strange and random happenstance

Austenland
Based on the book by Shannon Hale
Release Date: August 16th, 2013
Starring: Keri Russell, J.J. Feild, Bret McKenzie, James Callis, Jennifer Coolidge, Georgia King, Ricky Whittle, Rupert Vansittart and Jane Seymour
Rating: ★★★★★
To Buy

Jane Hayes has had it with her modern life of lewd men who lack manners. She wants to go back to the time of her favorite author, Jane Austen. Luckily for her, if not her bank account, there's Austenland, which caters to those who have a similar inclination, one might say fervor. She puts all her money on this last ditch attempt to find some happiness, or, as her friend Molly says, as a way to cure her of her obsession once and for all. She is greeted by the discovery that all her savings only bought her the copper package and her fellow female guests are given better rooms, better clothes, and better options. Jane becomes Miss Erstwhile and is soon turning away from the cold glances of Mr. Nobly and the other men whom are assigned to others and is cavorting with the servants, mainly the rather easy on the eyes Martin, who also has a taste in easy listening music. But Jane realizes that this "relationship" with Martin is just another way to step away from her life and she makes a decision. Austenland will cure her of happily ever afters and she is going to take control of her narrative. She decides that before she leaves she will become "engaged" to the man of her dreams, her own assigned Mr. Darcy, and move on. But what if her Mr. Darcy wasn't acting? What if she has bewitched Mr. Nobly and instead of a drastic cure she could come away from Austenland with her very own happily ever after?

If given half a chance I don't think there's any Janeite out there who wouldn't jump at the chance to vacation in the world of her novels. It's like Westworld but with parasols instead of pistols, unless you're watching the season seven Austen inspired episode of Red Dwarf "Beyond a Joke" and then it's both! Yet despite my love of Shannon Hale when I first read her book from which this movie is adapted I wasn't in love. Austenland was all right book wrong time and it just rubbed me the wrong way. I was like a dissatisfied cat. The joy at finding the book on my local Barnes and Noble shelves days before it's release was quickly overshadowed by my feelings after devouring it in one sitting. Like bad food it left an aftertaste I couldn't shake. I had been waiting so long for the book that I had certain expectations that couldn't possibly have been met and my dislike was almost a foregone conclusion. Luckily I was nudged into re-reading Austenland due to a well placed recommendation and the fact that a sequel was looming on the horizon. So I eventually embraced both Austenland and it's sequel Midnight in Austenland for what they were, chick lit that was subtly thumbing their noses at the Jane Austen Mafia, aka JASNA (an organization whom I have no doubt Jane wouldn't have just hated but is peopled by those she would have mercilessly parodied.)

With this new-found appreciation you can imagine that the announcement of a film adaptation was a pleasant surprise. Then when James Callis was announced, well, I started actually counting down the days to filming, then post production, then release. Once J.J. Feild was announced, I knew I was a goner. Ah J.J., you made me come to love Northanger Abbey. You and you alone! OK, the fact it's an awesome book making fun of the Gothic Genre is very important, but don't tell Jane it was really you. With each cast announcement and my mounting excitement you'd think that I was once again raising my expectations to have them shattered but that wasn't the case here! Austenland lived up to and exceeded my expectations. This movie is near perfection, but more than that it celebrates all that is Jane and is one of the funniest love letters to her you'll ever see. If Clueless and Bridget Jones's Diary had a baby who was then handed off to Monty Python for their education you'd arrive at Austenland. Even years later I can honestly say it's one of the funniest films I've ever seen and that first viewing in the theater was the hardest I'd laughed in a long time. The entire script is a goldmine of hilarious and memorable quotes. But it's not just the dialogue! The physical comedy, the subtle expressions of the actors, the sets, little things happening in every frame in the foreground and background that make repeat viewing not just a treat but a necessity to grasp the totality of not just James Callis and his constant murmurs, but of the love and talent that went into this production.

Let me break it down for you as to why this movie is just full of win. The perfect casting. Keri Russell is able to not only be the perfect surrogate, for me, the Austen loving audience member, but the chemistry with both the male leads makes for a believable and funny love triangle. Also, can we say genius casting with Bret 'Flight of the Conchords' McKenzie? But if it wasn't for the fact that every character was cast perfectly and every actor and actress seemed to be having so much fun, the three leads would not have been able to sustain the film. Then there's in-jokes of calling Bret a Hobbit reject, when everyone knows he's in ALL of The Lord of the Rings films, and Keri having hair Felicity hair in the opening flashback! As for Jennifer Coolidge, she is beyond charming, she is divine. In fact it's my firm belief that only she could be Miss Charming, and I have a sneaking suspicion that even in writing the book Shannon Hale was picturing her. And James Callis, what can I say, but I've always admired you, Bridget Jones, Battlestar, you made me want "evil" to win... you have some serious comedic talents, so while I love you in period pieces, do more movies like this! In fact, why aren't there more movies like this? With Georgia King skipping out of rooms or Ricky Whittle finding yet another way to strip off his clothing? But I must say, the casting of Mr. Wattlesbrook was by far the best. Because Mr. Wattlesbrook, aka Rupert Vansittart, aka Fatty Fat Buckle, is none other then Mr. Hurst from the 1995 Colin Firth version of Pride and Prejudice! Say what? Yes, he has cornered the market on laying about in unattractive positions proudly displaying his paunch.

Yet Mr. Wattlesbrook is also the one flaw of the film. The thing is he's a little to rapey. He's always drunk and more then handsy. He attempts to force himself on Jane thinking she's a little more lax in her morals due predominately to her piano performance and cavorting with the "staff." This is also an apparently recurring problem from what Colonel Andrews says. Yet nothing has been done about it!?! This is a thorn in the side of the movie. Why have this creepy aspect? You could say it's to get the two men to fight over Jane at the airport and to have her doubt Mr. Nobley's intentions when he shows up at her door, but I'm sure that all the people behind this clever production could have thought of a way around this. Because as it stands it trivializes a predator and for a film that is produced, written, and directed by women by not focusing on the danger this man poses it condones rape culture. Which, when you think more about it is so odd because Austenland is about female wish fulfillment, with all the men being beefcakes verging on male prostitutes, and yet there's a snake in the garden with Mr. Wattlesbrook. If there was some dire need to keep him in the narrative maybe make him a lesson in what life was like? A throwback to the times when men used their droit de seigneur? Because as it is if this aspect of him would somehow just disappear this could easily be up there with Clue and Dirty Rotten Scoundrels and Bridget Jones's Diary as one of my favorite films ever. I mean, as is it's so close. It's just the width of Mr. Wattlesbrook away... 

But what I found most interesting in this re-watching of Austenland was that until I was swept away by the happily ever after I found myself thinking how happy I would be just to be there in the clothes, staying in that house, and just pretending I was in Regency England. That would literally be enough for me. I don't need overly muscled men and fake fantasies, I just need the historical element. It's a lesser wish fulfillment, but a far more realistic one. In fact I'd say the stages of Jane Austen wish fulfillment would be reading all the books, then seeing all the movies, then visiting all the sights, then dressing up in costume, then finding your own Mr. Darcy would be the ultimate stage that I think many of us are grounded enough in reality to know that that is not very likely to happen. But when Jane is complaining to her friend Molly about how she thought it would be different... I think the non-deluded fan would say that Jane is getting just what they want. Which makes it interesting when Jane decides to view the whole experience as immersion therapy to get over her obsession. Yes, perhaps she did take it a little too far with the wooden letters over her bed, but what's wrong with some teacups? And I truly think a cut-out of Colin Firth could provide some much needed support in case of a burglary. I think anyone would think twice seeing his manly silhouette in a dark apartment. What all this comes down to is why hasn't someone made Austenland a real thing and how soon can I go? As you can see I, unlike some, have realistic expectations, I don't need a proposal at the ball! Though J.J. Feild would be nice...

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Austenland, Bicentenary Ball, Bridget Jones's Diary, Clue, Dirty Rotten Scoundrels, J.J. Feild, Jane Austen, Keri Russell, Monty Python, Pride and Prejudice, Rape, Red Dwarf, Rupert Vansittart, Shannon Hale

Howards End
Based on the book by E.M. Forster
Starring: Vanessa Redgrave, Helena Bonham Carter, Joseph Bennett, Emma Thompson, Prunella Scales, Adrian Ross Magenty, Jo Kendall, Anthony Hopkins, James Wilby, Jemma Redgrave, Samuel West, Simon Callow, Susie Lindeman, and Nicola Duffett
Release Date: March 13th, 1992
Rating: ★★★
To Buy

Helen Schlegel is visiting with the Wilcoxes at Howards End, where she becomes engaged to the youngest son Paul. In fits of rapture she writes a letter to her sister telling her of the happy alliance and due to her sister Margaret being unable to journey down to the house their Aunt Juley heads down to suss out the situation. Everything is muddled, the engagement was off before it really began and due to Aunt Juley's misunderstanding chaos reigns with the Wilcoxes and the two families go their separate ways. So how inconvenient that they happen to take a house in London directly opposite the Schlegels for the elder son Charles's wedding. Helen wisely takes herself off to Germany and Paul goes off to Nairobi. This gives Meg and the matriarch Ruth Wilcox a chance to become dear friends. Meg is Ruth's confidant, informing her of her illness, which she hasn't told her family about, as well as how Howards End is her place in the world. Meg longs to see Howards End with Ruth, but it is never to be. Ruth dies shortly thereafter. What Meg doesn't know is that Ruth asked her family to leave Howards End to Meg. The Wilcoxes think this is folly, not knowing the pain Ruth suffered on hearing that the Schlegels were to soon lose their house as the lease was up. But things have a weird way of working themselves out if they are meant to be. Meg ends up marrying Ruth's widower, Henry, and her possessions end up being stored at Howards End, much to the rest of the Wilcoxes displeasure. While Meg's life is sorting itself out, Helen's is spinning even more out of control. She has a hanger-on, Leonard Bast, a poor clerk whom she befriended after accidentally stealing his umbrella. Due to the interactions between the Schlegels and the Wilcoxes Helen hears of some advice for Leonard that she thinks is in his best interest. Instead his friendship with Helen slowly destroys him. Helen, unwilling to believe that anything is her fault, lays the blame on Henry and she cuts herself off from her family after a scene at Henry's daughter Evie's wedding. Helen's behaviour is odd. Something must be behind it. Could it be Leonard? Or could it be the end of everything they believe and hold dear?

I really don't know how many times I have watched Howards End. I wouldn't say it was overly much, in the realm of Clue and The Princess Bride, but then how do I know so much of the blocking and the gestures and the exact way the lines are delivered? So apparently, without my knowing it, I'm some kind of Howards End junky, or the film is just particularly memorable, you choose. But seeing as I had the recent and mortifying experience of learning a new brand of hatred for the book I was still willing to believe in the film. To believe that all this was just me. It was refreshing to find that I still like the film, but by watching it with a jaded and suspicious eye I picked up on the oddest things that I don't think I would ever have noticed were it not for my skepticism. The biggest change is in how the movie diverts from the book, what I call the music and meaning. When Helen first meets Mr. Bast at the concert of that title Merchant and Ivory basically show their hand as to how they are going to treat this film. Instead of Helen going on about the Goblins in the music, they assign that task to Simon Callow in his requisite cameo. Later Helen disagrees with this fanciful assigning of meaning and narrative to the music. She is more prosaic and that makes her differ from the Helen in the book. The film doesn't delve into the deeper meaning of the story. It doesn't dwell on the morbid thoughts of the leads, going instead for the flash and the gloss. This is why the film still works while the book now fails in my mind. The characters internal lives destroy them and make them unrelatable in the book, being petty and self centered asses. By taking things more at face value we are spared the shallow inner lives that Forster wrote and we are left with a satisfying story.    

The movie isn't hurt either by it's superb casting, it's a who's who of the best in British stars, from Antony Hopkins to Samuel West. Emma Thompson picked up her first Oscar for her portrayal of Margaret Schlegel, though personally, I could take or leave Emma Thompson. Yes, the film wouldn't have worked without her, but the truth is that Vanessa Redgrave deserved all of the awards for this film, because it is through her and her character of Ruth Wilcox that the entire tone of the film is set. I defy you to capture the whole feeling of the film better then the first few minutes where Ruth Wilcox is dreamily walking about the grounds of Howards End. It sets up her love of the house and the love of her family. This is the world entire to her and it is perfect. A role that in the book isn't more than a plot device to bring the two families back together after the rift of Helen and Paul is given such depth and pathos that you can't help but be moved. Through her carefully delivered lines we come to love Howards End as she does. Vanessa Redgrave sprinkles magic over the house at the center of the book and gives it a life. In the book you never quite get why the house is so important, why it is everything. Yet in that one speech where Ruth talks about the tree relieving the tooth ache, what in the book is an odd insignificant line, brings all the magic of home and belonging somewhere in the world. Because that is what Howards End is, a place to belong.

Yet if they hadn't found THE PERFECT house I don't know if all Vanessa Redgrave's magic would have worked. In fact, for quite some time this was my dream home. For the country that is. For the city I really wanted the Schlegels house... perhaps that's why I remember this film so much, I wanted to live in their homes. I wanted to live, not in their world or even with them, but in the places they inhabited. The one thing that Forster does and does better than anyone else is describe places in such a magical way that you feel as if you are there, walking through the fields blanketed with flowers. His world, despite the death and despair that always comes at the close, is a place for nature to show it's wonderful bounty. This film felt like the very best of Forster's writing on nature. While Leonard Bast's actual walk through the night isn't magical or mystical in the least on the page, the film captures the romanticism that is found on the road to Monteriano, the woods abundant and fecund with bluebells, even if Broadchurch has tainted my views on woods and bluebells ever so slightly, the magic is still there. There is a Pre-Raphaelite sensibility to the clothing and the flowers that romanticize the setting. Though I will saying that the coupling of Helen and Leonard might have taken the Pre-Raphaelite aesthetic a little too far. Overtones of John Everett Millais's Ophelia, and John William Waterhouse's The Lady of Shallot, while apt for their love affair, just made you think how uncomfortable being seduced in a rowboat would be.

Though, for all they did right with the production of the film, whomever did the makeup needs to be called out. Seriously people. I am glad that I don't have a high definition television, because the horror of the men's makeup might not have been endurable. They all look like silent film stars, as in that very overly made up way. I kept expecting them to start mugging for the camera, or for ominous music to start as Emma Thompson was tied to the railway track, or even an Errol Flynn sweep across the screen on a rope as Samuel West showed off his swashbuckling skills. Across the board, their skin is a nice flat spray tan, with the eyes and eyebrows comically enhanced. So, was the makeup lady blind or just hired off the most recent Christmas Panto? Every time Anthony Hopkins wasn't shamefully hiding his face I was about to bust my gut with laughter. I wonder if he saw the dailies and came up with that clever hiding of his face when he had to talk about unpleasantness with Margaret just so that the hideous makeup job had less screen time. All I kept thinking of was the season seven episode of Red Dwarf "Blue," where in order to get Dave to stop missing Rimmer Kryten creates "The Rimmer Experience," a virtual reality ride of Rimmer's life seen through Rimmer's eyes. Everyone is heavily made up to the comical extreme. While it works in a comedy, I don't think that was the look they should have gone for in a period drama! As for how the women escaped this fate? I don't think all of them did, Helena Bonham Carter looks a little too Mary Pickford for my liking.

One thing that drove me crazy throughout was the film's heavy handed foreshadowing. So, if you don't want to be spoiled, stop now. Though it you've read my review of the book I kind of spoiled it without warning, oops. Anyway, so two key things that happen at or near the end of the book is that Charles Wilcox repeatedly hits Leonard Bast with the flat or a sword until Leonard dies of his heart condition, though it is manslaughter. The other is that it comes out that Henry Wilcox cheated on his wife Ruth with Leonard Bast's wife, Jacky, while he was in Cyprus. So how were they heavy handed? With Jacky and Henry, it's just a deliberate mentioning of Cyprus in both their pasts that is never mentioned in the book until they fatefully meet at Evie Wilcox's wedding. As for the killer blade? Oh dear me, even if you didn't know it is coming from reading the book, you would have known it was coming with how they handled every mention of the sword like it was semaphore code. "THIS SWORD IS IMPORTANT PAY ATTENTION!" First it's mentioned by Meg at a dinner party she has at her house with Mrs. Wilcox, then on Leonard's second coming to the house he plays with the hilt, then there's a big to-do with unpacking it at Howards End and hanging it under the mantelpiece, AND THEN Meg and Helen discuss how perfect it sits over the fire, AND THEN it's used as a murder weapon. Four, yes FOUR clumsy and obvious references to that damn sword. Couldn't they have alluded to it in a more sly way? Couldn't they have, I don't know, mentioned it twice and not felt the need to point it out with big flashing lights. The only thing they could have done worse is a giant lighted sign pointing at it going, "Keep Leonard Away!" So much for subtlety. But then again, they were painting the book in broad strokes, which overall worked, how can I fault them for doing a better job overall than the author himself?

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Arnold Rimmer, Broadchurch, Clue, E.M. Forster, Emma Thompson, Forster Fall, Helena Bonham Carter, Howards End, Pre-Raphaelite, Red Dwarf, Samuel West, The Princess Bride, Vanessa Redgrave

Congo
Based on the book by Michael Crichton
Starring: Laura Linney, Dylan Walsh, Ernie Hudson, Tim Curry, Grant Heslov, Joe Don Baker, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, Bruce Campbell, Taylor Nichols, Joe Pantoliano, Delroy Lindo, Stuart Pankin, Peter Jason, James Karen, Shayna Fox, and Frank Welker
Release Date: June 9th, 1995
Rating: ★
To Buy

Charlie Travers is leading an expedition in the Congo to find diamonds to power high tech communications devices, in other words, lasers, for TraviCom, a company run by his father. Charlie misses his second check in with his father back in Huston and when they get the video feed back online they see death and destruction everywhere and a mysterious ape like creature rushing past the camera. Charlie's father, R.B. Travis, begs his employee Doctor Karen Ross to go to the Congo. Karen agrees if the expedition is really to save Charlie, her former fiance, and not to get the diamonds. In California, Doctor Peter Elliott runs Project Amy, which has been teaching Amy the gorilla sign language. Amy is amazing, she has a glove that allows her to actually speak when signing and she's learned to paint. Of course the paintings are actually a form of therapy to help with her nightmares. Peter wishes to return Amy to her home in the Congo but the University doesn't want to lose Amy and the cost would be prohibitive. Enter Herkermer Homolka, a philanthropist who claims his interest is to see Amy happy, when really he suspects Amy is the key to finding the lost city of Zinj and King Solomon's Diamond Mines. Do to necessity Karen Ross attaches herself to Amy's party and they have only a few political hiccups in entering the Congo. With their forces combined will they find the diamonds, Charlie, or Amy's home? Or will they find nothing but death and destruction?

In 1995 Congo was tied with Sphere, well, maybe a little ahead of Sphere, as my favorite Crichton book; and it was going to be a movie! Not only that, it was going to be a movie with Tim Curry, my most favorite of all actors! Rocky Horror and Clue forever! The movie just happened to be opening right after my junior year of high school ended. I was counting down the days to summer break and then the last few weeks of my junior year descended into hell. I got the sickest I had ever been in years, I can still remember the pain as if it was yesterday. I had such a severe ear infection that I kept thinking if only I could get that metal spike from The X-Files and jam it in my ear everything would be better. I didn't sleep for days, making me test the theory that if you stay awake for three days straight you're insane. I quite possibly was, but aren't we all mad here?

I was so disoriented I picked up a soldering iron in art metal from the wrong end. Yes, that's right, I thought why not pick it up by the searing hot metal end that likes to burn flesh. Luckily for some unknown reason I picked it up with my non-dominate left hand, so I could at least still write and take all my finals the coming week, oh happy day. I spent all my spare time trying to finish my stained glass project with my one good hand, and then I had a week's worth of finals and on Saturday morning, before getting to see Congo, I had the ACTs. Because what better then to take the ACTs with a fever of 104! I still say getting a 26 when I was giggling to myself at the absurdity of my situation and randomly selecting answers was pretty darn good. It was good enough for the school I was applying to so that's all that mattered. And then, after all this suffering, my reward was Congo. It wasn't much of a reward. 

Of all the adaptations of Crichton's films Congo is begging for a remake. If not just for the advancement in technology, could the new version try to maintain any aspect of the book, oh, and can Andy Serkis play Amy? Bring back those ominous hand paddles and crush some skulls! Seriously, I have a new cast in mind and it would be awesome. Just saying, Jennifer Lawrence, Lee Pace, and Toby Stephens. Back to this version... the biggest and most detrimental change from page to screen in my mind is the changes wrought with the character of Doctor Karen Ross. Putting aside my hatred of Laura Linney, because I have a strong feeling that it was this movie that started this hate, this adaptation once again shows that for Hollywood woman can't be strong and ruthless, yes they can be strong, yes they can make tough decisions, but it all comes down to gooey romantic feelings. Ah, ick. Karen Ross didn't want to go to the Congo to prove she could do it, to succeed and get the diamonds at all costs, as in the book, oh no, she went to rescue her ex-fiance and her boss's son! Yes, it's all about saving someone she loved!

I wonder if Michael Crichton when watching all these various films of his books ever cringed. He doesn't write weak females and yet time and again they are made weaker. By making Doctor Ross all about her heart they are taking a book about ruthless business practices and making it into a doomed love story. By doing this they are shifting the burden for their journey into the Congo onto Amy. Amy's return to the wild becomes foremost. Instead of Amy being an addition to the expedition, Doctor Ross is an addition to Amy's release. And this change doesn't work because this throws the whole plot into turmoil and forces the movie to add in unnecessary characters that are literally cannon fodder in an attempt to keep the diamond subplot. And yes, that is a laser powered by diamonds. Yes, seriously, lasers! Lasers that could punch a hole in the moon. Say what? I know a psychic vegan who can do this and yes, it is still more believable the this freakin' laser.

By taking Doctor Ross out of the driver's seat the movie now needs someone to get Amy, she is now the star after all, to Africa AND have the interest in the diamonds. Hence, as much as it pains me to say he's an unnecessary character, Tim Curry is brought in as the ludicrous Herkermer Homolka. Firstly, who thought of that name? Secondly, why are we having this weird H. Rider Haggard throw back? The whole point of Congo was to have a modern interpretation of the adventure novels of Haggard, not do this weird clash of modern and old fashioned. Mesh the two don't set them off against each other. Also, Curry is basically the great white hunter, but so is Ernie Hudson, why do we need two characters that could, in a better written story serve the same purpose? For my money, despite my adoration of Curry, I'd stick with Hudson, he was the only one who was perfect in this plane wreck of a movie.

But, oh dear. Despite ranting about all the changes I haven't even gotten to the worst of it. I'm talking about Amy. Firstly lets talk animatronics. All the apes were done by Stan Winston who, if we were to judge him by this movie, has never seen an ape in his life. Seriously. What they hell. By the end of the movie we're in this weird guns blazing human engineered ape cave with everything going to shit in epic The Island of Doctor Moreau fashion, what the fuck. And I mean the crappy film version. Which came out a year after this film and was also done by Stan Winston. Sigh. So firstly, we have apes that don't even look like apes, then add Amy's "Power Glove." Though, to reference the Nintendo Power Glove is a disservice to Nintendo. So apparently having Peter translate Amy's sign language or even just having subtitles wasn't "cool" enough and instead we get this weird childish talking ape. And yes, if you ask me at a party, I will do my impersonation. Yes, it's so bad it deserves one. Easily. Also, interesting fact, if you had a friend named Amy in high school, this might just be their most hated film because of the "Power Glove."

The first and only time I watched this film I was so distracted by plot changes and talking apes I missed the weirdest part of this movie, and that's the jungle itself. Now, I'm not talking about the built sets that looked like they were rejects from Legends of the Hidden Temple or Xena: Warrior Princess, a conclusion that is easy to reach because of Bruce Campbell being in the movie. I mean seriously, look at that river, doesn't it look a little chocolaty to you? Is that ape throwing eyeballs at Bruce really Augustus Gloop? That is a whole different level of cheesiness. No, what I'm talking about is that the jungle is SO OBVIOUSLY NOT Africa, something my fevered brain missed the first time around. Yes, it's probably hard to get permission to film there, but still... why not just build the whole freakin' jungle, you badly built enough of it already. For the majority of the film I thought perhaps I was mistaken in the film's stupidity of not even filming in Africa, but the credits confirmed it. Costa Rica it is! In fact, isn't this the rain forest where some dinos fled to after leaving Jurassic Park? But then again, the people behind this film obviously thought the viewing public was made of idiots having the lost city of Zinj's architecture based on Cambodian temples... you know, that Asian country half a world away... or maybe they were just so stupid they didn't know or care. Because if you walk away from this film with one impression it's that it was made by idiots.

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Adaptation, Africa, Bruce Campbell, Clue, Congo, Costa Rica, Crichton Celebration, Gorilla, High School, Jurassic Park, Michael Crichton, Sphere, The Island of Dr. Moreau, Tim Curry, Willy Wonka, Xena

The Layton Court Mystery by Anthony Berkeley
Published by: The Langtail Press
Publication Date: 1925
Format: Kindle, 222 Pages
Rating: ★
To Buy

Because of his friend Alec, the author Roger Sheringham has been invited by Victor Stanworth to be a part of his house party at Layton Court. Victor has rented a lovely house for the summer and has surrounded himself with friends. So why do they find Victor locked in his library with an apparently self inflicted gunshot wound to the head and a suicide note? Despite the fact that all the windows and doors are locked from the inside, Roger thinks that perhaps it was murder and it would be fun to play at being a sleuth. He has to have a Watson to his Holmes, someone who will be a dumb sounding board and willing to be berated constantly. Alec grudgingly takes up this mantle and they set about solving a crime that they aren't sure even happened. At one time or another they suspect all of their fellow guests, and even a mysterious "Prince." With the clock running against them till the inquest and their imminent departure from Layton Court, can an amateur sleuth and his reluctant Watson solve it in time?

When I sat down here at my computer and hammered out the details to my Golden Summer, I added Anthony Berkeley for the reason I have had a copy of The Poisoned Chocolates Case sitting on my bookshelf for... well, I don't know how long it's actually been there, but a dash long time. Yet when I got to reading up on Berkeley I found out that The Poisoned Chocolates Case was not the first Roger Sheringham book as I had thought. Because of Berkeley's propensity for writing under pseudonyms, or in this case, sometimes anonymously, The Poisoned Chocolates Case is either the forth or fifth book with Sheringham... so obviously, I had to start at the beginning and my poor copy of The Poisoned Chocolates Case would be neglected for some while more.

My initial impressions of The Layton Court Mystery was that it had more then a few striking similarities with A.A. Milne's The Red House Mystery, which I had just finished and loved. Sadly, where that one had wit and originality, this was just labored and had an angry tone throughout... or maybe it was my rage reading because everything grated on my nerves. I was more then once struck by how this reminded me of an episode of the BBC's Comedy Showcase called "Felix and Murdo." In the episode the hilarious actors Ben Miller and Alexander Armstrong, are Edwardians looking forward to the 1908 Olympics in London, this being aired to spur the fervor for last year's summer Olympics. The thing about the whole episode was that it was trying too hard to be witty and ended coming out crap. That's how I felt about this whole book. It was trying too hard. That and the fact that seeing as both Milne and Berkeley worked for Punch, that there is no way Berkeley didn't realize how similar his book was and I think Milne should have taken him out back, not necessary for a dust up, but maybe to school him in the ways of actually writing a good book. Or perhaps it's crappiness was why it was published anonymously...

There is just so much wrong with this book I literally don't know where to start... shall I dissect the horrid characters or the plot... decisions, decisions... ok, let's go with characters, because their stupidity made the plot drag and drag until I could barely stand it anymore. Roger and his "friend" Alec are the two most unlikable people ever. They are mean and snipe at each other constantly. I would say that they quite literally hate each other. I would never treat a friend in the manner they treat each other, a mortal enemy, maybe... but still, it wouldn't be as harsh as these two. Also, they act against character all the time. They say they are not prone to sentimentality, yet the act that Alec commits is the definition of being a sentimental fool and rushing in to save the damsel in distress. But luckily, they aren't sentimental...wtf? Not to mention Roger is a bigoted jackass, and a hypocritical one at that who calls others bigoted! He looks down on the servants, whom having a discussion with "would be as ineffective as to harangue a hippopotamus." Also, his views on women... oh dear me. Women are all crying milksops that need a big strong man to protect them, and with their inferior mental capabilities "there's always the chance that a woman will" give away a clue. Though nothing compares to how Roger's antisemitism comes out. The line was so offensive I can't even bring myself to quote it. Unlike the pervasive racism that is in the work of Dorothy L. Sayers, Berkeley's was like a slap in the face. I literally cannot think why anyone would say something so offensive.

Now to the plot... or what I gather you would call a plot. It's really just two guys arguing and then arguing some more and at the end of the day, well... nothing happens at the end. It just sort of stopped. All the plot problems are because of the idiocy of Roger and Alec. Their attempt to solve the "murder" of their host is like a how-to guide on how not to solve a mystery. They look at the scene of the crime and then retreat into the garden and talk things out, repeat ad infinitum. Because obviously they can't be overheard in a garden? Why is this garden so damn secretive? Is it in fact The Secret Garden? NO!?! Well then, anyone with any sense can hear what you're saying. As for your host and resident corpse... you didn't figure out that his circle of friends are all people he is blackmailing till about 150 pages in? Well, I figured it out 10 pages in. Haven't you seen Clue? Ok, no... you wouldn't, but still, it was obvious. Also, why would you discount the fact that the killer was probably among the house guests? Why would you think an outside person was the perpetrator? Ug. But the worst of all, why would you think that a suspect would have the name "Prince?" I mean, the SECOND I read that name I was like, dood, that's an animal, as it turned out to be a bull, I was spot on. In fact, everything about this book was either bang my head against the wall obvious or so offensive that I wished to throttle the author. And here I go... getting ready to read his next book... am I a masochist? Yes, I think I might be, but it's all for you, my gentle reader.

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: A. A. Milne, Anthony Berkeley, Antisemitism, Clue, Dorothy L. Sayers, Felix and Murdo, Olympics, Punch, Roger Sheringham, The Layton Court Mystery, The Red House Mystery, The Secret Garden

Midnight in Austenland by Shannon Hale
Published by: Bloomsbury
Publication Date: January 31st, 2012
Format: Hardcover, 288 Pages
Rating: ★★★
To Buy

Charlotte Kinder is still wondering how it went wrong. She dedicated her life to her family. Now she's single again and her husband James will soon be married the a woman named Justice. How is that just? To be single again at her age is something she never thought would or could happen. Thankfully due to her brains, and her Internet start-up company, she's not exactly hurting for money. But what does that matter. She doesn't know who she is without James. Finding an old bucket list from when she was a teenager she realizes how many dreams she had that where abandoned by an early marriage and pregnancy. The list is unrealistic, Kilimanjaro, really? But what about the part about reading all Jane Austen's books? That was something that she didn't even have to leave the house to do.

Reading the works of Jane Austen is the first time she has truly felt anything in a long time. Realizing that she has the money and the time to take a vacation, Charlotte thinks she would like to go to England and walk in the steps of this great author to hopefully recapture some of those feelings Austen has reawakened. Then she hears about Pembrook Park... an immersive Austen experience. She wouldn't be walking in Jane's footsteps, she would be living in her world! Arriving at the park she meets a motley crew, from the strict proprietress, Mrs. Wattlesbrook, to the Englsih songstress Alisha, ill and in disguise as Miss Gardenside, with her ever present nurse, Mrs. Hatchett, as well as the guest in permanent residence, Miss Charming. But what about the men? There's the exuberant Colonel Andrews, the Rochester like Mr. Mallery, and the actor who is to play her brother, Eddie. Because Charlotte has left her life behind and is now Mrs. Cordial, the widowed bell of Regency England. Even if Charlotte just learned what Regency means...

A relaxing stay doesn't seem in the cards. The drunken and decidedly modern dressed husband of Mrs. Wattlesbrook makes an appearance. But an interruption into the verisimilitude isn't so troubling as the ghost stories and mysteries that start to weave through the house. Dead nuns and ghosts and secret rooms and fire. Charlotte stumbles on a corpse, but was it really there, was it Bloody Murder? Could Charlotte be next?

For those familiar with Pembrook Park from Hale's previous jaunt into Austenland, you are in for a complete 180. Instead of the romance and comedy of manners, much like Austen's Pride and Prejudice, her we have the Austen of Northanger Abbey. The laundry list that might be a plaintive cry for help. The tone is set quite early by Charlotte, who, upon first seeing Pembrook Park, thinks "this is the sort of house were murders happen." She isn't far off. With a far more Bronte-esque man set aside for her, this isn't going to be all longing gazes and secret rendezvous. Instead Charlotte will be sizing everyone up in the drawing room and making lists of suspects.

Quite a suspect list it is, with some familiar faces returning, in fact, after her last stay, Miss Charming has never left, instead moving into the park full time. Also, Mrs. Wattlesbrook's husband, who was booted out of the house because of an incident in Austenland, shows he's even more of a villain than previously thought. Also, the new characters are interesting, though I think with Miss Gardenside is badly timed. She is very much of the Amy Winehouse/Lily Allen persuasion... and, well... things didn't really turn out well there. Not that Hale was to know writing this book way in advance of Winehouse's death.

While I found the change of tone and the recurrence of characters fun, feeling at times like my favorite movie, Clue, there was one problem I had. A problem that often happens in murder mysteries. Why does the heroine always have to be in danger? Not just once, but repeatedly. The same scenario played out over and over and over. The inner monologue trying to justify what was really going on and always second guessing herself. I did like how the red herrings Hale laid out did lead me down a few dead ends, but once it was all solved... there was not enough rapidity in the conclusion. A drawn out ending can be the killer of a book and this ending did bring it down a full star rating. If I where Charlotte I wouldn't have second guessed, I would have called the police immediately and had done with it. Why do people have to figure things out for themselves before calling the proper authorities... I mean, I'm sure I might make the same mistake, but I'm hoping that after all the horror films and mysteries I've been exposed to I wouldn't be so dumb.

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: Amy Winehouse, Austenland, Bloody Murder, Bronte, Clue, Jane Austen, Kilimanjaro, Midnight in Austenland, Northanger Abbey, Pembrook Park, Pride and Prejudice, Rochester, Shannon Hale

The Spellmans Strike Again (The Spellmans Book 4) by Lisa Lutz
Published by: Simon & Schuster
Book Provided by Simon & Schuster
Publication Date: March 16th, 2010
Format: Hardcover, 384 Pages
Rating: ★★★★★
To Preorder

The Spellman Clan is no longer at war... they are now bonding... there have already been two camping trips... in fact an all out family brawl might improve the situation and stop the exposure to the great outdoors and what passes for food at the Sunday night dinners... But work continues apace and aside from the fact, that with her boyfriend Connor's grudging acquiescence, Izzy is dating lawyers to keep her mom quite about an incident at Prom, things seem as settled as they can be with the Spellmans around. But things can't remain stable for long in Isabel's life with the two intriguing cases she has and fixtures from lights to doorknobs mysteriously disappearing from 1799 Clay Street. Plus Morty keeps calling her "from the edge" about how he wants to return to the Frisco. Henry, despite Izzy's avoidance of him after their kiss, seems really bent on getting their friendship back. Rae's newest obsession, thanks to working for Maggie, is to free the wrongly imprisoned, mainly a man named Schimdt. She has t-shirts and everything. Rae's obsession, in true Isabel fashion, makes her overzealous and she overshoots her mark and ends up in serious trouble. On the plus side, she might get to stay out of the Ivy league and with her new boyfriend due to having an arrest record. But Rae's meddlesome ways might help Isabel in her taking down Harkey... that most corrupt of PIs.

This latest installment is bittersweet. Being billed as the "uproarious fourth and final installment" I didn't think I'd be able to let go of my favorite family. I have two good reports on that score, the first, if this is the final installment I'm content with the ending, second, straight from Lisa "what I can say right now is that there won't be another Spellman book in March, 2011. I've been working on other projects. However, I think I will probably do at least one more Spellman book after that." So good news on both fronts.

In the forth Spellman book Izzy definitely seems more mature. She has a steady boyfriend, even if she's dating other men in the form of the legal brief kind and has signed a contract forbidding her from marrying Connor. There is always the Henry question... which does find closure... eventually. But despite Isabel's new found maturity, the antics of her family, along with her most interesting case yet, make this another great book by Lisa Lutz. Aside from her general snooping and surveillance on her family members Izzy has two cases, one involving a scriptwriter that is definitely more than it seems, and one that is straight out of an Agatha Christie mystery. The second is obviously my favorite, Anglophile that I am. The case involves a Mr. Franklin Winslow and his palatial Pacific Heights mansion and his absent valet, Mason Graves. As Isabel notes when arriving at his estate, she can see why her mother likes working for him, "it was like briefly inhabiting a life-sized game of Clue." The Spellmans usually run background checks on his ever rotating employees, but this case is different. Mr. Winslow relied on his valet for everything and there might be some reason for his disappearance. What is required is a spy/valet... and Isabel has just the man for the job, her friend Len. Of course she didn't really realize that he'd take to being Hobson to Mr. Winslow's Arthur quite so readily as "Mr. Leonard"... but that's actor's for you.

The one aspect I found interesting and different was the campaigning for the wrongfully imprisoned that seizes the female Spellman siblings. While it's a natural progression given Maggie's line of work as a lawyer and her being more incorporated into the family, I found it very different then any case before. While the books have dealt with crime and the seedy underbelly of life before, this felt almost too real. Hyper-real within the world of the Spellmans. It showed the petty squabbles that landed Isabel in prison as a kind of candy coated game prison, like in Monopoly where you wait your three turns and are released, whereas this prison is totally real. While I'm not sure if this jives with the whole series I think it was necessary because this stark reality shows more than anything that Isabel has grown up and that she understands life more than before. And while I liked the ending of this book, some aspects more than others, and I can say goodbye to them, if I must... I'll still crave a next chapter!

Make sure to enter my Surfeit of Spying Spellmans Giveaway to win this, or any of the other Spellman books. All signed 1st editions!

Posted by Miss Eliza at 12:00 AM 0 comments  

Labels: 1799 Clay Street, Agatha Christie, Arthur, Clue, Harkey, Henry Stone, Isabel, Maggie, Monopoly, Morty, Mr. Leonard, Mr. Winslow, PI, Rae, The Spellmans Strike Again