Quickly, before it goes out again
Woo hoo! I now have the 2-disc 300 DVD, and my mother was just now randomly at a bookstore ("Wait... I don't have this Clive Cussler book! How can this be? I MUST COMPLETE THE COLLECTION") and called and asked me if I wanted anything. This is like telling a drug addict that you're at the corner dealer and the next hit's on you, so I racked my brain for a moment and blurted out "Watchmen!" This, of course, meant sending her over into the dangerous, uncharted territory that is the Comics and Graphic Novels section, and the last I heard from her, she was ending the call so she could bring in uniformed backup. You'd think that Watchmen would be pretty easy to find, but maybe not. Oh--wait--she's just called me back, and she's said that the bookstore people have dug up a boxed set of some kind. Also, one of the guys working said, "Whoever you're getting for, he's really going to enjoy this." "Uh, it's a she." Insert the dropping of jaws, etc. I thought people were used to the idea of girls reading comics by now, but I guess not.
(ETA: Omg, it weights five pounds.)
Meanwhile, more writing, less swimming; I reread Stardust yesterday, and I have to say, I like what they did with the movie ( see Thursday night) even more now that I can compare it directly. The book is wonderful and bittersweet, but--for example--Gaiman glosses over several adventures Tristan and Yvaine have on the road (and I like that in the book), and a lot of the book is the pleasure of the language as opposed to the pleasure of the things actually happening. With a movie, a lot of the pleasure is in the visuals and the action (and I don't even mean the Stuff Blowed Up Good action; I mean the simple fact of people doing things), and "they did stuff but I'm not going to show you" doesn't really work in a movie. The very things that make books enjoyable often don't work onscreen--much the way that the things that make movies enjoyable often don't work in books, either (have you ever tried reading a blow-by-blow action scene?). So all in all, I'm pretty happy with what they cooked up for the movie.
While we're here: cleojones (who is not me) also saw an early screening. I'd say more, but the thunderstorm has my connection on the fritz.
(ETA: Omg, it weights five pounds.)
Meanwhile, more writing, less swimming; I reread Stardust yesterday, and I have to say, I like what they did with the movie ( see Thursday night) even more now that I can compare it directly. The book is wonderful and bittersweet, but--for example--Gaiman glosses over several adventures Tristan and Yvaine have on the road (and I like that in the book), and a lot of the book is the pleasure of the language as opposed to the pleasure of the things actually happening. With a movie, a lot of the pleasure is in the visuals and the action (and I don't even mean the Stuff Blowed Up Good action; I mean the simple fact of people doing things), and "they did stuff but I'm not going to show you" doesn't really work in a movie. The very things that make books enjoyable often don't work onscreen--much the way that the things that make movies enjoyable often don't work in books, either (have you ever tried reading a blow-by-blow action scene?). So all in all, I'm pretty happy with what they cooked up for the movie.
While we're here: cleojones (who is not me) also saw an early screening. I'd say more, but the thunderstorm has my connection on the fritz.