Truth Universally Acknowledged

The title of this blog is an obvious reference to my favourite author, Jane Austen. My other great inspiration is Ella Fitzgerald. I intend this site to be general musings about things which interest me, and hopefully you as well.

Name:
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

I'm a girl in her twenties living in New Zealand - of Irish and Scottish descent. I'm married to a wonderful guy and we live in a tiny house in the suburbs with a menagerie of soft toys and model aircraft. My main occupations at the moment are attempting to become and author and surviving my day job... wish me luck!


Google
 
Web truthuniversal.blogspot.com

The Truth Universally Acknowledged Resource Centre (UK)

Browse stuff I like at Amazon.co.uk.


The Truth Universally Acknowledged Resource Centre (US)

Browse stuff I like at Amazon.com.

Thursday, 18 January 2007

Austen adaptations

New crossword here.

Article about the new Persuasion here.

A new novella series as a sequel to Northanger Abbey.

Help decide the promotional poster for 'Becoming Jane'.

And a quiz to round things off.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Friday, 15 December 2006

Jane Austen for the 21st Century

Read this interesting article with Andrew Davies, care of Jane Austen's Regency World magazine.

Plus, a quiz about JA parties.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Friday, 20 October 2006

Austen tidbits

An interesting article on the origin of Halloween and whether JA would have celebrated it

A tricky quiz on movie adaptations vs the books

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, 18 October 2006

Movie review: The Devil Wears Prada at Village Gold Class

The best thing about this movie experience was that it was a gold class freebie put on by one of my company’s suppliers. I had never been to the Gold Class cinema before, and I’m not sure if the free wines and gourmet nibbles in the lounge beforehand are included with a regular ticket price. The nibbles were fantastic, and with the free popcorn provided in the theatre, I would not require any dinner. And the seats! I was one of the last ones inside the theatre so I got stuck in the front row, but being able to recline in a cushy lazy boy, feet up, meant I was never uncomfortable.

On to the movie itself. It was fairly predictable if you knew the premise – innocent girl gets job at high class fashion magazine. Her boss is the most horrible person ever, she has to work too hard, and she hates it. Then she decides to put more effort in, becomes a fashionista, and loses her integrity along the way. Then she realises she has alienated those she loves, and chucks in the towel at the magazine. She’s learned a lot, but is back to being her sweet self. Sigh. Meryl Streep was fabulous of course, being hilarious one moment and heartbreaking the next. Anne Hathaway was sweet and beautiful, but I’m not sure if her character really had enough depth. After a while it looked like she was just being used to showcase designer outfits. A couple of other characters at the magazine were interesting, but everyone else were just props. The message of the movie is to be true to yourself, that fashion is more than just clothing, don’t let work get in the way of your real life… etc. Quite an enjoyable way to spend 109 minutes, but I wouldn’t have paid for it myself.

Interview with Anne Hathaway
Herald Review


Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, 27 September 2006

An interview with the author of "Jane Austen for Dummies"

Brought to you by our friends at Austenblog.

Joan Klingel Ray, Ph.D., is in her third term as President of the Jane Austen Society of North America, a title she will hold until December 2006. A native of New York City, she is a professor of English and a President’s Teaching Scholar at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs. Dr. Ray is the author of Jane Austen for Dummies, recently published by Wiley.



Getting to Know You

When and under what circumstances did you first read Jane Austen’s novels?

Like many an Austen reader, I first read Pride and Prejudice when I was about 13. I was at summer camp and loved the book at first read. I’ve re-read it many times. Pride and Prejudice is the most approachable of Austen’s novels in terms of its wonderful plot, hero, and heroine, and wondering if they will ever get together. But I did not read all of Austen’s works until I was in a grad course that lasted two semesters and included all the novels of JA. I think this was a great time to read them as I was then 22 and had developed a strong sense of irony, myself. Not that younger readers don’t read and appreciate Austen’s novels. But the older and more experienced in life and literature one becomes, the more one appreciates the full Austen–really a very sophisticated writer.

Which of her novels is your favorite, and why?

When I visited Philadelphia and stayed with Elizabeth (Steele, the Regional Coordinator), we found that we had the same two favorite Austen books and for the same reasons. Using Elizabeth’s words, “Pride and Prejudice is the book of my heart, while Emma is the book of my head.” Re Pride and Prejudice: I love the whole story-line of the way Elizabeth is too clever for her own good and so plays Miss Pert to Darcy, who is remarkably patient with her. I also admire the subtle way Austen presents Darcy–a way that misleads many readers and actors (or their scriptwriters!). Austen tells us that he enjoys conversation, that he smiles a lot at her, that he is–as I’ve already noted–remarkably patient with her, and that the wonderful smile Elizabeth sees on his face in the Pemberley portrait reminds her of the way he smiled at her. So Austen’s Darcy is not the dour, sullen Darcy that we normally see on the screen! This is part of Austen’s witty, subtle treatment of her character. Re Emma: I adore the Emma character because she means well so much of the time, but is so clueless almost all of the time. I love her true sorrow and chagrin for screwing things up. And I love the way Austen lays out the clues of Jane and Frank. When Emma, after realizing how wrong she was to think Elton liked Harriet, and thinking that she should be less clever, like Harriet, then recognizes that “‘It was rather too late in the day to set about being stupid and ignorant,’” I just hoot–sometimes in recognition of myself! Austen is at her most clever and mischievous in this book.

What is your favorite non-Austen reading–fiction or non? Any particular author or book that you particularly like?

I love reading the poetry of George Herbert, which appeals to me spiritually. I admire Middlemarch; but none of Eliot’s books has the charm and wit of Austen’s. (Ain’t that the truth! –Ed.) I have fun reading the novels of Alexander McCall Smith, Jasper Fforde, and Janet Evanovich, all of which I can whip through in a few hours. I read the New York Times daily and admire the non-fiction of Thomas Friedman. I have a long list of novels I plan to read when I retire!

Do you have any non-Austen hobbies or interests that you would like to share with our readers?

Like Austen, I am a desperate walker! But I prefer walking in cities, rather than on country roads, because cities always offer something new to see that interests me more than what the country offers. (All I see is green!) After all, I am a 5th-generation New York City person, born and bred. I am an opera-lover and travel to opera in NYC, San Francisco, Chicago, and Santa Fe, and Denver. When in London, I attend the Royal Opera and the English National Opera. This summer (06) I saw Tosca at the former and Nixon in China at the latter; this was my 12th Tosca and my first Nixon in China, and I loved the ENO production of NIC. In fact, NIC may well be my new favorite opera, but it must be seen, as well as heard, to fully appreciate–unlike Tosca, which I love even just hearing.

What do you think of the recent resurgence of interest in Jane Austen among the general public (that is, not us fanatics, who of course are always interested in Jane Austen)?

Great! Austen wrote for her contemporary audience or the common reader, and it was only in the mid- to late 19th century that the idea spread that one must be especially sensitive and cultured to appreciate Austen. The more readers who come to Austen, the better, as far as I am concerned. One point for newcomers to keep in mind, though, is that the culture of Austen’s period, which is also the period in which her novels are set, was quite different from ours. Consequently, certain customs and manners may seem unusual for readers who are unfamiliar with the novels’ cultural foundations. Austen, of course, assumed her readers would understand them. Reading Jane Austen For Dummies, about which you ask me later in this interview, will help newcomers to the novels understand the culture.

About JASNA

When did you join JASNA? What was your impulse to join?

I joined in 1991, having purchased The Jane Austen Companion, edited by Jack Grey, then President of JASNA, and others. That book mentioned JASNA and how to join. So I sent a postcard to the address provided and received an enrollment form, which I immediately returned with the dues. I thought it would be great to join a group of my own kind: Janeites! Shortly thereafter I saw in the JASNA newsletter (JASNA News) that there would be an AGM (Annual General Meeting) in Lake Louise and that the topic would be Persuasion. I had written a paper on Persuasion called “In Defense of Lady Russell: The God Mother Knew Best,” and I decided to send the précis to the organizers’ (Juliet McMaster and Bruce Stovel) request for paper proposals. (Meanwhile, I had already sent a paper to Persuasions, the JASNA annual journal. The essay, which was accepted, was “Fanny Price as a Case Study of Child Abuse,” and it has led to many a graduate student’s writing to me to say how helpful reading that essay was to his or her thinking and writing about Mansfield Park!)

What has been the most interesting or amusing thing that has happened to you as a result of your involvement with JASNA?

Having been introduced at the 2000 AGM in Boston as the incoming JASNA President, I attended in December, two months after the Boston AGM, an off-Broadway show at which I left my hat under my seat. I had to wait until everyone came downstairs to return to the theater to look for it. The staircase was Λ-shaped, with attendees coming both two staircases at once. Suddenly, a JASNA-NYC member whom I recognized and who recognized me from the 2000 AGM in Boston waved to me as I waved to her. She was being pushed forward by the crowd and so could not stop to talk to me, but she did look back at me as the crowd continued to propel her towards the exit and said to her husband, pointing in my direction, “That’s the new president of the Jane Austen Society…” Those behind her only heard her say, “Jane Austen,” and soon persons were exclaiming, “Jane Austen is here; Jane Austen is here!” What a hoot, especially when the house manager came and escorted me back into the theater through another door to look for my hat (missing, alas!): people must have thought Jane Austen was being escorted backstage to meet the actors!

What is your best or most memorable JASNA moment ever?

My first AGM at Lake Louise, where I gave my Lady Russell talk, gave me my best moments. When I came to the AGM, I did not know a soul as I was brand new to AGMs. (And we did not have a JASNA Region in Colorado at that time.) First, I met a Pennsylvania woman who subsequently became a good friend as we waited for the busses to take us from Calgary airport to the hotel in Lake Louise. Then, as I waited in the hotel lobby for a bus tour to Banff, Joan Pawelski of Chicago, by then a longtime JASNA, came over with a group of her fellow Chicago JASNA members. She introduced herself to me, saw that my badge said I was a speaker, invited me to join her group on the bus and at lunch in Banff, and encouraged her friends to come to my talk! Later, I gave the right talk in the right style (I do not read my papers; I “talk” them) to the right group at the right time. The next thing I knew, I was asked to be on the JASNA Board. And the rest is history. These were my best JASNA moments because I saw that JASNA members were amiable.

What is your best or most memorable AGM moment ever?

As Co-coordinator of the 1999-AGM in Colorado Springs on Emma, I was able to feature Joan Austen-Leigh (one of JASNA’s 3 founders and a collateral descendent of Jane Austen via Jane’s brother James) on the stage at the banquet for an extended period of time: 1. JAL did the champagne toast to Jane Austen. 2. JAL returned to the stage when we introduced the winners of the Young Writers Workshop (high school students), and she gave them their awards. The 1st–prize winner read her hysterical essay about Emma in the voice of Cher from “Clueless,” which had everyone, especially JAL, laughing uncontrollably. 3. Just prior to the piano recital that ended the banquet, I presented to JAL a large, framed proclamation from the Mayor of Colorado Springs saying this was “Jane Austen Day.” This was an especially memorable JASNA moment for me because Joan Austen-Leigh was (unknown to me) ailing at that time, and 1999 was her final AGM. I have since learned that she was very touched by the way we honored her.

Of which of your accomplishments as president of JASNA are you most proud?

There are really two accomplishments: I am the first college professor to be JASNA’s President. While JASNA is a society that is not based in academia–though many academics are members and give talks at meetings–I think it helped JASNA to have me, as a Professor of English, as its president because I could immediately come up with several topics for talks to regions, and I knew how to deliver them. This led to much travel as JASNA’s President, for I not only visited with, but provided substantial talks at the meetings about varying aspects of Austen’s work and life. Students tell me that my classroom demeanor is both entertaining and instructive. This is how I present my talks, as well. My reputation as an entertaining, yet instructive speaker, has led to my visiting dozens of regions, from the biggest to the tiniest (with whom I shared ideas about “growing” their region). For me, size does not matter! My visiting the regions–with a word-of-mouth reputation about my talks preceding me–has led to many new persons coming and then joining JASNA. So I am proud of being a good ambassador for the society. As a veteran of nearly 30 years in the university classroom, I can handle questions and comments easily from the floor. This adds to the congeniality of the meetings.

The other accomplishment of which I am proud is something else I learned from years in university administration, particularly from my last University Chancellor for whom I worked as Interim Vice Chancellor: personally greeting as many persons as possible in the room. When I attend a regional meeting, I go to as many attendees as possible and introduce myself to them, shake their hands, ask how long they have been members, what their favorite Austen novel is, etc. I do this with any JASNA or Austen audience: even when I had the honor to give an Austen-talk at the Library of Congress, I likewise greeted audience members as they took their seats. On the same score, after it was announced at the Boston AGM that I was to be the next President, I made it a point at the banquet to start at the back of the banquet hall and go to as many tables as time permits to greet members, old and new. (The Editrix was one of the n00bz, and was rather bowled over by the encounter. –Ed.) I do this at every AGM, at both the banquet and the cash bar, as well as at any time I can meets folks. I want the members to know that as President, I am grateful that they are members, and that the Society sincerely welcomes and appreciates them. In fact, members have told me how much they appreciate that. I think all future Presidents of JASNA should do the same thing: go to the tables and greet the members at the banquet, etc. (By the way, persons have asked me how I can go to the tables at the banquet and miss my dinner: my trick is to order room service, on my own nickel, in my room about an hour before the banquet. So I am well fed when the banquet starts and do not go hungry! This way I have the strength to go to the tables.)

What’s the best part about being president of JASNA?

The best part has been the travel that has allowed me to meet so many wonderful members! Many of the persons I’ve met have become my good friends outside of JASNA visits, too.

May I please share another “best part?” (Of course! –Ed.) I had two great opportunities as JASNA President in Washington DC in April 2005, when I was on sabbatical from the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs: to speak about Jane Austen at the Library of Congress, where 280+ persons showed up, and then to appear on “The Diane Rehm Show” on NPR on April 11, 2005, again to talk about and field callers’ questions about Jane Austen and JASNA. These were excellent opportunities for me to share my enthusiasm for Jane Austen and JASNA, which I very much appreciated.

Would you like to say anything to encourage AustenBlog readers to join JASNA? (Or for our international readers, their local Austen Society?)

As I noted in a reply to an earlier question, the Jane Austen Society, whether of North America or of any other location, is a great way to meet persons who have in common with you a love of Jane Austen. Interestingly, when I meet fellow JASNA-members, I find that we also have many other interests in common! JASNA has over 60 regional groups, which you can locate at our website, www.jasna.org. Besides the friendship and fellowship, the Societies give you the opportunities to learn more about Austen, her life, times, and works in a fun-filled and friendly atmosphere. I recently had a note from a gentleman whose wife, a longtime JASNA member, had just passed away. He made a donation to JASNA because his wife always came home from JASNA meetings–in his words–”bubbling with excitement and joy.” That says it all!

Jane Austen for Dummies

Did Wiley approach you about writing the book or did you pitch it to them? If the latter, what gave you the idea for the book?

I had been approached by a literary agent in NYC who was interested in having me do a book of Austen quotations. She knew I was President of JASNA and also a Professor of English; she had read about my talks and read some of my articles. As a result, she knew that when I wrote about Austen, or any other writer for that matter, I did not sprinkle my prose with literary jargon. (I’m a full professor, and I have nobody to try to impress!) We then saw that Barnes and Noble had beaten us to the punch on a JA quotation book. About a month or two went by, and this same agent met an editor from Wiley who said they were looking for someone to write Jane Austen for Dummies. The agent said, thinking of me, “Have I got the person for you!” She had me send Wiley my curriculum vitae and a sample or two of my professional writing on Austen (articles I had written and that were published). Wiley then sent me a sample table of contents, which I was free to revise and send back to Wiley’s editorial board for approval. I was glad to see that the Dummies book was not going to include plot summaries, etc., because I did not want to write Cliff’s Notes©! The board members at Wiley liked what they saw and then asked for a sample chapter by the following week. I wrote it; they liked it and sent me the contract.

What do you like best and least about the book?

The best thing I like about the book is that it offers newcomers to Austen an excellent background on the culture of the period, which is crucial to a fuller understanding her novels. It also explains her place in the development of the novel. Any teacher of high school or college students could assign this book as supplementary reading for Austen’s novels. And anyone not in school will read this book and come away with a better knowledge of all things Austen.

The thing I like least about the book is the proofreading. I wish Wiley had let me have 48 hours with the final version before it went to press, so I could catch the typos and the little editorial changes they made to simplify my writing, but which caused grammar errors. The good news is that I was able to send corrections to them for future editions.

Did you learn anything new or exciting about Jane Austen while writing it?

I was very happy to be forced to read Deirdre Le Faye’s edition of Austen’s letters carefully again. Every Austen lover should read her letters.

Why should AustenBlog readers rush out and purchase a copy?

This book is a reader-friendly introduction to Austen and her times. It’s a good place for Austen readers to start. Much of what I included in the book is what I have to be sure to include in my Austen classes, what students have asked me about, and what JASNA members ask me about when they see me. So I think the book’s contents will answer a lot of questions that readers either have or should have about Austen and her world.

The Great Pig Kerfluffle

You stirred up a controversy when some harshly critical comments about the recent film adaptation of Pride and Prejudice were published in the British press shortly before the release of the film. We understand that your comments to the reporter were spun a bit out of context. Here’s your opportunity to clarify or expand upon what was published: to paraphrase Eleanor Tilney, “Clear your character handsomely before the Internets.” Or publicly tell Joe Wright to go jump in a lake; your choice.

What I said to the reporter was this:

“Joe Wright’s having a large pig with his sexual equipment dangling walk into the Bennets’ house was inappropriate for the Bennets’ home. The Bennets’ farm was undoubtedly some distance from the house, not right up to the back door as the film showed it. Just look at Anna Lefroy’s drawings of Steventon and the drawings by Austen’s contemporaries of other Austen-related homes that appear on the walls of Jane Austen’s House in Chawton: they all had farms, but not right up the door of the main house as Wright placed it for the Bennets’ house in the film. The 2005 Pride & Prejudice film needed more background research. Wright’s boar-with-the-dangling-equipment-walking-into-the-house scene is more appropriate for a film version of a Fielding novel–such as another film version of Tom Jones, where a barnyard and a well-endowed boar is in keeping with the rowdy humor of Fielding’s novel and the settings of the poorer farmers in Tom Jones. But the Bennets’ lovely home would not have livestock entering the house, and the farmyard would not be right next to the house.”

My lengthy comment (after all, I’m a teacher and thus go into detailed answers in class!) clearly overwhelmed the reporter, who admitted he had an undergrad degree in English, but couldn’t quite remember the novel Tom Jones, though he fondly recalled its film version. When the reporter finally wrote the interview, he restated my admittedly wordy comment as my talking of Darcy’s supposed “jewels” represented by the boar’s. The reporter’s revision of my remark was then picked up by the wire. The Fielding reference must have been too literary for him.

On this subject of Austen and sexual innuendo: I disagree strongly with Austen critic Jill Heydt Stevenson’s conclusion that in Persuasion in the scene where Anne Elliot, riding with Lady Russell in the latter’s carriage in Bath, sees Captain Wentworth walking down the street and hopes that Lady Russell does not see Wentworth, Austen insinuates a sexual innuendo when Lady Russell, looking intently at the other side of the street for some curtains that she observes are particularly “well hung,” means that the words “well hung” refer to Wentworth’s jewels! Lady Russell is not even looking at Wentworth’s side of the street, let alone at his pants! (But what about Sir Walter describing Mr. Elliot as being “very much under-hung?” Inquiring dirty minds want to know. –Ed.) Stevenson also assumes that the scene in Pride and Prejudice, at Netherfield, where Miss Bingley asks Darcy if she can sharpen his quill pen is meant as sexual innuendo. If one knows anything about writing with quills, one knows that one’s quill point was as idiosyncratic as fountain pen points today are for extra fine, fine, medium, broad, and italics are! His quill is not his penis.

But I do think–and have always thought, back to grad school in 1974!–that Mansfield Park’s Mary Crawford’s reference to Vices and Rears is meant as a pun to show readers how worldly Mary is when compared to Edmund and Fanny, who don’t catch the pun and complain, instead, how the remark shows how disrespectful Mary is towards her uncle who raised her! Austen was born and raised in Georgian England, and so she is direct and candid; however, she is also a lady. And on her being a lady: I still remember the review of the Gwyneth Paltrow’s Emma film in The New Yorker where Anthony Lane–whose reviews I normally respect very much–complained of Paltrow, as Emma, saying “Good God!” several times in the film as Mrs. Weston surprises her about the Frank / Jane engagement: in the novel, Emma says, “Good God!” several times in that scene!

A final word, if I may: I have heard and read persons comparing Jane Austen to writers such as Shakespeare, Fanny Burney, and Alexander Pope, and to artists like Vermeer or Japanese painters. This is all well and good. But Jane Austen is like . . . Jane Austen! There’s no one quite like her, and she’s like nobody else.

Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, 25 August 2006

Pride & Prejudice meets Harry Potter

My connection is a bit too slow to do this justice, but apparently it's very funny.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Monday, 19 June 2006

Movie Review: Failure to Launch

This was the movie I selected to watch on the plane home from Sydney. I have to say I’m glad I didn’t pay good money to see it elsewhere. Romantic comedies these days just seem to lack the originality and spark of those classics from the ‘90s.

The premise is that Tripp (Matthew McConaughey) is a 35 year old man still living at home. He gets rid of girlfriends who want to get too serious by taking them home to meet the parents – and of course they all promptly break up with him. Paula (Sarah Jessica Parker) has made a profession out of seducing guys out of their parent’s homes. From here it just goes downhill. The dates between the two go well of course, until the truth is revealed, at which point there’s a lot of hurt and anger until their well-meaning friends get them to face up to their true feelings of love.

Is it just me, or does Matthew McConaughey play exactly the same role in every movie he does? Does the man not get tired of reiterating the same character? Sarah Jessica Parker did well with what she was given. I was disappointed to see a paint-ball scene during the falling-in-love part of the movie – this was used to great effect in “10 Things I Hate About You” and its use anywhere is a blatant copy. The sub-plot involving the flatmate and chirping mockingbird was slightly endearing. I felt the climax at the end wasn’t that satisfying – there wasn’t a real reason why these two should be together, apart from that fact that they’d otherwise be alone.

Overall, a mildly pleasant way to pass 2 hours. If you love either of the stars, you’ll probably ignore the flaws.

Official site

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, 17 January 2006

DVD Reviews: 3 Holiday Picks

I’d like to state straight away that my sister picked these 3 DVDs for us to watch as a family over the New Year period. If you can’t guess what happens in these films and you don’t want to know, you might not want to read these.

Pick 1: The Terminal

Tom Hanks starred in this film, and carried the whole thing. Even Catherine Zeta-Jones was just a pretty face who cried a lot. The plot centres around Hanks character, who is visiting New York from a war torn Eastern European country which ceases to exist while he is in the air. Though he speaks no English, the officers at the airport spend a lot of time telling him slowly and loudly – in English – what the problem is. American arrogance on display. They won’t let him leave the airport, and he honourably rejects the few illegal opportunities they give him to slip out. He ends up living at the terminal for 9 months, during which time he gets a job renovating the terminal, sets up house, teaches himself English, and tries to win the heart of a flaky air hostess. We finally find out that he only needs to be in New York for a day to fulfil a wish of his late father. The war in his country ceases, he fulfils his task and the movie ends. The best bets of it for me were Hanks’ convincing portrayal of the man in a completely foreign environment, trying to understand things in his terms. His heartbreaking comprehension of the violence in his country, his loneliness and frustration, as well as his good nature and patience, are well portrayed by Hanks. See this movie if you’re a Hanks fan, otherwise give it a miss.

Official site



Pick 2: Raise Your Voice

This film is a Hilary Duff vehicle, and again, only for her ardent fans. The rest of us have to sit through her squeaky voice and a predictable story line for 2 sickly hours. She’s pleasant enough, and so is the film, which will no doubt appeal to teenage girls. Duff’s character is apparently a singing genius from a small town, who just wants to go to LA for the summer to pursue her dream at a prestigious music school. While her brother supports her wish, her father is not so keen. When he brother dies in a car crash, her mother and aunt hatch a plan to get her to the school in honour of her brother. Duff does an admirable job of portraying the grief she has for her brother. Things go along as you’d expect – our heroine gets to the school and finds it was harder than she thought it would be, falls in love, plays matchmaker, gains the favour of the cool teacher and eventually performs with her new boyfriend in front of an adoring crowd. Enter Dad, who is furious she has been at the school without his knowledge, but he is won over by her performance and all ends happily. This film was a bit of a chore to sit through, but I suppose I have to concede that Duff did a pretty good job with the limited material she had. Hopefully she will be given the chance to do better films.

Official site



Pick 3: Chasing Liberty

Mandy Moore is the teen idol taking centre stage in this film. Like “A Walk to Remember”, Moore benefits in this film from sharing the screen with a strong male lead (Matthew Goode – okay, maybe I just liked him because he’s British). She’s the president’s daughter, who can never go on a date without an army of guards, and he’s one of the said guards who fools her into thinking he’s just a good guy looking out for her. She runs away in Europe, he saves her from herself, they fall in love, she gets mad when his identity is revealed, and then she just happens to get a scholarship to Oxford so she can bump into him in London for the happy ending. The script is quite banal, but the European locations help to make things interesting. The best bits for me was when Ben (Goode) was trying to hide his affections for Amy (Moore) because of his position in the Secret Service. When he finally succumbs to his feelings and confesses his love for her, much of the dramatic tension is lost. This was a pleasant movie in parts, and probably my favourite of these three. One for the ladies or Mandy Moore admirers.

Official site



Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, 5 November 2005

No Life Without Wife

I finally watched Bride and Prejudice this week, leant to me on video. If you have seen it, you'll recognise my subject line. Having never seen a Bollywood film before, I was a little taken aback at first with the raucous dancing and singing numbers, but in no time at all I was really enjoying it. Being a fan of musicals in general probably helps.

It was nice to see mostly fresh faces on the screen, including New Zealand's Martin Henderson sporting an American accent. Opinions about India and its place in the world were also interesting, if somewhat preachy at times. The most refreshing (and sometimes amusing) aspect was the modesty - the most intimate moment of the entire film was a kiss on the forehead. I applaud this stance - but it is a bit funny when the leads are gazing into each other's eyes, and then suddenly the whole world breaks into song and dance. The sudden emergence of a gospel choir on the beach, complete with singing lifeguards and swaying surfboards was hilarious, as was Darcy's stint as a drummer at the end.

Speaking of Darcy, the plot stuck relatively close to the original, in an Indian kind of way. The elements of the second half of the story were all kind of jammed into the last half an hour - due to the long musical numbers in the first part - but it wasn't too jarring.

I'll keep this review short - I just wanted to mention how much I enjoyed the film. If you haven't seen it, make sure you do - it's of particular interest to Jane Austen fans or those who like lively quirky musicals.

Official site



Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, 20 May 2005

On hair and de ja movies

First, I’d just like to say how nice it is to see Oprah wearing her hair in a thick, curly style. When I wear mine like that because I have no other choice, at least I can think that she had her hair like that and it looked okay. The only thing is she’s black, so it looks normal, whereas I am pale and freckly and stand out. Oh well – it gives me some hope for future hair fashion trends.

***

I was reading about Ashton Kutcher’s new movie, “A Lot Like Love” just now. Am I the only one who thinks it sound exactly the same as “When Harry Met Sally?”. There’s no possible way it could be a better movie. Why don’t they just describe it as: “A bad modern re-make of the classic WHMS”? Just be honest.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Monday, 4 April 2005

Movie review: A Walk to Remember

I saw this movie on the weekend. I had no idea what it was about as someone else had rented it. The first few minutes made me dubious about whether I would like it. Teens getting into trouble and all that. But soon afterwards we are taken on a wonderful, poignant, and heartbreaking journey. I just loved this film. I've got to admit I'm a sucker for these classic plots anyway - guy from the wrong side of the tracks, girl who believes in him, some terrible circumstance that will keep them apart. I love it when tough guys get gentle. But moving right along...

The film stars Shane West (Eli from Once and Again) as Landon and Mandy Moore as Jamie. Mandy does a good job, but her character is not as multi-faceted as Shane's. He was the stand-out performer for me. Entirely believable as a delinquent and as an earnest man in love. The rest of the cast is somewhat in the background, but fill the space well. The music is a mix of teen and Christian pop, songs by Mandy and also one written by Shane (although I couldn't figure out which one when I was watching it). The songs suit the moods well, and do a good job of illustrating Jamie's innocence.

The main reasons I loved this film are probably because I strongly identified with the female lead and was captivated by the performance of the male. The emotions feel very real (get your tissues ready for the second half). It's probably predictable to a cynic, but for those of us who go along for the romantic ride, it's brilliant. Rent it when you're next by yourself or in the company of other hopeless romantics.

Imdb

Official site



Labels: , , , ,

Monday, 21 February 2005

Movie review: The Phantom of the Opera

I've been a fan of this musical since I first heard the soundtrack when I was little. I saw the stage production a few years ago. I was curious to see how this movie would stack up, nearly twenty years after the show was born.

The first obvious change from the original show is the character of the Phantom. Michael Crawford played him as a middle aged, pasty, bulky and lurking character. His music is really his only attraction - and to that end he has a fabulous voice. In this movie, Andrew Lloyd Webber and Joel Schumacher have changed tack. Gerard Butler is a younger, tanned, and basically sexy phantom - but his voice is lacking the power and polish needed for the role. Inconsistencies aside, I found his magnetism gave the movie extra emotional pull, as it's very easy to feel sympathy for this more attractive phantom, who just happens to have a scarred face and murders a few people here and there.

While we're on the face - how come Gerard's hair is perfectly styled on both sides all throughout the film, but at the end a great deal of it disappears into scars? *shrug* And why does Meg suddenly appear in tight leather pants at the end? Oh well.

I thought that Emmy Rossum was fabulous as Christine, and Raoul (Patrick Wilson) was pretty good too. Minnie Driver was hilarious. Miranda Richardson was creepy but maternal at the same time. I found myself cringing during the portrayal of the back story - the freak show was a bit too much for me - but I suppose they thought it was necessary to impart how horrible people were to the phantom in his youth.

The music was pretty much the same as the original, except they took to speaking a lot of previously sung lines. In parts where the phantom is supposed to perform magic in the original (appearing suddenly, or taking over people's voices), the tricks were given logical explanations. Instead of lurking, this phantom leaps about and plunges down trapdoors.

In summary - loved the film, in the end deciding I like the new take on the phantom's character. If you like musicals, you'll love it.

Official site
Fan site
Imdb

Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, 11 February 2005

Movie review: 84 Charing Cross Road

This is one of those charming movies about the letters interchanged between two dear friends. He (Anthony Hopkins) is the owner of a bookshop at the title address, and she (Anne Bancroft) is an American author with an apetite for rare English books. It is set during World War Two. The gentle movie is enjoyable because of the friendship cultivated between such different characters half a world away. Even though they never meet, the friendship becomes the most important part of their lives.

This is a slow, rambling sort of movie, a bit like "Remains of the Day", but less depressing. Don't expect lots of action, but expect to feel a true connection with the characters and sympathy for their situation. It's amazing how excited the English women are over their package of stockings! Highly recommended.

When I was in London I was wanting to find the address of the film, but to no avail. My friend and I walked down part of Charing Cross Rd (near the tube station) and there were no charming little shops to be found. Perhaps I was at the wrong end?

Imbd



Labels: , , ,