psychologist Madeline Levine, doesn't blame money itself for the rising problems among privileged teens. She mentions wealthy families where the kids are raised to be decent, hard-working, responsible and mature. Rather than rail against the evil of money (which would've been annoyingly hypocritical, given that she, her husband and sons live in an affluent community), Dr. Levine makes an important distinction between money and the values that often go hand-in-hand with money (but don't have to). One example is the attitude of materialism one sees in many privileged communities. Materialism isn't constrained to any one socioeconomic class; a person from a poor or middle class home may also value his possessions excessively, and place more importance on acquiring more "stuff" at the expense of spending quality time with family, forming friendships, and cultivating meaningful interests and positive character traits. The reason why materialism is often associated only with wealth, is that wealthy people have the means to indulge it more often and in more conspicuous ways. The point is, it's this mindset that Levine criticizes, not money per se. She knows wealthy kids who are well-adjusted, in part because their parents had them do chores around the house, encouraged them to volunteer and engage in community activities, did not cave in and buy them everything they wanted, and basically set firm boundaries and placed emphasis on the important values in life. In less healthy families, material goods are sadly seen as fulfilling all needs and solving all problems. It's painful to read about parents who hold out bribes of expensive cars and clothes in the hopes that their kids will get the best grades, make the best sports teams, and get into the best colleges. As Levine points out, it's not only materialism that hurts these kids. It's also the intense pressure to be the best at everything and pull it off without any apparent effort. The emphasis on outward appearance, on superficial measures of success stifles many of the kids in these communities. One example she gives is a boy who's unremarkable academically but very gifted at car repair and mechanics. For his parents it's a nightmare; they're ambitious, college-educated professionals and can't accept their son's enthusiasm and preference for what they see as lower class work. They criticize him relentlessly, and as one coping mechanism for feeling so under-valued and out of place in his family and community, he turns to drugs and starts acting out. Levine doesn't excuse the boy's behavior, but she can understand it; in addition to drug abuse treatment, part of her therapy involves the parents and getting them to see that their son is his own person and shouldn't be forced into the prototypical mold for a "successful" child. Which brings me to another good point about the book. Levine really encourages parents to rethink their parenting styles and review their values and motives. For example, after reading this book a father might wonder why he's pushing his son so hard to play a sport - is it because he wants the boy to learn something and grow as a person? Or is it because he wants to live vicariously through his son and be the envy of the other competitive fathers in the community? Levine is sympathetic to parents. She acknowledges that most parents want the best for their kids. She has particular compassion for the mothers in these affluent communities, who often lead lonely lives and, because of the need to appear perfectly happy and perfectly together, often don't have a close friend to confide in (in fact, one of the pitfalls is a socially isolated mother turning to her kids for the kind of emotional intimacy she isn't getting from her spouse and friends). She urges parents, particularly mothers, to address the troubled and painful issues in their own lives; essentially, a content and well-adjusted parent makes for a much better influence on a kid than one who is cold and remote, or clingy and needy, or just downright depressed. Dr. Levine's book is thoughtful, straightforward and worth reading. Though all parents can benefit from her advice, the book is especially important for affluent parents who inspite of their good intentions might readily adopt the dominant values of their communities - the materialism, the pressure to look good and (at least outwardly) succeed, the emotional isolation, and the conformity to a certain kind of lifestyle. As Levine demonstrates again and again in her book, these values stunt and skew development. | ||
 | Alice Adams | |
| "Sweet and full of feeling" | 2006-12-23 |
| The success of Alice Adams hinges largely on Katharine Hepburn's performance, and she does a fine job bringing life and spirit to the part. Alice admires the beautiful and rich daughters of the wealthier families in her town; she longs for their life of privilege, fashionable clothes, and charming suitors. Her own family lives in a modest house; her father isn't a driven and ambitious type, and her brother doesn't behave respectably. Alice attends a social ball wearing an old dress, and puts on a brave face as hardly anyone looks her way. Then, miraculously, a wealthy and affable young man, Arthur Russell (Fred MacMurray), asks her to dance. From that point, Alice tries to fool Arthur into thinking that her family is well-off. When he visits, she meets him out on the porch. She talks about all the language, dance, and music lessons she was supposedly gifted with as a child, and makes excuses for why her family's home doesn't look all that splendid. And among these rambling made-up stories are the real kernels of truth about Alice's character - her loneliness and naivete, her bold dreams and self-consciousness. While it's true that she's adopted some of the same values as the more genteel families, she's sympathetic in how she stands up for her family in the moments when it truly counts, and how she's kind and soothing to her parents as well, particularly her loving but often unassertive father (played wonderfully by Fred Stone). Fred MacMurray, as Arthur, isn't given a role with great depth, but he brings to it what he can. His job is to be a dream, an ideal, and he plays Arthur with a certain inscrutability, so when the end of the movie comes, and Alice seems resigned to a life filled with more responsibility and less romance, his continued presence on her porch didn't strike me as particularly unrealistic (no more so than similar events in other romance movies). As for Hepburn, she made me feel for her character, so that even while Alice was being foolishly pretentious, I felt kindly towards her (and at times embarrassed for her). I was moved towards the end, when - with her grand romance seemingly ended - she pushes aside her pain and stands up for her father. Hepburn renders a character who is naive, full of love and fancy, and refreshingly different in key ways from the more fashionable young ladies in town. | ||
 | Alice Adams | |
| "Sweet and full of feeling" | 2006-12-23 |
| The success of Alice Adams hinges largely on Katharine Hepburn's performance, and she does a fine job bringing life and spirit to the part. Alice admires the beautiful and rich daughters of the wealthier families in her town; she longs for their life of privilege, fashionable clothes, and charming suitors. Her own family lives in a modest house; her father isn't a driven and ambitious type, and her brother doesn't behave respectably. Alice attends a social ball wearing an old dress, and puts on a brave face as hardly anyone looks her way. Then, miraculously, a wealthy and affable young man, Arthur Russell (Fred MacMurray), asks her to dance. From that point, Alice tries to fool Arthur into thinking that her family is well-off. When he visits, she meets him out on the porch. She talks about all the language, dance, and music lessons she was supposedly gifted with as a child, and makes excuses for why her family's home doesn't look all that splendid. And among these rambling made-up stories are the real kernels of truth about Alice's character - her loneliness and naivete, her bold dreams and self-consciousness. While it's true that she's adopted some of the same values as the more genteel families, she's sympathetic in how she stands up for her family in the moments when it truly counts, and how she's kind and soothing to her parents as well, particularly her loving but often unassertive father (played wonderfully by Fred Stone). Fred MacMurray, as Arthur, isn't given a role with great depth, but he brings to it what he can. His job is to be a dream, an ideal, and he plays Arthur with a certain inscrutability, so when the end of the movie comes, and Alice seems resigned to a life filled with more responsibility and less romance, his continued presence on her porch didn't strike me as particularly unrealistic (no more so than similar events in other romance movies). As for Hepburn, she made me feel for her character, so that even while Alice was being foolishly pretentious, I felt kindly towards her (and at times embarrassed for her). I was moved towards the end, when - with her grand romance seemingly ended - she pushes aside her pain and stands up for her father. Hepburn renders a character who is naive, full of love and fancy, and refreshingly different in key ways from the more fashionable young ladies in town. | ||
 | Wanderlust: A History of Walking | |
| "Thoughtful and lyrical" | 2005-10-28 |
| In Wanderlust, author Rebecca Solnit looks at walking and its role in various historical and cultural contexts. The book isn't meant to be comprehensive, or study walking in all cultures and in all periods of time; as the author herself points out, the book is shaped as a kind of walk itself, a ramble through various topics that have interested her personally. Wanderlust covers a good variety of areas - pilgrimages, Wordsworth, streetwalkers, labyrinths, disappearing pedestrian space, to name a few - and how the book succeeds is in getting you to think in new ways about the fundamental act of walking and to examine its varying function and significance in (mainly Western) society over the centuries. Solnit even meditates on how walking is linked to thought and memory and how we regard our lives as a spatial narrative, a journey with various milestones. I thought the book was very interesting and well-written; the language was precise, and especially wonderful were moments where Solnit reflected on her own walks. The prose is both lyrical and absorbing, rich with anecdotes, character sketches, and evocations of place. | ||
 | Saving Grace | |
| "Unexpectedly delightful" | 2004-08-30 |
| I'm not a reader of romance novels, but recently one of my good friends, who reads widely in that genre, said that I must sample what she considers to be the cream of the crop in romance. Reluctantly I paged through the several novels she lent me, and Saving Grace turned out to be the only one I could finish. I found it really enjoyable.
What drew me in at first was that the hero, Gabriel, and the heroine, Johanna, are not good-looking, empty-minded twits who come together for the sake of the plot. Despite the fact that both are beautiful people, their looks aren't belabored... it's plain to us that it's their characters that hold the key attraction. What begins as a marriage of convenience, blossoms into a relationship of trust, respect, and ultimately love. They bring out the best in each other and each is nourished by the unique strengths of the other. As the hero, Gabriel is great. Sure he's gruff, and likes to grumble and shout, but as the heroine realizes very early on, he's just a big softy; it's an amusing moment in the book when she likens him to his pet dog - growls a lot, but really just wants to be petted and scratched behind the ears. He's honorable and loyal (would defend his wife at the drop of a pin), and despite all his bluster about how a wife should listen to her husband, he swells with admiration each time his wife shows him spirit and gives him sass, and he supports her various clever initiatives in improving clan life (so long as she doesn't place herself in harm's way, of course... he's terribly overprotective). Despite a professed inability to figure out women, and his repeated claims that warriors don't know anything about matters of the heart, from the onset he makes sincere efforts at knowing his wife's thoughts and feelings, even as he's confused by his own. When he learns at the start of the novel that she has been abused in her first marriage, he makes sure to always behave gently, tries his best to always be patient, and - on those occasions when he does tear his hair out in frustration - gives her repeated assurances that for all his barking he has no bite. Also refreshing - when he realizes that what he feels for his wife is deep and abiding love, he doesn't fight the vulnerable feeling, but tries to figure out how to make her feel the same way; he doesn't want to be mushy-hearted on his own. Johanna starts off a bit on the timid side (which, given her age and her first marriage, is understandable), but even from the start she shows pluck. And once she settles in with her new husband and realizes that he's a good man who would sooner kill himself than harm a hair on her head, her confidence continues to grow and she thrives, becoming a commanding and remarkable woman. She has very appealing traits for a heroine - strength of character, great warm-heartedness (particularly for people who are weaker and undefended), and great force of spirit and cleverness; it's no wonder that within a few short months of marriage, her husband is eating out of her hand. Garwood writes her transition in her new home very well, how she breaks out of her old mentality of guardedness and fear and gains the respect and admiration of all the people in her clan. Aside from two very appealing main characters, what makes the novel a good read is that it isn't written melodramatically or in an overwrought fashion. Though some of the writing and the plot twists are a little cliche, I really didn't care. Garwood writes with a great deal of wryness and humor, so that when truly emotional moments do come, the reader feels their power all the more. The light touch in the writing is great, and there are many very unexpected moments and bits of dialogue - another refreshing facet of Saving Grace that readers will appreciate. The hero and heroine actually have intelligent discussions and banter wittily (though they don't always intend to be funny). A satisfying read. I enjoyed the time I spent reading it, and if there's any romance novel I would recommend to someone wanting to get a taste of the romance genre, this would be it. | ||
 | The Making of a Poem: A Norton Anthology of Poetic Forms | |
| "A solid overview of poetic forms" | 2004-08-30 |
| The Making of a Poem is a good book to read for people introducing themselves to poetry and also for writers who wish to learn more about different ways they can work with rhyme, meter, and poetic context and expectation.
The introductions that precede each type of form (from sonnet to pantoum to sestina) could have been fleshed out more, and it would have been great if Strand and Boland had taken one or two poems from each section and presented them with commentary, pointing out the various elements and the ways in which the poet adhered to or twisted the poetic rules for various effects. However, because the intros to each poetic section include a brief historical background as well as a brief overview of how the form is used by today's poets, we still get a good general idea of how these various forms evolved. Also, I loved that the sample poems presented for each form spanned from early poetry to contemporary poems - it was always interesting to see the progression and the contrasts. And even if you don't learn as much as you want to about each form, the book manages to serve well as an anthology of fine poetry, surprising you on each page with another gem (some familiar, like a Shakespeare sonnet, and others more obscure but still incredibly riveting). | ||
 | Heist | |
| "Decent film; not one of Mamet's best" | 2004-08-16 |
|
Gene Hackman plays an old thief who is coerced by another crook (played by Danny DeVito) to take on a high-risk heist. The plot cannot be captured in a few lines; it's got a lot of twists... a lot of people double-crossing each other. It's great to see Gene Hackman and Danny DeVito get in each other's faces. However, the movie is not that far above the average heist film. It's got some great moments of dialogue ("Don't you want to hear my last words?" "I just did."), and it's got a lot of attitude and intense performances. But sometimes the flashy dialogue also seems forced, and you as the viewer feel aimlessly led around by a rope rather than really absorbed in the film. I also managed to predict what the next twist would be nearly every time. The movie's worth watching if you're a fan of Mamet, Hackman and/or DeVito. You could find worst films out there; it's decent, but not great. | ||
 | Saturday Night Live - The Best of Steve Martin | |
| "Not the best chosen skits, but still funny" | 2004-08-13 |
|
Steve Martin is a comedian with great range. He can be goofy and do incredible slapstick, working with his whole body. He can also be incredibly dry and witty, saying the funniest lines without batting a lash. I don't think that this collection showcases his best work, but you still get a very good sample from this marvelous comedian. The King Tut routine is a classic; also funny is the tight-fisted James Bond. | ||
 | Rounders | |
| "Solid entertainment" | 2004-08-09 |
|
I'm not a poker player and am usually not interested in movies that center around gambling and card games, but Rounders was an exception; it entertained me, and I thought it was suspenseful (even though I could still guess at the movie's most important outcome). Matt Damon plays a law student who is also a rabid poker player; he has not neatly reconciled both pursuits. He has an aimless, dissolute friend, played by Edward Norton, who is not as good a card player, but never found something else to do in life; as a result, he haunts the seediest joints and gets himself into lots of trouble. His worst nightmare comes about when he incurs a huge debt to a Russian mobster called Teddy KGB (played by John Malkovich). At that point, it's up to the Damon character to step in and play one high stake poker game that will determine the fate of his friend's life (and his own life). The movie is pretty intense and gives you a lot of detail about poker. Both Damon and Norton acquit themselves decently, while Malkovich is hilarious as Teddy KGB. I don't know if it was intentional or not, but his Russian accent is terrible; as such, Mr. KGB comes across as less sinister than he actually is. | ||
 | L.A. Confidential | |
| "One of the best crime dramas" | 2004-08-09 |
| L.A. Confidential is a taut, gripping, gut-wrenching movie. The acting is superb... each character is strikingly drawn and flawlessly brought to life by the cast. In the seedy Los Angeles of the 1950s, we meet Officer Bud White (Russell Crowe), used as a bully and strongman for the police department. He gets drawn into an investigation of a cafe shootout that killed his partner; he also grows powerfully attracted to a high-class call-girl (played by Kim Basinger), whose boss may be involved in the murder. There's also Officer Ed Exley (Guy Pearce), the boy scout of the police force; he does everything by the book, and for most of the movie has faith in his police department. And then there's Jack Vincennes (Kevin Spacey), a washed-up, burned out cop who has forgotten why he's in the force.
These characters will live in your mind for days after the movie (that's how strong the performances are). It's amazing to watch the three officers change their perceptions of each other and their police force when confronted with increasingly strong evidence that there's something really rotten going on in the upper ranks of law enforcement. The three work together in strange ways, but each meets his own fate. Incidentally, the climactic scene of the movie is really powerful, but there are moments that precede it that are equally powerful (moments that amount to a single action or even a single word). Really a fantastic movie... | ||
 | The Quiet American (Penguin Twentieth Century Classics) | |
| "A powerful book" | 2004-08-08 |
| The Quiet American is a book on moral dilemmas and uncertain loyalties. Set in the early 1950s during the French war in Vietnam, the novel's central figure is Thomas Fowler, an aging British journalist who has promised himself never to take sides in a conflict. He has committed himself to neutrality, and is content to live in Vietnam with his young mistress, Phuong, who keeps his bed warm and prepares his opium pipe. Fowler's world is disrupted when he makes the acquaintance of Alden Pyle, a young, idealistic American whose presence in Vietnam has a darker purpose than Pyle initially lets on. The larger drama of war becomes confounded with Fowler's personal life when Pyle vies for Phuong's attention and when his connections are made clearer to the British reporter.
The book has an overall tone of muted sadness and deep, gray feeling. The details are woven in deftly; each scene is so vivid. Graham Greene has a deep understanding of human morality and motives, and also gives us a good idea of what Vietnam was like in those years. | ||
 | Minority Report (Widescreen Edition) | |
| "Riveting" | 2004-08-08 |
| Spielberg is at the top of his game with Minority Report. He doesn't just settle for the masterful special effects; he takes care to develop the human drama as well. Combined, the stunning visuals and the moving story line make for a great film.
Tom Cruise gives an intense performance and gets our sympathy as an officer in the pre-crime division, a law enforcement unit that prevents murders before they happen. They are able to do this by using the mental powers of three pre-cogs, three human beings with strange powers and strange minds who can see the future. The Cruise character does not have a happy past. After the disappearance of his young son, who was kidnapped at a public pool, his marriage has fallen apart; he now lives for his job. Then the unthinkable happens - the precogs project an image of Cruise murdering someone, and he becomes a suspect on the run, trying to evade capture while figuring out why he is set to kill a man he doesn't recognize. The movie is an engrossing futuristic thriller with unexpected twists. The supporting cast is also strong. Colin Farrell plays an investigator looking into the pre-crime unit for glitches; his performance is suitably cool and smarmy, though he is not necessarily the bad guy. And Samantha Morton plays Agatha, the pre-cog who holds an integral clue to the mystery of the false accusation against Cruise; Morton's presence gives depth and an ethereal power to Agatha, in what might have been a shallow performance in the hands of another actress. | ||
 | The Fugitive (Special Edition) | |
| "Gut-wrenching" | 2004-08-08 |
|
The Fugitive is one of the best action/crime movies out there. The story itself is gripping - a man wrongly accused, breaking loose and trying to prove his innocence while being doggedly pursued by ruthless law enforcement officers. The movie doesn't waste a single moment; you're constantly propelled from one scene to the next, each scene linked tautly to the others, and you really feel that you're in the middle of the chase. You become deeply involved in the fugitive's desperate actions. He's Dr. Richard Kimble, a prominent doctor convicted of murdering his wife. He is played by Harrison Ford in what is one of Ford's most memorable screen roles. The performance is wonderfully understated, and that's why it's so powerful; we sense Kimble's quiet despair, quiet determination, his single-minded, all-consuming mission to clear his name and bring the real killers to light. Tommy Lee Jones plays his pursuer, U.S. Marshal Samuel Gerard, and he is chilling - a cool, calculating, ruthless machine. Even after it seems to dawn on him that Kimble is innocent, you're not sure what he'll do, or whether he'll refrain from shooting the fugitive doctor. What's also so amazing about this film is how the relationship between Ford and Jones subtly changes over the course of the movie. At first they're pure opponents, with no room for dialogue between them ("I don't care," Gerard says at one point, when Kimble protests his innocence). Then, as Kimble starts leaving clues that point to the real murderers, the two are not merely opponents, but are also partners; Kimble must trust that Gerard's agile mind will pick up on the clues and form doubts about the doctor's guilt. And at the end, Gerard reveals a new side of himself in one simple act of courtesy that moves you unexpectedly and makes you let out a sigh of relief. The Fugitive is definitely worth owning. It doesn't matter how many times you watch it - you will always be gripped, you will always be caught up regardless of whether you know what happens or not. | ||
 | Lost In Translation (Widescreen Edition) | |
| "Foggy, unfocused, with some fine scenes" | 2004-08-08 |
| Lost in Translation was a film that left me with mixed feelings. Urged on by the hype surrounding the movie, the awards it won, and the breathless recommendations I received from several friends, I decided to watch it; the experience had some heartening moments, but otherwise left me unsatisfied.
Bill Murray is the best thing about the movie. A middle-aged actor, reduced to doing alcohol advertisements in Japan, carrying on a strained relationship with his wife over the telephone. He brings to the part some wonderfully wry humor and a true tiredness of heart. He really engages the viewer. What I also liked about the movie is that it doesn't fall into the cliche of having the older man embark on a torrid love affair with the much-younger woman; their relationship is of a kind not seen often in movies, an unexpected friendship that has sexual tension in it but goes beyond the physical. One of the best moments in the movie is at the end, with something whispered from one character to the other that we can only guess at... I was disappointed with the Scarlett Johansson character. She hits the same note over and over again - she is sort of blank and listless and lifeless. To her credit, she does the most with what the screenplay gives her, but you're always wanting something more from her character. Just as you want something more from the movie. It's interesting to watch the relationship develop, but you always sense that the movie could have done a little more with the characters or given us something more to think about and feel for. There are some sequences I found utterly shallow (the karaoke sequence, Murray and Johansson's night out running from place to place). It really feels like the film is treading water. I know the film is supposed to be more "atmospheric", but unlike truly wonderful atmospheric films, there's something about this one that keeps us at a distance, that makes us wonder why we are where we are, and why it is even important for us to watch the characters do what they do. As the setting, Japan is used for the comical and the strange; it's a world where two lost souls can float around and ponder the lack of meaning in their lives. There is one scene where Johansson visits a temple - what does she think of it? What impact does it have on her? Nothing, it seems. The country sometimes seems to be little more than a cardboard backdrop, two-dimensional. Johansson visits a gathering of Japenese women at an ichebana (flower-arranging) lesson. She walks through the room, brushes her fingers over some flowers, and...? And...? On to the next scene... | ||
 | Beowulf: A New Verse Translation | |
| "A wonderful translation" | 2004-08-08 |
| Seamus Heaney takes the classic tale of Beowulf - the courageous, glory-hungry Geat prince - and translates it into powerful (and accessible) English verse. Heaney has a solid grasp on the original text's rhythms and meter, its use of alliteration, the stresses in the lines... he also has a sensitive ear to language. He weaves really visceral, vivid images - Grendel's thick, disgusting sliminess, and at the end, the dragon "rippling down the rock" - the language is marvelous.
Before you embark on the epic, read Heaney's introduction. It is especially helpful to anyone unacquainted with Beowulf or with Anglo-Saxon poetry. And in addition to giving you background info, the poet also relates his own personal association with the text and how he came to translate it. Beowulf is a must-read for everyone, and Tolkien fans especially will find it delightful. Not only did Tolkien write an important treatise on Beowulf, there are strong elements of Beowulf's world in the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings (barrows with treasure, fearsome dragons, the names of characters and the cadence of their speech). | ||
| © 2009 GoSale.com (S1) |