After discussing Willow, last Monday, I got to thinking about my most favorite movie and it’s novel.    I am a lot more familiar with the movie, having watched it enough times to have most of the lines memorized, but I’ve only read the novel once.  Does this mean that I’ve finally found a book where I actually prefer the movie?   Perhaps.

The fact is that this movie has garnered a huge cult following, mainly because of it’s wit and one liners, but also because of it’s incredible characters and the actors that portrayed them.   There is a divide in the fan community, however, between those that prefer the novel and those that prefer the movie.   Novel lovers tend to look down on movie lovers, in some sort of elitist way, as if those who have only seen the movie haven’t been let in on the whole story.

The truth is that the movie follows the plot of the book so perfectly, that nothing is lost there – there are no missed plot lines or unmentioned background, like there was between the Willow movie and novel.   The one biggest difference between the movie and the novel is the style of narration.   I’m particularly fond of the movie’s convention of having the grandfather read the story to his sick grandson.  Fred Savage provides an excellent counterpart of the kid who finds romance and kissing disgusting, but it won over in the end.

The book on the other hand, claims to be originally written by S. Morgenstern, and abridged and commented on by William Goldman.  This is, however a fiction in itself.  Similiar to the fictional author of Memoirs of a Geisha, S. Morgenstern doesn’t exist. The abridgment is a rather clever part of the novel, a way for the author  comment on and internally narrate his own work.   I enjoyed this aspect of the novel, it was clever in a ‘pop up video’ kind of way, but it did get distracting from time to time, and occasionally got in the way of the story.

The William Goodman is so good at fiction that even his author biography is fictional, as are references to a deleted scene and a sequel, supposedly called Buttercups Baby.   He is so successful in his deception, that many of the susceptible are deceived into believing that S. Morgenstern actually existed, a fact that many of the die hard novelists love gloating over.

What really matters, however, is not which medium is the better way to experience the story, or who is smarter for appreciating its different forms, it’s the fact that the story transfered into movie so effectively as to have such a devoted following.

“No more rhyming now, I mean it!”  ”Anybody want a peanut?”

Get the movie here:  The Princess Bride (1987)

and the novel here:  The Princess Bride

I have a few favorite movies from childhood which remain favorites today, and I’m not alone in this, seeing as how they’ve all gained a sort of cult following.   My all time favorite is The Princess Bride, a book to movie combo that I suspect I’ll get further into some other day.  The other two, running a close race for second on my favorite movies list, are Labyrinth and Willow.

I was ten years old when this movie came out, and I’ve loved it ever since.  The films virtues changed over the years as I got older, but in a nut shell is has magic, action, humor, romance, suspense and excellent, diverse characters.  You can’t go wrong with fairies, mischievous brownies, evil and good sorceresses,  valiant, yet flawed heroes, a baby with a destiny and her diminutive guardian.   The movie even includes an evil warrior princes who is brought over to the good side through love.

What’s not to like about this movie?!  Apparently there’s a lot because the movie flopped at the theaters, and only gained a following when out of theaters, probably through other kids like me.   My husband still maintains that he doesn’t like it, but then he doesn’t like Labyrinth, either, so there’s no accounting for his taste.

Somewhere a long the line, possibly in a second hand book store, I discovered that there was also a book, Willow: The Novel.   I had no idea until doing research for this post,which came first, the movie or the novel, but I always assumed it was the novel.  I was wrong.   Wayland Drew was responsible for the novelization of the movie.   Usually an author writes a book and the movie is created, which is never as good as the book.   With this novel, it was backward; the movie was created, then the book, which was still better than the movie.

As much as I like the movie, I still like the novel better because the novel goes into history and explanations that the movie never really covers, or glosses over.  For example, we find out that the ruler of the doomed city of Tir Asleen, where Willow and Elora are supposed to find refuge, was actually ruled by Scorsha’s father, who was King. We find out Bavmorda’s history, how she became an evil sorcerous because she was jealous of a rival and wanted more and more power.    Eventually, Bavmorda, turned evil by her lust for power,  destroyed the city, freezing everyone into stone.

In the novel, this explains Scorsha’s desertion of the army, when she discovers her father, red-headed as she is, and begins to remember her childhood.  In the movie, we never really find out what Tir Asleen was, except that it was frozen by Bavmorda, and the spell broken at her death.  At the end of the movie, we do see Scorsha and Madmartigan waving from the castle of Tir Asleen, obviously taking up the raising of Elora, and presumably ruling of the city, but there’s no explanation of why that’s possible.

While I’m happy that I got the extra detail from the novel, I would still recommend it more as a companion to the movie, rather than advising to read the novel instead of watching the movie.  The movie’s a cult classic, and by not seeing it you’d be missing out on a lot of antics and action that, being visually appealing, the book doesn’t have.

Unfortunately, the novel is now out of print, but there are plenty of used copies available on Amazon.   Otherwise, you can find the movie here: Willow (1988)

My interest in The Golden Compass, by Phillip Pullman by was peaked when I heard that there was a lot of controversy surrounding the His Dark Materials series.   I ended up getting the series for Christmas one year and was actually quite surprised by the sophistication of the novels.

While touted as Young Adult fiction, the series actually goes quite deep into religious philosophy and theories of the soul.  This is where the controversy comes from, as the books discuss the roll of the church in the salvation of the soul.  Each novel of this series goes deeper, becomes more sophisticated, and handles the issue on a more mature level.  This is why there was more controversy surrounding the movie,  because it only covers the first novel, which does nothing more than question the motives of the church.  I can also see how this could scare people off from finishing the series, if they didn’t like what they read in the first novel.

It’s not just controversy that might keep people away, however .  As I said, this is supposed to be a YA series, and the first novel definitely reads that way.  The characters are children, the writing and imagery is simple, even the subject matter, while philosophical is also fantastical and isn’t too deep for the reader to have problems comprehend or imagining.

The Golden Compass is a story of a young girl, an orphan, and her daemon (an animal companion that we later learn is the physical representation of the soul) who goes on a quest to discover why children are going missing.  She does this with the use of a magical golden compass which can answer questions, and which only she can interpret.   The novel is about her adventures in freeing the children and stopping the bad people, Gobbers.

It’s very unfortunate that, like the first book, the first movie didn’t grab people enough to want to see more.   A lot of money was put into making this movie;  It had star power, great marketing and a huge production budget.  At the time it was to come out, I remember it was supposed to be the next ‘big thing’ in movies, and everyone was so excited to see it.  Except, of course, those from the religious right who were boycotting it because of it’s supposed anti-church stance.

The movie fell flat however.  It just didn’t have the magic that the book had, even though it tried really hard.  It’s kind of like how, in the novel, the king of the Polar Bears wants to have a Daemon, more than anything, so he pretends that he has one.  This is almost how it seemed with the actors to me – they tried to pretend they had their souls out in the open, but it was obviously just pretend.  While the movie was fairly loyal to the plot, the childlike excitement was missing, and it was difficult to care about the characters.   So, what audiences were left with was a movie that wanted to be good, that no one cared about and so the entire idea was lost.  Without sequels we don’t get to get to the good parts, where we learn about the goodness of the human soul and the dangers of power corrupting, and we don’t get to see a little girl save the universes.   It’s all so disappointing that appreciation of the series has been lost, (and it has such potential!) because the movie had no soul.  How ironic.

You can’t just read one novel and appreciate it, so you can find the series here: His Dark Materials Trilogy

And the movie, here: The Golden Compass (2007)

Around eight years ago (wow, how time flies!) I was living in the Caribbean on a tiny little island that didn’t have very many amenities.   There was no book store, besides the tourist shops that sold Harlequin romances, and the library was the top floor of a house about 500 sq ft in size, and frankly, scary to go into.   All of my books, therefore, were passed down or borrowed from friends; it’s how I came to read the Harry Potter books, and this one, Memoirs of a Geisha, by Arthur Golden.

I can honestly say that I didn’t have very high hopes for this novel, mostly because it just wasn’t my type; At the time drama wasn’t really my thing and I hadn’t discovered my affection for historical novels yet.  I was pleasantly surprised, however, when the novel drew me in from the very first pages.  Part of this was because the narrative of the story makes it seem as if it’s a true story, after all, crediting a fictional person as the translator and author of the story.  It actually took me a long time to figure out that it was in fact fictional, it was so well done.

Secondly, I enjoyed how the beginning of the novel focussed on the main characters childhood and family; it establishes where her personality and perseverance comes from.  Throughout the novel it is said that she has ‘too much water’, which is evidenced by her blue eyes, but it is always said in a derogatory way.   Her mother, before her death, however, is the only person who refers to her ‘water’ as her strength, and tells her it’s a good thing.

The character is very strong and it’s what makes her enjoyable.  She may be sold and stuck in a situation beyond her control, but she doesn’t let it defeat her, she always tries to gain the upper hand and take control of her life.   The entire premise of the novel – from her being sold to a geisha house, to her determination to become the most popular geisha in Japan, to her life during the war and comeback afterwards – is a testament to her strength and determination to survive and make her life the way she felt she deserved it.

When the movie came out I was satisfied by the way the novel was represented on screen, however I felt that it lost some of it’s heart.   Without the personalization the narration provides, and with only a minimal of time spent on Sayuri’s the history, her motivation is lost and she is seen only as a character that is strung along in the stream of events, rather than dictating their direction.   Instead of having the strength of character of the novel, she is turned in to the typical female heroine.

Besides the treatment of the main character, the majority of the novel is covered in the movie accurately enough that none of the plot is lost.  I also have to commend the directors for not ignoring small details and actualy focussing on scenes that might seem insignificant, such as Sayuri’s first time pouring tea for the Chairman, only to find the pot is empty.

I’ve enjoyed the movie and have even watched it more than once.  I feel that a person could watch it in place of reading the novel and not lose too much.  However, I do think that to really understand Sayuri, to really feel for her character, the novel needs to be read.

You can find the novel here: Memoirs of a Geisha by Arthur Golden

and the movie here: Memoirs of a Geisha (2006)

There aren’t very many movies I can think of that I watched before reading the book, usually I read a book and then the movie comes out, which I just have to see so I can compare the two.   When I first watched this movie, however, I wasn’t even aware that the novel existed.  Nonetheless, it quickly became one of my favorite movies.

I was 19  when the movie came out, in 1997,  and I was initially encouraged to watch it because Casper Van Dien was so incredibly hot as Jonny Rico, even though he was a 29 year old playing an 18 year old.  I ended up liking the movie so much because I saw it as a plausable view of the future.  Marketed to teenage audiences,  it begins with high school graduation and deals with issues such as leaving home.  It’s a coming of age story, with just enough science fiction (space travel and aliens) that any lessons to be found aren’t stifling as they’re hidden behind the action and aliens.

The society portrayed in the movie I also found interesting: Public floggings and execution  for crimes, military personnel having more privelidges, such as being able to have children.  All of these were ideas that I had flirted with in my idea of a ‘perfect society’ that could sustain itself.   I’m also a fan of how the movie presented information in a news form, as if on a computer, “Do you want to know more?”

The characters were also undeniably attractive and had honest relationships; how many of us have promised to “always be friends, no matter what”, before going out in to the world only to find that high school friendships and romance rarely survive the realities of grown life.  Add to the story a war with massive bugs, rife with heavy casualties, action and adventure and it’s a great movie!   It’s really too bad the sequels were so incredibly horrible.

Now, imagine my surprise when required reading for my Science Fiction English course in University included Starship Troopers by Robert A. Heinlein.  One of my favorite movies is a book!  I was ecstatic, because all things considered, I’ll take a good book over a good movie, any day.  Except it quickly became obvious that what I was reading was not the movie I had watched dozens of times.

Starship Troopers by Robert A. Heinlein was written as a young adult fiction for boys, in 1959.  Similar to the movie, the novel follows Jonny Rico’s military career in a future where the earth is at war with the Bugs.  Unlike the movie, however, the military is better equipped with powered body armor allowing improved fire power and movement, when compared to the guns  and foot power the infantry of the movie had to rely on.

This isn’t the only difference, however.  As I was reading through the book, desperastely searching for my favorite characters and plot lines I was surprized to find that Dizzy, the strong female character of the movie, who joins Jonny in the mobile infantry, exists in the book only briefly as a male character who goes off course and has to be rescued by Jonny.  Any other female characters were completely lacking as well;  there wasn’t anything even close to a romantic back story or any love interests.

What this novel is really about is politics.  It is a commentary on society and how Heinlein envisioned politics of the future, eerily similar to my own imagined ‘perfect society’, except that my vision includes women.   In Heinlein’s predicted future, anyone who is responsible for anyone else – doctors, nurses, police, teachers, even parents – must first serve in the military for one term before given the responsibility of looking after others.  He also has a lot to say about discipline, advocating public executions and town square floggings as an incentive to prevent crime.  While all of these ideas were reflected in the movie, they acted only as setting for the plot.  In the novel, however, the plot acts as a delivery device for these ideals.

That’s not to say that this is a bad novel, because it isn’t.  Like the movie it is a coming of age story, however instead of appealing to both sexes is meant to teach young boys about the responsibilities inherent in growing up and taking their place in the world.  The way it ends demonstrates how children inherit the earth (and responsibility) from their parents, as Rico discovers his dad is alive and a new recruit under his command.

If I was to make a complaint about the novel, despite it not being what I expected and that’s the movie producer’s fault, no the author’s, its the same complaint I have with all of Heinlein’s books:  its outdated.  It’s really hard to read a book about the future when the characters behave like it’s the 50s.  I feel the same way about Stranger in a Strange Land; I could only read so much before I got tired of the mysoginist male characters.  Never the less, this is a good book, a classic even, and the politics it puts forth are intriguing.  As such, it remains one of my favorites and is my standby novel when I have nothing else to read.

You can find the movie here: Starship Troopers

and the novel here:  Starship Troopers

For today’s book-to-movie combo I decided to tackle a classic. I say ‘tackle’ because everyone is bound to have an opinion on a classic and its inevitable that I won’t manage to cover all my bases. I encourage discussion though, so if you have something to say, say it!

Alright, so the classic up for discussion is Frank Herbert’s Dune. I first read the book so long ago that I can’t remember when I read it; it was either high school or university. The interesting point is that I didn’t read for my own pleasure, but for a class of some sort. I also remember, however, that I went on to read at least one of the sequels, because I enjoyed the original so much. Now that I’m thinking about it though, I don’t think I found the sequels as good as the original, because despite the many years since reading the books, Dune is the only one that has stuck in my memory.

If there’s anyone out there who hasn’t yet read this classic, here is an (extremely) basic synopsis: In the year 10,000+ humans rule the universe because of something called spice, which allows them to bend space and hence, travel between planets. Spice, however, is only found on one planet on the universe, Arrakis. A feud between to ruling families, the Atreides and Harkonnen leads to the Harkonnen taking over the planet, which the Atreides were running, and sending the son and conqubine of the Duke into the desert to die, where they meet up with the indigenous people. The duke’s son, Paul, becomes the prophesied savior and ruler of the universe, eventually, after using the planet to defeat the Harkonnen.

This is an extremely basic synopsis because there are so many layers of history, politics and ecology that make up very important parts of the story, that to explain it all would mean to go on for pages. I’ll just leave it by saying that the novel won Frank Herbert the Hugo award and the Nebula award and is considered by some to be the world’s best selling science fiction novel.

How does it translate into movie form, however? That’s the brilliant part, Dune has inspired somany producers that it has spawned numerous cinematic versions including two movies and a miniseries; there are even rumors of a remake coming up . The movie that I watched last night was the original 1984 version. It was a whopping three hours long, a length which, in all honesty is needed to stay true to the book, and that’s what this movie does. Only the most minor changes are made, and the ending is changed, or at least left out, to appeal more to audiences. In fact, the director went out of his way to explain, through prologue, narration and character asides to explain the history, political dynamics and character motivations. This ensures that the audience doesn’t feel left behind by not understanding, however, it could get a little tedious for those who know the story.

Interestingly enough, the movie didn’t do well in theaters. Perhaps the length or the depth of the film scared people off. It was a good movie, however, even despite the incredibly cheesy 80′s era special effects, and I can certainly see how it would profit from a theater revision. However, when I mentioned this to my husband he reminded me of the mini series that was done most recently. Still, I’d like to see what someone could do with this, today, in movie form.

If you haven’t read this book, then you’ve been living under a rock, so go get it here:  Dune

The original 1984 movie can be found here:  Dune (1984)

A lot of my most favorite books were introduced to me by a very good friend; we used to raid each other’s book shelves for novels we hadn’t read yet.  She introduced me to my favorites, Diana Gabaldon and Jack Whyte, both which I’ll be discussing in the coming weeks.  She also lent me the first couple books of the “Inheritance” series by Christopher Paolini.

This series was actually my first introduction to dragon novels, and began what I’m sure will prove to be a life-long love.   From this series I moved onto the Dragons of Pern, and spent months reading all of those books, but that’s a different post.

Similar to Naomi Novak’s “His Majesty’s Dragon“, the first novel in the series, “Eragon” is a coming of age story between a boy and his dragon.  That is, however, where all simlilarities end.   Eragon is a fantasy that takes place in a world where dragon riders used to protect the people, until the most powerful dragon rider killed off all the others and seized rule of the kingdom.  The boy, Eragon, finds a dragon egg that was sent into hiding (protecting it from the evil dragon rider king) by an elven princess.

The egg hatches, and the baby dragon imprints on Eragon, marking him as his rider.  The beginning of the novel is spent with Eragon raising the dragon, their developing relationship and learning how to ride.  The rest of the novel is about the conflict between the evil king and the resistance (led by the elven princess whom Eragon has to rescue) of which Eragon becomes a member when his home is destroyed, by the bad guys, and he is forced to flee with the dragon.

There is absolutely no way that my description could do this novel justice, and unfortunately, there is a whole slew of people out there who saw the movie who are now convinced that the novel was bad, when in fact, it was just a horrible movie.     The acting was bad, the action bland, and the relationships between the characters cliche and predictable.  The whole movie felt washed out and was a colossal disappointment to fans of the novel.   I actually feel bad for Christopher Paolini because the movie was so bad, and performed so poorly that the possibility of following up with the sequels is practically nil.

The reason I wanted to talk about this novel-to-movie today is that I recently discovered that the third novel in the series, Brisingr,  is now available in paperback, unfortunately there is still no word on when the last book can be expected.  I also want people to know that the series is GOOD!  Don’t believe what you’ve seen with the movie; this is a great series with endearing relationships, fantastic battles and inspiring characters.   Give the novels a chance, you won’t be disappointed!

On a side note, I saw “Eclipse”  last week and it was 100% better than the first two movies.  It was really good and even worth watching more than once.

You can find the 3 book Inheritance series here:  Eragon, Eldest and Brising

The movie is here:  Eragon

Welcome to a new feature!   I’ve had it in mind for a while now to have a feature on books turned into movies, because, lets face it, everyone wants to see their favorite novel, when turned into a movie, represented in the best light; very rarely does that happen.   How often do you hear, “the book is much better”, compared to “the movie was better than the book”?  To be honest, I’m not sure I’ve ever heard the latter before.

So, to begin this feature, I’m going to tackle the very controversial ‘Twilight Saga’, seeing as how the third, ‘Eclipse’ opens in theaters tomorrow.   The first issue to delve into is, why is it controversial?  Well, it starts with the fact that for every novel discussion forum there is either one of two topics:  Twilight Lovers or Twilight Haters.     Basically, you either love the books oryou hate them, it seem that there is no in between.   So, why is that?

The haters have said such things as “Stephanie Meyers is a hack”.  They  point out that the writing is horrible, the characters shallow, vampires horribly misrepresented, and that the message sent to teen girls is dangerous.

The lovers on the other hand, of which I am one, I have to admit, love it because the shallowness of the characters allows the reader (girls, mostly) to assume the roll of heroine.    The criticizm made by the haters that the author created a blank slate of a character that could fit any average teenager, is exactly the point, and it’s what helps to sell the book.  Every girl can imagine herself as Bella, an awkward, average, girl with low self esteem who  is loved by a beautiful mystical creature.    Once the reader becomes that girl, having all these new experiences and feelings, it’s like experiencing a first love all over again.

The action and suspense in the novels are as intense as the romance and conflicts between characters, and the culmination of everything that happens is intensely satisfying and left me wishing there was more to read.  I found the writing to be compelling and completely absorbing, each page leading me on and needing to see what happened next.

Unfortunately, this doesn’t translate to movie form.    I loved the novels and have read the saga at least three times, devouring the novels in quick succession.  I’ve watched the movies because I love seeing my favorite novels in movie form.  I love seeing the characters come alive in front of my eyes, and play out what I imagined.  These movies, however, are horrible, horrible movies.   The acting is completely lacking in any emotion, except for a constant brooding.  There is absolutely no chemistry between the characters, and the story plods along.   The most exciting parts of the novel just hit the screen with a dull thud that makes it obvious that the director is both male and didn’t read the books for himself.

The director seems to  feel that what brings the girls in are images of Jacob and Edward without their shirts on.   While this is undeniably hot, guys without their shirts on do not a movie make.   If anything, all it does is point out that vampires sparkle, which just outrages vampire fans, without giving any context as to how or why.  Never mind the fact that vampires are a fantasy creature and open to interpretation; just because Dracula was written one way, doesn’t mean they all have to fit the mold.

Anyway, so I am planning on going to see ‘Eclipse’ in the next couple days, and I expect it to be just as horrible as the other two.   I can’t stay away however, because I want to relive the story, and even as it’s hacked to bits on screen, at least I can imagine it as how it should be.

If you want to read the books, which I do recommend, because they’re awsome (quiet, you haters!), you can find them here:

Twilight Saga

If you insist on watching the movies, as I do, you can find those here:

Twilight, New Moon