A Novel Experiment

Filed Under Books vs. Movies | 4 Comments

VS.

When I say Howl’s Moving Castle, do you think of Diana Wynne Jones’ book or Hayao Miyazaki’s movie?

Even though the latter was based on the former, they are completely different. Pretty much the only things that are the same are the names (mostly) and Sophie’s curse.

I saw the movie and fell in love. I just had to read the book now. I asked one of my friends if he’d seen the movie or read the book. He hadn’t, but he was interested. And I was far enough into the book to realize there were major differences.

Thus was born the Novel Experiment.

I thought, faced with two similar-yet-different tellings, would people favor one over the other, or would it depend on which you had encountered first? Since my order had been movie -> book, I told him to read the book first, then we’d watch the movie after.

The book was good. It was quirky and charming. But my favorite scenes from the movie were all missing. I decided I liked the movie better.

After watching the movie, my friend decided he liked the book better.

Any science-minded person would tell you this isn’t nearly enough data to prove my hypothesis. But I think it’s a good start.

Have you done any similar experiments?

Life Imitating Art

Filed Under Books vs. Movies, Tales from the Author's Desk | 3 Comments

I bought The Jane Austen Book Club for my mom for Mother’s Day. If you haven’t seen it (or read the book it’s based on), it follows five women whose lives parallel those of Jane Austen’s characters.

That got me thinking:

Does my life parallel any fictional character’s?

I’m not sure.

I was talking with my mom, and we agreed that Anna and Camron – the newlyweds I gave a shout-out to on Friday, who went on to have a gorgeous wedding – are Jane and Mr. Bingley. To quote a certain father:

“I have not a doubt of your doing very well together. Your tempers are by no means unlike. You are each of you so complying, that nothing will ever be resolved on; so easy, that every servant will cheat you; and so generous, that you will always exceed your income.”

We’re as close as sisters, so mom insists that makes me Lizzy. I believe this means I should start looking for guys who insult me!

But if I’m to resemble a Jane Austen character, right now I feel more like Emma:

“I have no idea that she has yet ever seen a man she cared for…there is nobody hereabouts to attach her.”

I definitely have to think about this some more.

In the meantime, do you think your life resembles a fictional character’s? Whose?

Narnian Media

Filed Under Books vs. Movies | 4 Comments

I’ll be the first to admit it, I’m a terrible bookworm. I judge books by their covers, I’m super picky about what I read, and – and -

I liked the Narnia movies so much more than the books!

There. Now you know my dark secret. I could just leave it at that, but what kind of blogger would I be if I didn’t justify my outrageous claims?

First, to give credit where credit is due, they did a great job of casting. They didn’t sell out and get Dakota Fanning or whoever to be Lucy. They went out and found perfect matches for the characters. If you don’t believe me, watch the actors’ commentary. And Liam Neeson as Aslan? Genius. Already you’re on the road to a good movie, because you’re not snickering at the actors and their phony and/or pompous acting.

But casting doesn’t in and of itself make a movie better than a book. (It’s just a sweet bonus.)

What really makes it stand out is the screenplay. Director Andrew Adamson did an amazing job with the adaptations of both books. The story is moving and the characters are lovable (even traitorous Edmund).

And how is this different from the books, you ask? Same moving story, same lovable characters, right?

Wrong.

C. S. Lewis’ works were simplistic. I mean, of course they have to be on some level, they are children’s books. But man. I’d like to think children are intelligent enough to understand some complexity. The characters were too black and white.

Thankfully, Adamson wrote in some gray areas. He gave us character development, a trait seriously lacking in the books. And hey, who’s going to pass up juicy drama?

Think I’m exaggerating about the lack of character development and overall simplicity? Here’s two examples:

1. In The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, the Pevensie children don’t believe Lucy discovered a new world. And why would they? They give her grief, and are soon proved wrong. Fast forward to Prince Caspian. In the book, Lucy sees Aslan, but the other Pevensies don’t believe her. Sounds familiar, right? And it makes absolutely no sense.

Adamson keeps the plot point, but he at least gives us a good[-ish] reason why Lucy’s siblings so quickly discount her. They’re hurt because they don’t know why they couldn’t see Aslan too.

2. When the Pevensies arrive in Narnia hundreds of years after their original sojourn, they discover all the friends they’d made were dead. Do the book Pevensies react? No, cold-blooded jerks that they are. They don’t care one whit. But the movie Pevensies do.

I have to admit, I never finished the Narnia books. They were too frustrating after watching the first movie. I think I made it through the first chapter or so of the fifth book (counting chronologically Narnia-time) before I gave up completely. But I am looking forward to the next Narnia movie!

My work here is done. Okay Narnia fans. Challenge me, if you dare!