First, happy birthday JKR! And happy birthday, Harry. Here’s to squished cakes from the inside pocket of a giant coat and 4200 pages of crazy beautiful story.

Second, just know: HERE THERE BE SPOILERS. But it’s been 2 weeks, so there are spoilers everywhere on the web.

Third: I went to the midnight showing of HALF-BLOOD PRINCE, and didn’t absorb as much as I’d wanted to, of course, so my review had to wait. I had a very tired ten-year-old talking in my ear, and I was pretty tired myself. Since I got to re-see HBP last night, I finally feel qualified to give a more clear opinion.

To be simple, I’m going to make lists, keeping in mind that BOOKS AND MOVIES ARE NOT THE SAME GENRE, SO THEY CAN’T BE THE SAME. I’m not sure if I’m convincing myself or other people when I say that, but it bears repeating.

OK, so. Here’s what I liked:

1) this shot:

Add in the reference to OOP and Voldemort in the Undeground, plus the words from the billboard behind Dumbledore, and you’ve got visual perfection. Sometimes a picture is truly worth 1000 words. No, this like is not in opposition to my #1 dislike (see below). This is a strictly visual thing.

2) the humor--gotta love it

3) the fact that Ron got to be his goofy, wonderful self more than he has in other films

4) the emphasis on Dumbledore using Harry. Yes, I said USING Harry. JKR takes this up in both HBP and DH (remember that conversation w/ Aberforth?), and the filmmakers used the idea very well. It’s a hefty one to think about.

5) the unfolding of Ron/Hermione’s romance

6) the fact that there was NO natural lighting in the entire film except after Dumbledore died (when HRH are on the Astronomy tower, talking about what comes next). The surreal lights/shades/shadows are perfect for the mood of the story.

7) the echo of the Burrow-destroying ring of fire in Dumbledore’s scare-away-the-Inferi ring of fire

8) the London scenes, esp. the twisted Millennium Bridge--I walked over that bridge in May!


Here are the things I disliked:

1) THE ASTRONOMY TOWER SCENE. Holy cats, people, be true to the spirit of the story! Dumbledore should be WEAK, SICK, and READY TO DIE. The film Dumbledore could have taken every single Death Eater and Draco on and thrown them all off the side of the tower! The film Dumbledore has disagreed with me since Movie #3, so it doesn’t surprise me I didn’t like this scene, because I don’t like Michael Gambon as Dumbledore, and I think his characterization is about 50% wrong. Even so, we want to understand that Dumbledore wants to be released from his agony of the ring curse and the agony of the potion, and it didn’t happen here. BOO. And it’s so damn pivotal! I was pissed. I also wasn’t sure about the “let’s raise our wands together” thing, because it almost sent me into hysterics the first time I saw it (because I was tired, and because I was thinking about lighters and “Freebird”), but I *did* like how the light destroyed the Dark Mark. That symbolism worked for me.

2) Dumbledore’s hand. It should have looked like a torched marshmallow, not a hand with shadows on it.

3) the lack of conversation about where the Horcruxes could be, or what they might be. Poor Harry now has to search the entire Wizarding world. One again, film people, be true to the book and give the kid a chance at having a clue! The film is plenty long--would 5 more minutes of dialogue between Harry/Dumbledore have killed you?

These fillmmakers (and Steve Kloves, the screenwriter) have had one of the most difficult tasks in the history of telling stories, and they will never satisfy everyone. They gave it one hell of a go, that’s for sure. As you can see, my likes outweigh my dislikes. That wouldn’t have been true had I written this review the day after I saw it the first time.

More than anything, I think fillmmakers who adapt books need to be true to the spirit of the characters and the spirit of the story at hand. If they can do that, well, go for it. That doesn’t always happen for me in HP films. Grrr...

There are lots of EMPHATIC CAPITAL LETTERS in this post, aren’t there? : ) And it’s long. Sorry.

Tags: reviews

Last night we went to the new TRANSFORMERS movie. I have never been such an un-target audience member in my life. Wow. Why, do you ask, was I not a target audience member?

Here’s one reason. She’s beautiful, but I’m married and not full of testosterone.



Here’s another reason:


I’ve never really been a truck girl.

It wasn’t a bad film. Parts of it were funny. But the jokes weren’t engineered for me, the music wasn’t picked for me, nothing was for me. But that’s perfectly OK--it *shouldn’t* be for me. I’m not their target.

I have to say, though, I wouldn’t mind having a guardian car with a humorous personality:


The only way that movie could have been more male-oriented is if it had smells. Eau de Sweaty Locker Room Clothes would have made it perfect.

Tags: reviews, audience

So I am spending time with a famous teen author, one who’s been on the NYT bestseller list. Her characters are great, and they hit me where it hurts. But the storylines . . . not so much. Parts of them are compelling, but lots seem drowned in words and too much extraneous info/characters. Granted, my style (except here, it seems) is slightly minimal, so it doesn’t take much to be wordier and busier than me. But still.

So I wonder: what makes a NYT bestseller? Characters? Storylines? Beach readability? Getting in and getting out with no muss or fuss? Or is it just who you know, and knowing 47027009984 people who will buy your book? I don’t believe she’s won any awards, so that doesn’t do it (I can’t imagine there’s a huge correlation between awards and bestseller-dom at all). What has made her so popular? I think she’s getting ready to release her 7th or 8th book, if I’m not mistaken. She touches the terrible in her work--but it’s a light touch in some spots. Maybe teens don’t want too much pain in their commercial books. I’m not sure. She’s eminently readable, but I still see flaws. But what book is flawless?

I’m not sure I can unlock this mystery. And I wonder if NYT bestseller-dom is even achievable for someone like me. Not that I’m aiming for it, but I don’t think as commercially as I could. At my heart, I’m a lit major, and as a very wise editor said, sometimes lit majors are not good writers---they’re trying too hard to imitate the Great Books, and failing quite admirably.

She seems like a very cool, sane, down-to-earth person, and her writing mentor is the author of one of my favorite short stories. I would like to meet her. And she’s touched a ton of lives. I would like to do that, too. Maybe that’s the answer to the secret: resonance. If your book resonates, you land on the NYT bestseller list. Maybe I could do that.

I will say I rearranged the beginning of one book (in my head) and liked it much better. But what do I know?

Tags: reviews

We celebrated my son’s last day of 5th grade with a movie: UP. And it was wonderful.

Once again, Pixar does its job well. The film is visually appealing, it tells a great story, and it’s family-friendly (duh). It also does America a great service by casting an older person in the hero’s role. I will expose my nerd self once again and tell you I liked the TV show LOU GRANT--I was way too young to really get it, but I thought Ed Asner was great. I still think he’s great, and this film gives him a way to show off his dry humor. The film also does America a great service in the way it explores how it’s possible to love someone for a loooooooooooooong time, through lots of changes--Carl and Ellie’s relationship is lovely and warm, even in the face of sadness and loss (Carl and Ellie are even opposites, just like the rest of us married people who think we’ve found someone like us, and then that person turns out to be from another planet, a nice planet to be sure, but another planet, and what the hell were we thinking?). Not to risk sounding like a conservative, but America could do with some more examples of couples who stick it out through the craziness (straight AND every other kind of couple, mind you). Between that and showing us an older person who is worth every single ounce of his salt, I am all for this film.

I am terrible in the fact that I pick apart storylines now (“ooh, you need more exposition there,” and “well, that’s a giant hole”), but this film has little to pick apart. I did, however, notice that I wasn’t suspending my belief quite in the way the Pixar folks wanted me to. I TOTALLY bought into the fact that a guy could fly his house to South America using balloons from the zoo--like nine zillion of them. I did NOT, however, buy into the fact that said guy and captive Boy Scout-ish friend (who the dogs of the film call “the little mailman”) could then tow said house around like a parade balloon. Too heavy!

Um . . . well, Kirstin . . . traditionally, houses can’t fly. At all, let alone with the help of balloons. So if you’re gonna believe a house can fly, believe it can be towed. Don’t wreck it for yourself.

Tags: reviews

(Not to change the subject already, but have you ever heard the soundtrack to THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY? It’s a very old Clint Eastwood western, and the score is fantabulous. Check it out.)

It’s one thing when I review a book on my blog--who am I? Nobody important. Will the author ever read it? Maybe. Maybe not. It depends on how they Google themselves. But it’s a wholly different thing when the “real” reviewers get to your book. Then it can make a difference.

An acquaintance of mine just received a . . . lukewarm? . . . review from Kirkus for his first book, a middle-grade sports novel. I can’t find the review to read, so I can only report on what he said: Kirkus claimed his book “tried too hard.” It’s not the kindest thing anyone could say about a book.

Lots of us responded to him and tried to help him feel better, so that’s good. Anybody can understand a stinging review, not just book people. Problem is, in the book world, reviews are currency. They can determine library sales, for one thing, and the can sway regular-person sales, too. A lukewarm-to-bad review can’t just be blown off, especially for a first-time author. Then again, a lukewarm-to-bad review can happen to ANYONE, even big fish in this little pond. Reviewers are like anyone else---they have good days & bad days, and specific likes & dislikes.

It’s the breaks of the business, where there are a zillion of us competing for attention. But it makes me wonder what will happen to THE SKY ALWAYS HEARS ME, and it makes me wonder how my acquaintance is thinking about his review, after a few days has passed. I hope he feels better. I know I’m looking forward to reading it, and my son will eat it up.

Reviewers have to call them as they see them. I know that. It’s a business, and my book (or my acquaintance’s book) is just one of the pieces of coal that makes the publishing industry go. We think they’re works of art. “They” think they’re fodder for the machine. Not in a bad way, usually, but fodder nonetheless. Might as well be honest about it.

I wonder what my reviews will say. I wonder how I’ll react. The book business is a lot of wondering.

Tags: reviews

I’ve not gotten as much reading done over break as I had hoped, but I did let myself digest Stephen King’s new book of short stories, JUST AFTER SUNSET. I think the reviews are right: he’s still got it. At least most of it, anyway.

I’ve been a fan of King for a loooong time, since I was in middle school, which was right after he’d written some of his greatest novels (CARRIE, THE SHINING, THE STAND, etc.). When I read them as a youngster, I didn’t get them. But I was still able to absorb his literary prose, his ability to create a character (he’s a master), some of the themes he was working with (what happens when reality bends on you?), and his love of language (hail Mary, full of grace, let me win this stock car race). Even as a kid I could appreciate his ability to spin a good yarn. All of those things are still present in JUST AFTER SUNSET, but now as a grown-up, I can also tap into some of the craziness and desperation that comes with King’s characters. As a kid, I was oblivious to most of that subtlety.

In some of the stories there were holes. After I finished “Gingerbread Girl,” I wanted to e-mail him: “Dear Uncle Stevie, you need some backstory. It would help.” A couple others left me rather neutral. But there were also ones that piqued my mind. One story was about an English teacher and his alter ego, his writer persona, and the writer persona has to step in where the English teacher cannot. That story fascinated me. Other stories were old themes (possessed objects) with new twists (possessed objects whose owners were killed as a result of terrorism). The last story in the volume, which I think is called “In a Tight Place,” is vintage King, absolutely fantastic stuff. I didn’t really buy his main character (weird convolutions, and some “the character has to do X so Y can happen later on”), but the rest of it was amazing, just incredible. I was honored to read it.

So, for someone who’s retired a time or two from writing, he’s still producing good stuff. I’d wait until it’s in softcover, but I’d still buy it, if I were you. Even if you’re not a King fan, it’s still worth your time.

One more note: happy 2009! I am excited for this year--it’s going to bring good things. Here’s to good things for you, too!

Tags: reviews