Everest

The IMAX team, led by David Breashears and Ed Viesturs, is mentioned several times in both Krakauer's Into Thin Air and Boukreev's The Climb. They had many goals - make Araceli Segarra the first Spanish woman to summit Everest, bring GPS gear up the mountain for geologist Roger Bilham to get information on the formation and movement of the mountains, and film the ascent to give the world the first 360° view from the summit.

I know the team hadn't set out expecting the worst tragedy in Everest history to occur, so I wondered how they'd handle it in this documentary. Would the film be a product of their original intent? Or would they edit it somehow to involve the events on the mountain?

Everest was a pleasing and emotional combination of both. The film starts just as it intended - with introductions to the climbers who were part of the IMAX expedition, a trip to Kathmandu and coverage of the Sherpa's spiritual attention to the mountain,  and familiarizing the audience with the different aspects of the climb, from Base Camp to the treacherous Icefall. For someone who has only read about these things, they were amazing to see - even if just via film.

Araceli Segarra crossing a crevasse in the Icefall

Because the intent was to cover their own team's ascent up the mountain, not much is mentioned of the other teams on the climb in the beginning. The exception is a picture that is shown of Rob Hall and Ed Viesturs, old friends. Later, though, when the unfortunate events begin to unfold, the documentary changes directions. Though unnamed, you see several climbers making their way back slowly, stiffly, through the raging storm. You see Beck Weathers' - a climber in Rob Hall's expedition who was assumed dead - miraculous return to Camp, skin blackened with frostbite. The IMAX team had decided not to summit on the same day as the other teams and spent the night at a lower camp to await their bid. When they heard that Beck Weathers was in serious need of medical attention, the team climbed up to bring him down, saving his life. 

And you hear Rob Hall. Rob, who somehow survived the night of the storm on the Hilary Step had managed to radio down to the IMAX camp. There is a scene in the documentary where Viesturs pleads with Rob Hall to just keep moving. In the background you can hear Hall's croaking, frozen responses. Later, though it isn't shown, Viesturs finds Hall's body on his own summit bid and stops to pay tribute to his fallen friend. 

In the end, the IMAX team makes it. Araceli Segarra becomes the first Spanish woman to summit. Jamling Tenzing Norgay, son of the one of the first two men to climb Everest, summits with her and leaves behind a tribute to his father. The first 360° view of the mountain is captured. 

Is it silly to feel this emotionally attached to a mountain I'll never visit and people I don't know, nor will ever meet? I can't help it.

Purchase Now from Amazon

We Need To Talk About The Movie Based On The Book

A majority of the time, I feel like these projects end up with the label - "Good, not Great." No difference for We Need To Talk About Kevin, the movie starring Tilda Swinton based off of the book by the same name by Lionel Shriver. Cut to credits and all I could say was, "Meh."

The most striking issue with this movie has not much to do with the content of the film at all. Which, actually, is part of the problem. There were whole scenes, running 60 seconds or more (an issue, when in film, every second should count) that seemed to be there purely for the sake of style rather than anything which might advance the story or our understanding of the characters. "Look at me and the pretty things I can do with a camera!" doesn't really cut it when the beautiful things that Shriver can do with the written word waste not a moment in her dark and genius novel.

Tilda Swinton does a pretty incredible job with Eva, or takes it as far as the film allows. Without the letters to Franklin which drive the narrative in the book, the viewer doesn't get to know Eva like we know her in the book. While you get a sense that she does try very hard to be the kind of mother she thinks she should be, the viewer misses out on the incredibly selfish side of Eva. It's an important side. John C. Reilly, for his minimal screen time, does a good job of portraying the happy -go-lucky dad. Missing, however, is the spirit and youth of the couples' love before children, which Eva draws on time and time again in the novel. Without ever having a true sense of what they had the viewers aren't as stricken by what the two end up losing.

Kevin is played by several young actors. The oldest and most nihilistic was portrayed by Ezra Miller, whose cold, dark eyes were a dead ringer for the Kevin I imagined in my head. The movie falls short again, in only depicting Kevin and his relationship to Eva, Franklin and his younger sister, Celia. Cut from the movie were the troubles that Kevin got himself into outside of the house, the parents that complained about Kevin, and the resolute way that Franklin insisted Kevin was just being a boy. All of these things together make Kevin's final deed horrific in the novel. In the film he seems... less. Less evil, perhaps. Just a kid who fakes around his dad, is a pain in the ass to his mother, and is mean to his younger sister.

Book beats movie. Hands down.

Purchase Now: Movie, Book

30-Day Book Challenge - Day 20

Day 20 - Book Turned Into a Movie and Completely Desecrated


The Percy Jackson series is a good group of books. It's the kind of awesome boy adventure series that is a lot of butt-kicking fun, but also teaches kids a thing or two about mythology. Everything in the books is an allusion to Greek mythology.

Then came the movie, which I was really excited for. I mean, it's rare that a truly great series of books comes along. It's not so rare that Hollywood then turns that series into a movie - but I ain't care! And, mind you - I never assume that the movie will be just like the book. In fact, I'd rather the movie and book be different experiences, so that I can hold them in their own regard. All I ask is that the filmmakers maintain the integrity and feeling of the copied work and that some fan-favorite scenes and characters be portrayed accurately. This movie did nothing of the sort. Firstly, it abandoned it's core, already established middle-grade fan base by aging the kids and turning it into a movie for teens - an audience that most likely hadn't read the books. Then, they completely re-wrote the story into something that had not a hint of the original book. And, worst of all, the main mythological element/story was one that ISN'T EVEN A MYTH. Horrible. 

30-Day Book Challenge - Day 19

Day 19 - Favorite Book Turned Into a Movie

Of course. The entire film series, from cheesy start to serious finish. 

Purchase Now from Amazon: Harry Potter: The Complete 8-Film Collection

The Hunger Games on the Big Screen

It's 8:30am - I completed my viewing of The Hunger Games a mere 9ish hours ago. I've got bags under my eyes from a combination of tears and lack of sleep. My head hurts something fierce. And I'm having a very difficult time sorting through whether or not I actually liked this movie.

As the fog clears (it's now 10:30am) the more I think about it, the more I think that every emotion I had while watching the movie was associated with my memories of the book, rather than anything the movie was able to evoke. Actually, the movie was a pretty big MINUS when set against a book that drew me so quickly into a new world with characters who were well defined almost at the very start.

The movie loses all of that. We miss out on Katniss' internal turmoil as she begins to allow herself to care for Peeta,  because her only objective was staying alive for her sister. We miss out on the fact that Peeta had any edge to him at all, he is reduced to Katniss' love interest and only that. We miss out on who exactly is Effie Trinket and her motivations (in fact, another blog pointed out that no one ever says her name. Is that true???). We miss out on why the people in the Capitol are so ridiculous and how Cinna's minimalism is therefore a rebellion. We miss out on Rue's resourcefulness - we hardly get to know her at all. And most importantly, as many have already pointed out, we miss out on the hunger aspect of the games. The fact that the Capitol withholds so much from the districts that daily life in itself is its own Hunger Games. And there's just so much more that was missing.

Not to mention - I'm not sure anyone who hasn't read the books would fully grasp what the whole thing was even about. Poorly, poorly done.

That being said - stylistically, the movie was pretty gorgeous. And, I must absolutely give credit to ALL of the actors. They were each EXACTLY what I had in mind for everyone in the book. I just wish they'd been given more to work with.

Read this: Everything the Hunger Games Move Left Out (Contains Spoilers)

The Hand of the King

Season Two starts in April! Can't wait! For more images from Season Two, visit George R. R.'s blog.

Purchase Now from Amazon:  Game of Thrones: The Complete First Season

Harry Potter - The End

Thank goodness for Pottermore. Shit must be seriously saving lives. Because without the anticipation of what's in store for J.K.'s newest initiative, this Friday would have been the saddest day in all the days of Potter fanatics.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 premieres.

I wish I could go see it Thursday at midnight, but as I'll be in Pheonix and as I'll have a 7am flight home the next day, I don't think I'll be able to. We'll see. Who needs sleep anyway? NOT ME.

I've been preparing, though. Have you?

- Listened to Deathly Hallows audio book not once, but TWICE in the last six months. It's no easy feat, let me tell you. Especially when you're trying to drive and sobbing all at the same time.

- Hit up abcFamily's Harry Potter weekend marathon. It was a slow, boring weekend because the boy is on a cruise. So I literally watched every movie except Half Blood Prince and Deathly Hallows 1. I even watched Goblet of Fire TWICE (once on Saturday, then again for the full sweep on Sunday).

- I might bring Sorcerer's Stone with me on my flight to Pheonix. I've got my re-read of Song of Ice and Fire to get through prior to Dances with Dragons (um. That comes out TOMORROW), but it might be nice to revisit the first book in the HP series as a nostalgia factor prior viewing the final movie.

Purchase Now from Amazon:  Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

A Game of Thrones Series in Review

I'm a little late to this party, mainly because I've been doing so much non-blogging lately. But since I anticipated this show for two years and posted many photos of my boyfriend Tyrion Lannister/Peter Dinklage, I think it would be good to let you all know whether or not I even liked the damned thing.

Just a warning - this post WILL ABSOLUTELY contain spoilers.

At the start, I wasn't sure how I was going to feel about this series. The first episode was pretty slow and I wasn't sure if it was because it was actually moving incredibly slow or if it was because I spent most of the time anticipating the next move from the book. Catelyn was OLD - much older than I'd pictured her in my head. Jon was incredibly moody. And we hardly saw the direwolves at all, even though they are a major part of all the books. I mean, the kids found six direwolf pups, 3 males, 2 females and a little albino runt one for the bastard Jon Snow. That doesn't just happen everyday! It's fate and a connection that the show hardly played up at all.


Of the scenes they cut or changed or added: From the beginning, I was upset with the way they handled Dany and Drogo's first sexual act. In the book, she's terrified and Drogo, a mostly silent and brooding figure up until then, shows her a more gentle side, using the only word he knows in her language - No - as a way to ask her permission and calm her. In the series, it was rape. And it isn't until later that Dany sees the man behind Khal Drogo. I LOVE the Drogo and Dany relationship and was pretty much waiting eagerly for the wedding night scene. I hated it right up until I read this: Emilia Clarke defends the decision to change the scene and I buy the explanation. AND I think I agree - the relationship's progression and end result is much stronger and much more believable for it. The two characters were able to believably shape and change each other.

The only scene that I'm still pissed wasn't there was the scene in the book between Mormont and Jon, when everyone except Sam (who, btw - was wonderfully cast!) is ready to take their vows. Up until this "graduation," Jon and friends have been protecting Sam from much of Thorne's cruel ways. If the boys graduate without Sam - Jon knows Sam won't make it. So he goes to Mormont and explains that every man has his worth and just because Sam can't fight and will never be able to, doesn't mean he isn't valuable to the Night's Watch. This scene is extremely pivotal in the book because it's basically the reason Mormont later appoints Jon as his steward. He sees the leadership quality in Jon.

Everything else matched up pretty well. I cried like a baby when Ned died and I liked the way the show handled it. I love that he and Arya saw each other and that the show changed it so that it was Ned who sends Yoren to take Arya and protect her, just by mouthing her location to him. It was also a little more drawn out than in the book, which was good. I didn't feel Ned's death in the book because - it happened so gd fast! And I was so shocked that I spent the next however many pages are left denying that it ever happened. I mean - who kills off their MAIN CHARACTER in the first book??? Now, as a wizened old fan, I get it. Ned's death is necessary to understanding their world and in triggering other events.

And the final episode. Thank god I watched it alone. I sobbed through the ENTIRE episode and CLAPPED at the end. And I hate clappers! I couldn't help it. I just thought it was so beautifully executed. Robb is named King of the North and he and Catelyn vow to kill all the Lannisters. Jaime Lannister is captured by Robb and Catelyn has that pivotal conversation with him that is SUPPOSED to happen in the dungeons of Riverrun in Clash of Kings, but I'll forgive them that. I thought it was well placed. Arya heads north with a band of thieves destined for the Nights Watch, not as Arya of Winterfell, but Arry, the boy. Sansa gets all not annoying and completely BADASS in a matter of mere seconds as her expression changes from one of grief and terror to strength and stoicism as she realizes that her life has basically turned to shit. Tyrion heads South to Kings Landing to act as Hand of the King in his father's stead. Jon rides North of the wall to fight off whatever strange thing is terrorizing the wildlings. And Dany. Dany! After losing Drogo, she sacrifices herself to her beliefs to either die by them or rise again. And when the burning pyre dies and cools, her men find her alive and surrounded by DRAGONS. Sir Jorah (hottie) bends at the knee - my queen.

Oh god. Shivers. I mean - wouldn't YOU clap??

Oh! I hardly mentioned Tyrion at all! My boyfriend, my love. Peter Dinklage was AMAZING. He stole every scene he was in. He's just such a perfect Tyrion. I couldn't have been happier. While we're on the subject of actors being perfect - while there are a lot of others who fit their roles well (Jaime, Tywin, Robb, Theon, Cersei, Varys, Littlefinger, Dany, Drogo, Jorah, etc), I was REALLY impressed by Jack Gleeson who plays Joffrey Baratheon. He is very, very good. I want to punch his smug little face all over the goddamned place. Well done, Jack, well done!

Viewers & Game of Thrones

So I've been getting - a ridiculous amount of views on my blog as of late. From referring sites I've never heard of. In the Netherlands. Well. They aren't all in the Netherlands. But still. Who are you guys? Please tell me...

In other news - I'm almost through Game of Thrones for the second time and I can't stop looking at stills from the upcoming HBO special. I just want to take some time to post some photos of my boyfriend, Tyrion Lannister/Peter Dinklage:

Maybe they're on their way to the Eyrie!

And here, I bet he's Lysa Arryn's prisoner. Mother, I want to see him fly! Ahhhh! "Lord" Mord in the background!

I am BEYOND excited for this entire thing.

Chills!

Via David Maybury - the Harry Potter Deathly Hallows trailer, you guys!

Game of Thrones Teaser Trailer

Oh my gosh, you guys. I watched this like, six times in a row with my hand over my mouth to keep myself from squealing at my freaking desk.

It's safe to say: I CAN'T FUCKING WAIT FOR THIS TO COME OUT!


I couldn't find a photo of Peter Dinklage as Tyrion Lannister, my favorite, favorite, favorite character, so here's just a photo of Peter Dinklage for your viewing pleasure. Because. I love him.

Best of the Best Children's Books

Thanks to The Guardian (and David Maybury, of course, for rounding up the entire thing) we have a list of the best children's books by age group.

This summary for Little Women had me laughing out loud:

"There is something for everyone (or, OK, every girl – much as we hate to admit the possibility of gender division in readers, we sometimes must) in Alcott's bestseller. Tomboys have Jo, wannabe celebs have Amy, homebodies have Meg and drips have Beth. And, of course, because we all contain multitudes, we love all of them equally according to mood. Except, of course, for Beth. Die, drip, die."

Mwahahaha! I admit, I always felt this way about movie Beth. Not book Beth. Ugh, the worst is when all the movie girls are talking about what they want for Christmas and Amy wants drawing things, and Meg wants, I don't know ribbons or something, and Jo wants to not have to work for Aunt March anymore. And Beth says:

"I want the war to end so father can come home."

OH SHUT UP! It's Christmas! Stop being so selfless and making your sisters feel like shitheads for wanting actual gifts for the holidays. Drip.

Why Can't They Ever Leave Well Enough Alone? (SPOILERS, probably)

I've been dying to see the Percy Jackson movie, The Lightening Thief. Though I haven't finished the series yet, I'm a medium sized fan of the series. Riordan is a great writer, the stories are exciting, and the characters are all believable and likable. So, when it was reported that the first movie was in production, I couldn't help being a really big kid about it. I LOVE seeing books turn into movies. I never expect much - it's rare that a movie lives up to the book - but I just really like seeing certain scenes from the book played out on the big screen. I like to see how the movie people envisioned the scene - is it similar to what was in my head, or did they have a different take on it?

I finally saw the movie on Wednesday (a lovely friend of mine surprised me with it) and it SUCKED. I mean, basically the only similarities between book and movie was that there was a kid named Percy Jackson and there's a lot of mythology. I mean, obviously there were more connections than that - they kept a lot of the other characters. But seriously. THEY CHANGED THE WHOLE PLOT! Why, I ask, when the plot was already SO GOOD!?

First, let's start with the target audience for the book versus the movie and let's discuss why this change up might explain why the movie isn't doing that great. Book Percy Jackson is a 12 year old boy, struggling to not get expelled from yet another school. Movie Percy Jackson looks to be about 17, a teenager with teenager problems. It was a movie based on a middle grade novel, but targeted towards teens. That doesn't make any sense to me. Why would you completely abandon the books core (and large!) audience? Am I missing something here? It just seems to me that if your fan base exists for you before you even begin, then you should probably thank your lucky stars and cater to it. "What? There are 1.2 million YA readers who put this book on the New York Times Bestseller List? OBVIOUSLY we want to make this movie for teenagers!" quote by movie people around a movie table.

I don't even know how to go into the rest of what bothered me about this movie without weaving a tale that would take a thousand years to tell. Let's start with the fact that Grover, the satyr assigned to protect Percy is a bit of a horn dog in the movie. WHAT? WHY? (An aside - it is my clear understanding that if you have to ask yourself WHY a zillion times while watching or reading something, it probably should have never even been made.) The sexual references are through the roof. I guess this made Grover 'cooler' and more relatable to teen audiences. (See paragraph above.) Even Persephone (disgustingly portrayed by Rosario Dawson) totally digs him - she keeps him in the underworld to be what I can only assume is her sex slave AFTER she shoves her tongue down Hades throat and then knocks him out. ACTION! ADVENTURE! ROMANCE!

The reason Percy is so special in the novel is because he is the son of Poseidon, one of the big three (Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades). At first, Riordan keeps Percy's parentage a secret from the reader, only giving us tiny clues to help us along until Percy is finally claimed by his dad. When Poseidon claims his son, it's a really big deal. Zeus decided sometime after World War II that the sons and daughters of the big three were too powerful and the three were therefore banned from siring half blood children. But Poseidon can't keep it in his pants, basically, (though in the movie they make it like he actually fell in love with Percy's mom and wanted to be a mortal. WHAT!?) and so Percy is born. In the movie, the rule instead is that the gods are not allowed contact with their children because, I don't know, they might love them too much or something. I forget because I kept yelling NOT THE RULE! at the screen. To me, this one simple change ruins the entire plot. Luke, the real Lightening Thief and son of Hermes, is this troubled kid who wants to cause a war between the gods. In the book, the gods are free to visit their offspring but often don't. Ever. I mean, they are busy being gods, you know, and some of them have a ton of kids. But Luke takes his father's abandonment to heart. Because that's what it is, when you are free to see your children but choose not to. It's called abandonment. And it's sad. In the movie, even though they took away Hermes' will to decide whether or not he wants to visit his son, Luke is still pissed about it. So instead of this troubled, hurt, and abandoned kid, you just have this whiny brat who doesn't know the rules. It doesn't really make sense or have the same sympathizing effect.

There's more. So much more. Like, why was Ares completely cut out of the plot? Why was there absolutely no mention of the Titans? Why was Persephone and her pearls added to the plot when, as far as I can tell or remember, they have no basis in Greek mythology at all?

Ugh. I chalk this movie up to nothing more or less than an epic FAIL.

Purchase Now from Amazon:  Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief