The kid and I recently read Harry Potter and the Cursed Child. Hmmm ... I don't know what to say. I guess I can say that my daughter liked it better than I did. Initially it was wonderful to see favorite characters again — Harry, Ron, Hermione especially. There are even appearances by some folks you might not expect. I won't spoil it. But ... I just didn't buy it. This was not who I imagined Harry, Ron, Hermione to be as adults. There are so many problems.
Harry Potter and the Cursed Child read more like fan fiction than Rowling. And it isn't exactly a "new Rowling," as advertised. It is the script of the play written by Jack Thorne, based on an original new story by Thorne, J.K. Rowling, and John Tiffany. The project has Rowling's blessing, so I guess I will have to go with that. But I never thought I'd read something more disappointing about Harry than Rowling's own lame epilogue in The Deathly Hallows. Oh well. She did actually she did write the screenplay for the upcoming film, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. So, Potter fans, not all hope is lost.
Showing posts with label Harry Potter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Harry Potter. Show all posts
Monday, October 17, 2016
Tuesday, March 24, 2015
spring break fun pix
![]() |
| Scooby Dooby Doo! |
![]() |
| The kid's first word was "Shrek," after all ... |
![]() |
| I want these!!! |
![]() |
| Talk about perfect timing ... |
Labels:
Fun,
Harry Potter,
Orlando Florida,
spring break,
Universal studios
Tuesday, December 30, 2014
horns: daniel radcliffe can still talk to snakes
Ig Perrish (Daniel Radcliffe) met the love of his life, Merrin Williams (Juno Temple), when they were just children, and the two fell in love and shared everything together. Their romance seemed idyllic, until one night when Merrin is found dead, the victim of a brutal rape and murder. Ig finds himself the prime suspect, his town, friends, and even most of his family shunning him. The heartbroken Ig maintains his innocence, to deaf ears. And then, as the opening line of the novel by Joe Hill states, after he "spent the night drunk and doing terrible things," Ig wakes up to discover that two small horns have sprouted through his forehead. The horns are growing, and he doesn't seem to be able to remove them. They also seem to have a peculiar effect on other people — they bring out one's deepest and darkest desires.
Horns
, directed by Alexandre Aja (Piranha 3D , Mirrors, The Hills Have Eyes) is at times quite great to look at. But exactly who is the movie for? It is not strictly horror. It has a quasi-religious subtext, although it doesn't go too far (or far enough) in that direction. It begins as a young/adult romance, but also includes a brutal rape/murder. It's not exactly a murder mystery, although the last third of the film mostly goes down that path. There are some clever biblical-themed in-jokes — check out the license plates on different character's cars, the diner Ig frequents is called "Eve's" — but the movie dances around a bit with its good/evil themes, too.
You can read the rest of my review on Cinema Sentries ...
Horns
You can read the rest of my review on Cinema Sentries ...
Labels:
Daniel Radcliffe,
Harry Potter,
Horns,
Horror,
Horror film,
Joe Hill,
movies
Thursday, October 02, 2014
throwback (halloween) thursday: the squirt
![]() |
| Ninja sushi chef |
![]() |
| It glowed in the dark, too |
![]() |
| As Aragog the Spider (poor Ron!) |
![]() |
| The (not so) Wicked Witch of the East |
![]() |
| Pretty kitty and cute hot dog |
Labels:
Fun,
Halloween,
Halloween costume,
Harry Potter,
Ron Weasley,
the kid
Monday, September 15, 2014
Thursday, August 23, 2012
we're living in a black and white world
The kid pointed out recently that almost every movie we see has something bad that happens, or a bad guy in it. I thought about it and I think she's right. Even The Parent Trap and Alvin and the Chipmunks have ersatz villains in them. Most Disney movies have evil witches or other creatures (Snow White — The Evil Queen, Sleeping Beauty — Maleficent, 101 Dalmatians
— Cruella DeVille, The Little Mermaid — Ursula, The Lion King — Scar) in them. Even the Muppets have to put up with being kidnapped (The Muppet Movie
), accused of theft (The Great Muppet Caper), fight pirates (Muppet Treasure Island), or someone trying to shut down their theater (The Muppets
). I guess most children's stories need to have conflict or someone for a child to root for — or against. And of course there are so many more. Here are just a few of the best:
The Wicked Witch of the West (and Miss Gulch) in The Wizard of Oz
Voldemort and many others in the Harry Potter series
The Child Catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang
Principal Ed Rooney in Ferris Buellers Day Off
Biff Tannen in Back To The Future
Judge Doom in Who Framed Roger Rabbit?
Darth Vader (and his minions) in Star Wars
The mean kids who gave The Karate Kid such a hard time (in both the Ralph Macchio and Jaden Smith versions)
The White Witch in The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe
Captain Hook in Peter Pan
The Grand High Witch in The Witches
There are a few children's movies that come to mind with no bad guy:
Hayao Miyazaki's My Neighbor Totoro
has some suspense, as little sister Mei goes missing temporarily when she goes to visit her mother in the hospital, but the entire spirit of the movie is loving and gentle.
Disney/Pixar's Finding Nemo
features a bratty kid in the doctor's office and some scary sea creatures, but no bad guy or girl — again, just suspense — will Nemo's dad and Dory be able to track him down?
Disney's Mary Poppins
has an out-of touch father, but even he comes around at the end, as Mary Poppins' charm and magic is irresistible.
Kiki's Delivery Service
, another wonderful Miyazaki film, features apprentice witch Kiki getting into lots of scrapes, but there are no villains to speak of.
Disney's The Ugly Dachshund
features some pretty naughty little dachshunds, but they're so adorable you don't mind.
That's all that I can think of at the moment. Not too many. Any other movies without a bad guy out there worth checking out?
Related: kiddie catharsis
![]() |
| Margaret Hamilton as The Wicked Witch of the West in The Wizard of Oz |
Voldemort and many others in the Harry Potter series
The Child Catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang
Principal Ed Rooney in Ferris Buellers Day Off
Biff Tannen in Back To The Future
Judge Doom in Who Framed Roger Rabbit?
Darth Vader (and his minions) in Star Wars
The mean kids who gave The Karate Kid such a hard time (in both the Ralph Macchio and Jaden Smith versions)
The White Witch in The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe
Captain Hook in Peter Pan
The Grand High Witch in The Witches
There are a few children's movies that come to mind with no bad guy:
Hayao Miyazaki's My Neighbor Totoro
![]() |
| Totoro and the gang hang out |
Disney's Mary Poppins
Kiki's Delivery Service
![]() |
| Suzanne Pleshette with her canine friends |
That's all that I can think of at the moment. Not too many. Any other movies without a bad guy out there worth checking out?
Related: kiddie catharsis
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
harry potter and the audio book
I've read Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone more than once (or even twice), not to mention seeing the movie a number of times. My daughter loves Harry and all his friends. At eight, she isn't old enough to see all the movies yet, or read the books. A friend a few years back recommended the audio books, and since we have been doing a bit of driving around this summer I thought we'd give the first novel a go. I didn't think I was really in the mood to "read" it all over again, but the amazing work of Jim Dale changed all of that. He makes Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
come alive in a way that rivals the printed word and the movie, although some of his vocals, especially those of Hagrid and Harry's uncle Vernon Dursely, seem to be influenced by the movie's actors, Robbie Coltrane and Richard Griffiths respectively.
Dale is so convincing in the prose passages and character voices that at times it is easy to forget that you are listening to just one person. From Wikipedia:
To millions of fans in the United States, Jim Dale is the "voice" of Harry Potter. He has recorded all seven books in the Harry Potter series, and as a narrator he has won two Grammy Awards, seven Grammy Nominations and a record ten Audie Awards ... He is also the narrator for the Harry Potter video games, and for many of the interactive "extras" on the Harry Potter DVD releases. He also holds two Guinness World Records: one for having created and recorded 146 different character voices for one audiobook, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, and one for occupying the first six places in the Top Ten Audio Books of America and Canada 2005.As much as some of J.K. Rowling's character names become a little twee for me after a while (Phyllida Spore, Vindictus Viridian, Arsenus Jigger, Quirinus Quirrell) I have to admit that Dale has helped me fall in love with Harry Potter all over again. I've always felt the first book was her best, as it probably received the most solicitous attention from editors. But it is fun again to hear Harry encounter Hogwarts and Hermione and Ron and everything else for the first time. Rowling undeniably created a wonderful world, and as inspired as it might have been by authors like Roald Dahl or P.L. Travers, it is still an amazing achievement. For our first venture into audiobook territory I'm now glad that we chose something so familiar and loved. And as Dale has done the entire series I'm tempted to press on. I'm not sure, however that even Jim Dale could get me through the last book and its endless forest camping trip, but we'll see.
Labels:
#CBR4,
books,
Harry Potter,
J.K. Rowling,
Jim Dale,
Robbie Coltrane,
xoxoxoe
Thursday, February 23, 2012
harry potter, all growed up
Daniel Radcliffe has had a creative life outside of Harry Potter — stage runs in Equus and How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying and a nice small part in the British television movie My Boy Jack. His name appears above the title of his latest film, The Woman in Black, and he is in almost every frame of this spooky, creepy horror film.
Radcliffe's face fills the screen, and he is impressive as Arthur Kipps, a grief-stricken young widower who is sent to conclude the affairs of an Alice Drablow, who owned Eel Marsh House — an isolated estate in northern England. This job is also his last-ditch attempt to keep his postion at his current employer's, which has been made precarious by his extended grieving. Kipps is haunted by the death in childbirth of his beautiful young wife. Before he even sets foot in the village of Cryffin Gifford, death surrounds him. He even sees her, in her wedding dress from time to time. For him, she is the woman in white.
Kipps quickly makes friends with Sam Daily (Ciarán Hinds), the most prosperous man in the area. Daily and his wife Elizabeth (Janet McTeer), like many families in the village, have lost a child, a son. His wife, who seems to be at times psychic and at others disturbed, is convinced that the Woman in Black, once she is seen, means harm to all children.
Kipps spends a great deal of the film exploring the house, trying to find out more about a woman that everyone fears but no one wants to seem to talk about. He is quite brave, at times foolhardy, in his desire to find out what that noise is on the other side of a locked door. But he is interested in séances, promoted in newspaper advertisements by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, and may be less spooked by the Woman in Black and more hopeful that he might catch another glimpse of his wife. He also has a young son to care for, and desperately wants to succeed in this task for his firm and retain his postion.
The Woman in Black is a Hammer film. It had the biggest opening in the history of Hammer films, and is the latest release from the revamped classic horror film company (Let Me In was released in 2010).
Based on the 1983 novel by Susan Hill, this is a truly creepy film, the scares and atmosphere setting the tone, rather than relying on gore. It's more along the lines of The Uninvited, The Innocents or The Others. The film deviates quite a bit from the book. There are added elements that are quite well-suited to the visuals of a film, and some changes to the plot that fans of the book may find annoying or confusing (it's a shame Daily's dog Spider, who was quite an important element of the book, is relegated to the background in the film). But it moves well. The old-fashioned ghost story nature of the novel, was sometimes seemed just that, old-fashioned. In the film the classic ghost story elements — haunted house, cobwebs, peeling wallpaper, creepy antique dolls — merely seem suited to the gothic atmosphere. Starring along with Radcliffe is the set design and setting of the film. The haunted nursery, the backyard graveyard, the depressed village, the Mont St. Michel-like tidal island and causeway — it's a great-looking film.
Daniel Radcliffe has proved with The Woman in Black that he can carry a film, as an actor, not just a familiar and beloved character. He is convincing as an adult and in period garb. Although Harry Potter was set in the present day, it had more than a touch of Dickensian London in its milieu of wizards and monsters. Most of Radcliffe's projects seem to be set in the past. In his next film he will play Allan Ginsberg, in a story that takes place in 1944. It would be nice to see Radcliffe in something really contemporary. Maybe something by Nick Hornby? Or a comedy? He's definitely graduated from Hogwarts, and I am looking forward to seeing what he tries next.
![]() |
| Arthur Kipps (Daniel Radcliffe) is not alone in Eel Marsh House |
Kipps quickly makes friends with Sam Daily (Ciarán Hinds), the most prosperous man in the area. Daily and his wife Elizabeth (Janet McTeer), like many families in the village, have lost a child, a son. His wife, who seems to be at times psychic and at others disturbed, is convinced that the Woman in Black, once she is seen, means harm to all children.
Kipps spends a great deal of the film exploring the house, trying to find out more about a woman that everyone fears but no one wants to seem to talk about. He is quite brave, at times foolhardy, in his desire to find out what that noise is on the other side of a locked door. But he is interested in séances, promoted in newspaper advertisements by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, and may be less spooked by the Woman in Black and more hopeful that he might catch another glimpse of his wife. He also has a young son to care for, and desperately wants to succeed in this task for his firm and retain his postion.
![]() |
| Kipps with Mrs. Dailey (Janet McTeer) |
Based on the 1983 novel by Susan Hill, this is a truly creepy film, the scares and atmosphere setting the tone, rather than relying on gore. It's more along the lines of The Uninvited, The Innocents or The Others. The film deviates quite a bit from the book. There are added elements that are quite well-suited to the visuals of a film, and some changes to the plot that fans of the book may find annoying or confusing (it's a shame Daily's dog Spider, who was quite an important element of the book, is relegated to the background in the film). But it moves well. The old-fashioned ghost story nature of the novel, was sometimes seemed just that, old-fashioned. In the film the classic ghost story elements — haunted house, cobwebs, peeling wallpaper, creepy antique dolls — merely seem suited to the gothic atmosphere. Starring along with Radcliffe is the set design and setting of the film. The haunted nursery, the backyard graveyard, the depressed village, the Mont St. Michel-like tidal island and causeway — it's a great-looking film.
Daniel Radcliffe has proved with The Woman in Black that he can carry a film, as an actor, not just a familiar and beloved character. He is convincing as an adult and in period garb. Although Harry Potter was set in the present day, it had more than a touch of Dickensian London in its milieu of wizards and monsters. Most of Radcliffe's projects seem to be set in the past. In his next film he will play Allan Ginsberg, in a story that takes place in 1944. It would be nice to see Radcliffe in something really contemporary. Maybe something by Nick Hornby? Or a comedy? He's definitely graduated from Hogwarts, and I am looking forward to seeing what he tries next.
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Friday, July 15, 2011
blood, magic, death, snakes, love, harry
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 is just that — the second part of a movie that we all saw last November. It isn't intended to stand on its own, and it couldn't. It won't when devotees buy the 2-part DVDs in time for Christmas. The movie starts off, practically in the middle of a conversation, and goes full speed ahead, towards Harry's destiny and Voldemort's, with bodies piling to the right and left. Many are heralding this film as the best of the series, but I can't do that, until I see it, back-to-back with its other half. As far as a coda to characters that I have enjoyed, even loved at times, it was very satisfying.
Part 2 can be unrelenting (and it is no more so than the book it's based upon, the weakest of Rowling's series). But it is also rewarding, with many, many nods to the previous films. J.K. Rowling created a wonderful world, with such fun details and endearing characters that many have grown to love. Her only weakness has been an inability to to not try to pack it all in — endless explanations for how and why things in the wizarding world are the way they are.
What has always been great about the films, even the weaker entries, are how screenwriter Steve Kloves has been able to condense Rowling's labyrinthian plotting and concentrated on the characters. Directors like David Yates have been able to visually tell the audience something that Rowling would have felt forced to use many, many words to do and a wimpy editor would have been afraid to cut. For example, the epilogue in The Deathly Hallows book was excruciating, as Rowling just couldn't let go of control of her characters and felt forced to explain, down to jobs held and ridiculously obvious middle names chosen for their progeny, precisely what happened to Harry, Ron & Hermione in the future. God forbid she let her young fans come up with futures for Harry and his friends from their own imaginations. But that horrible postscript, when it is depicted in the movie, with hardly any dialogue except a few words from Harry to his son is something else entirely. It allows the audience to enjoy seeing Platform 9 3/4 once again and to see that Harry has truly gotten past his pain and has become a caring, loving, parent. It doesn't even mention what he's doing for a living. Bravo, Yates & Co.
There are so many other little moments such as these in the movie, little goodbyes and thank yous, that provide brief respites from the Battle of Hogwarts, which takes up most of the the second half of the film. Some come directly from Rowling's text, some are nice little visual additions — Harry runs across Cornish pixies in the Room of Requirement, Snape has Harry use the Pensieve one last time. There are lots of faces we are happy to see again — John Hurt as Ollivander, Emma Thompson as Professor Trelawney, Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid. We also get to see favorite characters who have passed on, like Gary Oldman as Sirius Black.
The Deathly Hallows is a movie for fans of the Potter-verse. They will be happy, as things have been done right. I suppose that a fan of action movies might enjoy the battle scenes, but they wouldn't get most of the little moments that make it such a treat for the initiated — Neville (Matthew Lewis) and the sorting hat, the search for horcruxes, the breaking into and escape from Gringott's. It was great to see the three kids together again, if bittersweet, for the last time — Emma Watson as Hermione, Rupert Grint as Ron, and Daniel Radcliffe as Harry. The trio are together for most of the film, until Harry's stand-off with Ralph Fienne's Voldemort, but the movie belongs to Radcliffe. He is front and center, in almost every scene, at high pitch, trying to do what is right for his friends, for his world. As much as Voldemort is his ultimate adversary, and is magnificently villainous, it is true hero Harry, becoming a man, that is the focus of the film.
The other stand-out is Alan Rickman, as Professor Snape. Snape was always one of my favorite characters in the book. Although I never believed him to be a "bad guy," Rowling wisely created a very conflicted person, who no matter what he did, was always involved in a struggle with right and wrong. Rickman, apart from having one of the most mellifluous deliveries out there, was able to convey the complexity of Snape throughout all the films. Snape has been seen mostly through young Harry's eyes, who could never see his mean teacher as a man with deep secrets and feelings. In Part 2 Snape finally shares himself with Harry and the results are as emotional as you would expect.
Even with a life and death battle raging around him, Harry is smart enough to put aside past prejudicial feelings and listen to what Snape has to tell him. When Harry lifts his face from the Pensieve, Radcliffe's expression tells it all — how it feels to realize that he has been so wrong about someone, how his feelings of dislike have been misplaced. And how he may have put his trust and his love in another and been wrong, or at least not completely right, about them as well. That is the moment when Harry grows up. And Snape gets him there. There are a lot of sad moments after that scene in the story and the film — the Harry Potter series has been about death and loss from the very beginning — and there are many more deaths to come, possibly even his own, before Harry can move on, but Harry's learning Snape's story is the emotional turning point.
As Harry heads off to his duel-to-the death with Voldemort, he is for the first time ever going with his eyes open, with all the information that the secretive Dumbledore never dared share with him. When he meets the shades of his mother and father and godfather in the Forbidden Forest, he is a man. His mind, too, is open, and now he can fully open his heart. Harry Potter may have originally been aimed at children, but Rowling and her fans quickly turned it into something much more. Coming-of-age stories are always more appreciated by those who have been through childhood themselves. Many of Harry's fans, like the film franchise's young actors, have grown up together. But in watching the films now, it is Harry's journey of knowledge that resonates, which is why I wasn't upset to see him in that last scene, on Platform 9 3/4. Life keeps moving, and so has Harry.
![]() |
| Harry, Hermione, & Ron |
What has always been great about the films, even the weaker entries, are how screenwriter Steve Kloves has been able to condense Rowling's labyrinthian plotting and concentrated on the characters. Directors like David Yates have been able to visually tell the audience something that Rowling would have felt forced to use many, many words to do and a wimpy editor would have been afraid to cut. For example, the epilogue in The Deathly Hallows book was excruciating, as Rowling just couldn't let go of control of her characters and felt forced to explain, down to jobs held and ridiculously obvious middle names chosen for their progeny, precisely what happened to Harry, Ron & Hermione in the future. God forbid she let her young fans come up with futures for Harry and his friends from their own imaginations. But that horrible postscript, when it is depicted in the movie, with hardly any dialogue except a few words from Harry to his son is something else entirely. It allows the audience to enjoy seeing Platform 9 3/4 once again and to see that Harry has truly gotten past his pain and has become a caring, loving, parent. It doesn't even mention what he's doing for a living. Bravo, Yates & Co.
![]() |
| Neville! |
The Deathly Hallows is a movie for fans of the Potter-verse. They will be happy, as things have been done right. I suppose that a fan of action movies might enjoy the battle scenes, but they wouldn't get most of the little moments that make it such a treat for the initiated — Neville (Matthew Lewis) and the sorting hat, the search for horcruxes, the breaking into and escape from Gringott's. It was great to see the three kids together again, if bittersweet, for the last time — Emma Watson as Hermione, Rupert Grint as Ron, and Daniel Radcliffe as Harry. The trio are together for most of the film, until Harry's stand-off with Ralph Fienne's Voldemort, but the movie belongs to Radcliffe. He is front and center, in almost every scene, at high pitch, trying to do what is right for his friends, for his world. As much as Voldemort is his ultimate adversary, and is magnificently villainous, it is true hero Harry, becoming a man, that is the focus of the film.
![]() |
| The fantabulously misunderstood Snape |
Even with a life and death battle raging around him, Harry is smart enough to put aside past prejudicial feelings and listen to what Snape has to tell him. When Harry lifts his face from the Pensieve, Radcliffe's expression tells it all — how it feels to realize that he has been so wrong about someone, how his feelings of dislike have been misplaced. And how he may have put his trust and his love in another and been wrong, or at least not completely right, about them as well. That is the moment when Harry grows up. And Snape gets him there. There are a lot of sad moments after that scene in the story and the film — the Harry Potter series has been about death and loss from the very beginning — and there are many more deaths to come, possibly even his own, before Harry can move on, but Harry's learning Snape's story is the emotional turning point.
![]() |
| Harry sees clearly, maybe for the first time |
Related articles
- Harry Potter World Cup: Snape, Snape, Severus Snape! (moviesblog.mtv.com)
Sunday, July 10, 2011
my favorite potter film ...
... is Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban.
Alfonso Cuarón gets everything right. Gary Oldman, David Thewlis, werewolves and other shape shifters, Alan Rickman's Snape, Harry's Patronus, the time-turner ...
Saturday, July 09, 2011
in case you don't have time to reread all the books ...
... or rewatch all the films in preparation for the last Harry Potter film next week, here's a handy dandy ilustration to rmind you of what happened and will happen, by Lucy Knisley.
Check out the large-scale version to get all the nifty details. It's all here — polyjuice potion, centaurs, sorting hats and Neville kicking ass. Brilliant.
Check out the large-scale version to get all the nifty details. It's all here — polyjuice potion, centaurs, sorting hats and Neville kicking ass. Brilliant.
Monday, January 10, 2011
shiver
I could swear one of the blogs I regularly read reviewed this book and thumbs-upped it a while back, but I can't find the review. Now that I've read it, I was curious to read the review again. Oh well. I bought this book for my almost sweet-sixteen niece for Xmas, but figured I better read it first, just to be sure it was o.k. Apart from one very discreet love scene, it was more than appropriate for a "young adult." In fact, the whole book reads like a very innocent teenage girl's dream—not the Katy Perry
variety.
I wasn't exactly looking for or expecting sexy passages—I thought this would be more supernatural in nature, not pure romance, but I do find it interesting that there seems to be an innocence trend in teen-lit or YA. I haven't read the Twilight
books—just flipping through the first few pages of the first book in the series in Target didn't encourage me. I've read most of the Percy Jackson
series, which are pretty romance-free, prompted by said niece. Harry Potter manages a clinch or two in seven books
. It's all very chaste. It's interesting.
This book isn't about sex, although some folks might be instantly turned off by the potential bestiality implied in a girl-loves-werewolf story. It's a swoony, girly, love story. The heroine Grace stars out as a slightly eccentric girl, a survivor of a wolf attack who is now drawn to the pack that hangs out in the woods beyond her house, almost abnormally. She is smart and independent and I liked her. The boy she loves, Sam, is almost too perfect, too gentlemanly, too sweet. But he's the perfect magical boyfriend, complete with shaggy hair and golden eyes. I guess these guys are this generation's Prince Charmings. My generation had ... I'm not sure who. There really wasn't a young adult book category when I was going to Barnes and Noble. I read my Nancy Drews and then graduated to Grandma's John Jakes
and Sidney Sheldon and Harold Robbins novels for a little sex. In school we passed around thriller novels like Carrie
and Jaws.
The middle of the book where girl meets wolf boy, girl loves wolf boy, girl loses wolf boy is pure romance with a dash of suspense. The mysteries laid out are gentle and not too mysterious, but that doesn't seem to be the point. What stays with the reader is the atmosphere—the impending cold weather, the woods behind Grace's house, which seem quite real. There are a few undeveloped or abandoned threads—what about the wolf girl Shelby, who is set up as such a threatening antagonist? Will Sam ever see his mentor Beck again? But there is a sequel (now part two of a trilogy), which I haven't read, but might, if I really want to see how some of this turns out. It depends on how much my niece likes this first book. I'm eager to hear her teenage opinion and see if her perspective of the story and characters differs widely from mine. Not surprisingly, there is a film version in the works.
Mostly I liked the author Maggie Stiefvater's twist on werewolf lore. Her werewolves are tied to the seasons and nature, changing into wolves at the first hint of frost, then back to human form in the summertime. It doesn't always make sense, but it is still intriguing and atmospheric and enough of a necessary obstacle for the young lovers that will intrigue young readers.
I wasn't exactly looking for or expecting sexy passages—I thought this would be more supernatural in nature, not pure romance, but I do find it interesting that there seems to be an innocence trend in teen-lit or YA. I haven't read the Twilight
The author made a lovely little trailer for her book—she did the collage and the music.
This book isn't about sex, although some folks might be instantly turned off by the potential bestiality implied in a girl-loves-werewolf story. It's a swoony, girly, love story. The heroine Grace stars out as a slightly eccentric girl, a survivor of a wolf attack who is now drawn to the pack that hangs out in the woods beyond her house, almost abnormally. She is smart and independent and I liked her. The boy she loves, Sam, is almost too perfect, too gentlemanly, too sweet. But he's the perfect magical boyfriend, complete with shaggy hair and golden eyes. I guess these guys are this generation's Prince Charmings. My generation had ... I'm not sure who. There really wasn't a young adult book category when I was going to Barnes and Noble. I read my Nancy Drews and then graduated to Grandma's John Jakes
The middle of the book where girl meets wolf boy, girl loves wolf boy, girl loses wolf boy is pure romance with a dash of suspense. The mysteries laid out are gentle and not too mysterious, but that doesn't seem to be the point. What stays with the reader is the atmosphere—the impending cold weather, the woods behind Grace's house, which seem quite real. There are a few undeveloped or abandoned threads—what about the wolf girl Shelby, who is set up as such a threatening antagonist? Will Sam ever see his mentor Beck again? But there is a sequel (now part two of a trilogy), which I haven't read, but might, if I really want to see how some of this turns out. It depends on how much my niece likes this first book. I'm eager to hear her teenage opinion and see if her perspective of the story and characters differs widely from mine. Not surprisingly, there is a film version in the works.
Mostly I liked the author Maggie Stiefvater's twist on werewolf lore. Her werewolves are tied to the seasons and nature, changing into wolves at the first hint of frost, then back to human form in the summertime. It doesn't always make sense, but it is still intriguing and atmospheric and enough of a necessary obstacle for the young lovers that will intrigue young readers.
Book #4 in reading challenge Cannonball Read 3, sponsored by Pajiba
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)























