Divergent: The Movie and the concept of Girl Power

Saw Divergent this afternoon, as planned.  Good movie, but of course, not as good as the book. I was pleasantly surprised by how much they actually left the same, but there were a few glaring differences that I don't really understand the purpose of changing.  Perhaps if/when there's Insurgent and Allegiant the changes may make more sense.  I will say that Theo James as Four is definitely a better choice than I originally thought.  My mental image may have altered.  Shailene Woodley isn't quite petite/tiny enough for the mental image I had of Tris, since there are comments throughout the book about her tininess, but it wouldn't have been as obvious if Christina (Zoe Kravitz) wasn't even smaller.

Overall, definitely pleased with the book to movie transition on this one.

Divergent: the books- spoilers present

I finished reading the Divergent series last night.  And as usual, as I'm reading along, I'm thinking about how I don't really like the female character.  She seems kind of whiney and a little bit stupid.  Strong and brave but still whiney and stupid. Which is why I was so incredibly shocked to find that the story ends up not really being about her in the end anyway. She was kind of just a means to an end.  And yet, I still felt like crying about her loss. 

Clearly the books have really well written characters, or I wouldn't have gotten that attached. The story itself is really just another of the super common (right now) dystopian society themes, but has a little bit of an interesting twist on the basic.  Enough to make you wonder where our society is headed, what faction would you choose.

Gatsby ... the great?

I've often commented that a movie will never, and can never, be better than the book upon which it is based.  But, in one particular instance, I have been proven wrong.

To start at the beginning, I never had to read The Great Gatsby in school.  I'm not sure how I missed it, or it me, whichever, but somehow it was never required reading in my English classes.  So, a few years ago, I decided to try to catch up on all those books that somehow I managed to avoid in school, Gatsby obviously being on that list.  Considering the general reception the novel is greeted with, I understandably had expectations.  I don't think that I've ever heard anyone say anything against it, never mind finding someone who didn't like it.  That, it seemed, would be almost like heresy.

As I read though, I became more and more frustrated.  Nothing about the characters made me like any of them.  And the language made them all so ... I don't know, pretentious?  I understand that there is a point to that impression, but I felt at least the narrator should have gotten some favourable impression from me.  Thankfully, the book is short, and I finished it with relief, becoming the only person I know who could say they honestly disliked it.  I felt it was a waste of my time having read it, except to be able to say that I had.  Even with a fluffy romance novel, I end up with a feeling of having enjoyed it, even if I don't take anything meaningful away from the experience.  I couldn't say that for Gatsby.  I was actually so disappointed, that I struck F. Scott Fitzgerald from the list of authors that I ever wanted to read.

Flash forward about a year, when I learn that Leonardo DiCaprio is starring in an adaptation of the book.  I enjoy Leo - I have since his first appearance on Growing Pains, with only a minor pause during the Titanic trend.  (I liked the movie, but not the hype and freakishness that went with it.)  Anyway, I believe I probably audibly groaned when I found out about the Gatsby movie, knowing that I'd have to see it, considering the star.   I guess my only hope was that I might get a little more something out of the story than I had initially.

So, this past weekend, I saw the film. In 3D.  In typical Baz Luhrmann fashion, the images were breathtaking, the colours and spectacle made perfect sense in the framework of the story. (The music was a bit incongruous and out of time, but dealable.)  Everything was that bit over the top that excellently illustrated the excess of the lifestyle being portrayed, and I walked out of the theatre with a much better understanding of the character of Gatsby than I expected.  From the book, I just felt the behaviour was selfish and self-indulgent, but from the movie, I grasped something else, a vulnerability, a need to please that I hadn't noticed before.  All the roles were well-played, and made much more sense for me in the movie than the book, perhaps because I could see the emotions (or lack there-of) where in the book I had to make it up for myself.  With no sense of relation to any of the characters, I found that impossible.

I have started re-reading the novel now, while the film images are still fresh in my mind, because I hope to be able to take something more from it than I did the first time.  But I do need to applaud Baz Luhrmann for the interpretation/adaptation that has created an appreciation of this story in me.  And for casting Leo in it because with another actor, I may not have made the effort of seeing it.  He will likely always be the image of Jay Gatsby that I see.

Gotta cut loose

Went to see the new Footloose remake tonight.  Despite my initial impression from the tv ads that it was going to be just a replica with new actors, it was not.  And I did definitely enjoy it.  Enough new to make it original, but enough old to make it a great homage.  My friend and I both thoroughly enjoyed it.  Enough so that I'm considering putting it on the "to purchase" list.  Eventually.  There are a number of items ahead of it.  And the original.  The original still wins.  But the remake did a damn fine job for itself.

Note to self: Craig Brewer's a good director.  I should check out his other stuff.

Kenny Wormald was great as Ren.  He probably dances better than Kevin Bacon.

While not usually a Julianne Hough fan, I was totally able to forget that she was the actress and get lost in the life of the character of Ariel.  Kudos on that.

Miles Teller is someone to watch in the future.  As Willard, he was endearing and rednecky, and totally enjoyable.

I recommend seeing (the new) Footloose.  At some point.  Maybe not in the theatre, but it's totally not a waste of 2 hours.

Having said that, I really, really feel the need to watch the original right now.  And dammit, I don't own it.

Wow, check out the controversy that is me!

I recently made the "mistake" of posting an opinion on twitter about a movie that I'd seen the trailer for on TV all night.  My opinion was based erroneously, I found out after that, when numerous people attacked me for it.  One person calmly pointed out that I was wrong.  That person turned out the be the movie's director.  I then went and checked out a longer version of the trailer for said movie.  I was definitely wrong.  I apologized for my error.

Somehow this is not good enough for one person.  This person is having issues with the fact that I'm calling my tweet an opinion.  Below is the dictionary definition of opinion:
1. a belief or judgement that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2. a personal view, attitude or appraisal.

I'm not sure how what I posted doesn't count as an opinion, based on the one TV trailer that I had repeatedly seen that night.  And I'm frustrated by this person, who seems to think I have it out for this movie.  I was posting what I thought.  I'm still allowed to do that, right?  And I did apologize and correct myself upon realizing I was wrong.  And the director of the flipping movie is fine with me.  Even had more discussion afterwards.

I don't get it.  First, I don't understand why this guy really cares.  Is he in the movie?  Is this somehow personal to him?  I just don't get it.

But I think I'm over it.  I just needed to explain myself somewhere.  And Twitter doesn't let me use enough words.

BTW: you can follow me on Twitter.  Apparently, I say controversial things. *shrug*

limadastar on Twitter

Simplicity

Life really is about the simple things.

I'm staying in today.  This in itself isn't a surprise.  But I'm sitting by my patio door, first with the window slightly open for the fresh air, until it got chilly, and then with the fireplace turned slightly on.  Working on baby gifts for a friend.  Watching Doctor Zhivago on television.

None of the joy of these things are costly.  Yes, I pay for the digital cable that supplies the movie, and yes, I paid for the supplies for the baby gifts.  But as an activity on a daily basis, none of them are expensive.

And it really is such a nice thing to just sit and drink tea and craft.  Letting my mind wander, or not, listening to the cat purr on the couch nearby.  To just be.

It's a lovely way to spend a day.

The wise words of Marilyn Monroe...

Not a phrase someone expects to hear - Marilyn Monroe, wise?  Really?  Wasn't she just a vapid sex-pot?

I'm reading a biography right now, and no, she really wasn't.  She was constantly searching information, knowledge.  Reading classic literature, studying art.  It's interesting.

Wise words of today are: "I can be smart when it's important, but most men don't like it." (spoken as Lorelei Lee in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes - 1952)

And now you'd suggest that she didn't actually speak them, they were scripted for her.  Except that it was Marilyn's idea to add them to the movie.  They weren't originally scripted.  And truer words have probably never been spoken.  And, it seems she based her entire persona on them.

It's sad that 59 years later it's still the same.  Men/boys do not like smart women in general.  Are they threatened by it?  Do they just like to feel intellectually superior?  Who knows but them.  And they're not telling.

So, we learn to either play stupid, or suffer their intolerance of us.  It's a petty game, really.  But even as young girls we know we have to learn how to play it.  Because even now, there's judgement if a woman can't get a man.

And a smart girl, even a pretty one, can rarely get a man as easily as a pretty dumb girl.

It's Friday, Friday...

Thank Goodness it's Friday is not just a cliched phrase, it's a mantra where I work.

I know, there's a lot of people that can say that.  I'm not alone.  But it's okay, everyone's allowed to vent.

And this week wasn't really that bad.  The boss will be on vacation next week, and I'm on vacation after that (with a friend's wedding coming up too) so it's all good.  There's lots of chances to relax.

Tomorrow I'm going to see Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part 2 (again - for the 5th time) at the Imax before it's gone from the theatre.  That's exciting.  And since we're going to be in the States anyway, maybe we'll stop and I can buy some real Hershey's chocolate (the Canadian kind just isn't as good)  and if I'm REALLY lucky, maybe some Cherry Coke, since they don't make it here anymore.

That would make for a really good day.  And I'm doing it all with a good friend, and my mom.

Simple things are fab!

Nine?

I started, about an hour ago, to watch the movie "Nine" with Daniel Day Lewis, Nicole Kidman, Penelope Cruz, Kate Hudson, Fergie. To say the least, I am confused. I get that he plays a director, who has a wife, and many girlfriends/mistresses. But the random singing puts you in and out of the current scene, and I guess it's supposed to be his subconscious or something, but it's just not flowing at all for me. I will admit to kind of enjoying the burlesque aspect of it, because as a genre it's kind of interesting, but ... I just don't know...

Did anyone see it? Did it make sense? Should I be giving it more of a chance?