I just had loads of fun and didn't spend one penny :D
Just goes to show you can enjoy yourself without getting drunk or broke.
SO the Exeter Phoenix hosted a FREE FILM SHOWING :D at 7pm! It was of the 1994 adaptation of Frankenstein, and I thought, hell yes, free movie, so I went along (albeit alone, as no one else wanted to come ): ). Luckily I managed to get a seat despite not having booked in advance - and it wasn't supremely crowded either (which I was surprised at - who misses a free movie??).
The film in itself was very thoroughly enjoyable. Although Branagh didn't fit my mental image of Frankenstein, he did a fabulous job acting him. I was actually very surprised at the beginning because I hadn't expected it to be so faithful to the novel (although thank god some things were changed so that it didn't bore me so terribly as the novel did). The whole set-up with his family and his romance with Elizabeth was all really well done, and the cinematography was flawless throughout the movie, too. Okay, thoughts summarised on the film, then:
* Helena Bonham Carter was very good. I like what they did with Elizabeth's char - made her much more interesting than the flat 2D person she'd been in the novel.
* Some of the scenes dragged on a little long and/or were awkwardly choreographed, see: Victor and his monster grappling after the monster's "birth", Victor and Elizabeth's sexytime on their wedding night. OK, yeah, that was somewhat faithful to the book's long and tedious dragging-out, but it just made most of the audience feel incredibly awkward, weirded out or start laughing. (Though I have to say I mostly detested the gigglers given I normally refuse to let myself be drawn out of the state of suspended disbelief during a good film, and was annoyed at them for disrupting the serious atmosphere. But I digress.)
* Very good visuals were sometimes disrupted by very obvious transitions between real scenery and fake set. ._.
* The film managed to be gruesome without breaking its 15 rating. Now that is what I call good work.
* Not sure what I thought of the scriptwriter's decision to incorporate Frankenstein's bride as a realised concept in the film, whereas in the novel Frankenstein eventually decided against it. I realise the dramatic effect gained through such a plotty device added a lot to the whole Victor/Monster parallels-symbolism, but it was then wrapped up in such a ridiculous way that I really have to wonder if it would not have just been better to ignore that plot point entirely and just have Victor pursue the Monster to the North Pole without all the Bride-drama. After all, there's no way a house catches on fire as quickly as it did in the Bride-scene in the film.
* Pretty bloody pleased that they kept the random Captain character in it, even though he was largely completely pointless in the novel except as a... representation of the reader? And thank god they didn't do a-story-within-a-story-within-a-story and instead just interjected clips of Victor's life with clips of the Monster's life.
After the film was over, it was DISCUSSION TIME! 2 lecturers from the Uni whom I had never seen before came down and sat at the front and chatted a little about the film before opening it up to questions. One specialised in 19th Cent Lit (glee!!) and answered the questions more orientated towards the plot of the novel/film. The other specialised in social science and answered questions about relevant social issues, e.g. transhumanism, the morality of playing with genetics. There were some very interesting questions. I asked about why they thought the scriptwriter had decided to include the Monster's bride in the film adaptation, and also about what they thought was the reason for what I thought was a decidedly more active and symbolic role taken by Victor's friend Henry in the film adaptation over the novel, i.e. in the film he's presented as much more of the "nice guy" compared to Victor, and for some reason also doesn't end up dying. Not sure why. After the discussion was done, I went down to speak briefly with the 19thCent specialist (1. because 19th Cent lit is awesome, and 2. because I need to do NETWORKING and such things!) and I discovered that she actually preferred the end of the 19th Cent. I asked her what she thought were some good 19th Cent novels to read, and she said that she couldn't tell me all of it right there and then! and handed me her card and said I should pop in to see her at the uni instead. I explained that my favourite 19th Cent novel was The Picture of Dorian Gray and she said that I DEFINITELY should pop in for a chat then! :D Yay fellow Dorian Gray fans in the form of lecturers!
Anyway, it was EXTREMELY interesting, not to mention intellectually stimulating - I learnt quite a lot on some of the intricacies of the issues raised by the story of Frankenstein, and also learnt some about social science and transhumanism in general. I had loads of fun and was pretty bloody pleased with myself for going and not skipping out because it was 20 minutes away in town or because I had to go by myself. And I think I was possibly the only fresher attending the event. (And then on the way home I passed a bunch of fellow uni freshers heading out to clubs, including someone from my seminar group who recognised me. How awkward.)
SO the Exeter Phoenix hosted a FREE FILM SHOWING :D at 7pm! It was of the 1994 adaptation of Frankenstein, and I thought, hell yes, free movie, so I went along (albeit alone, as no one else wanted to come ): ). Luckily I managed to get a seat despite not having booked in advance - and it wasn't supremely crowded either (which I was surprised at - who misses a free movie??).
The film in itself was very thoroughly enjoyable. Although Branagh didn't fit my mental image of Frankenstein, he did a fabulous job acting him. I was actually very surprised at the beginning because I hadn't expected it to be so faithful to the novel (although thank god some things were changed so that it didn't bore me so terribly as the novel did). The whole set-up with his family and his romance with Elizabeth was all really well done, and the cinematography was flawless throughout the movie, too. Okay, thoughts summarised on the film, then:
* Helena Bonham Carter was very good. I like what they did with Elizabeth's char - made her much more interesting than the flat 2D person she'd been in the novel.
* Some of the scenes dragged on a little long and/or were awkwardly choreographed, see: Victor and his monster grappling after the monster's "birth", Victor and Elizabeth's sexytime on their wedding night. OK, yeah, that was somewhat faithful to the book's long and tedious dragging-out, but it just made most of the audience feel incredibly awkward, weirded out or start laughing. (Though I have to say I mostly detested the gigglers given I normally refuse to let myself be drawn out of the state of suspended disbelief during a good film, and was annoyed at them for disrupting the serious atmosphere. But I digress.)
* Very good visuals were sometimes disrupted by very obvious transitions between real scenery and fake set. ._.
* The film managed to be gruesome without breaking its 15 rating. Now that is what I call good work.
* Not sure what I thought of the scriptwriter's decision to incorporate Frankenstein's bride as a realised concept in the film, whereas in the novel Frankenstein eventually decided against it. I realise the dramatic effect gained through such a plotty device added a lot to the whole Victor/Monster parallels-symbolism, but it was then wrapped up in such a ridiculous way that I really have to wonder if it would not have just been better to ignore that plot point entirely and just have Victor pursue the Monster to the North Pole without all the Bride-drama. After all, there's no way a house catches on fire as quickly as it did in the Bride-scene in the film.
* Pretty bloody pleased that they kept the random Captain character in it, even though he was largely completely pointless in the novel except as a... representation of the reader? And thank god they didn't do a-story-within-a-story-within-a-story and instead just interjected clips of Victor's life with clips of the Monster's life.
After the film was over, it was DISCUSSION TIME! 2 lecturers from the Uni whom I had never seen before came down and sat at the front and chatted a little about the film before opening it up to questions. One specialised in 19th Cent Lit (glee!!) and answered the questions more orientated towards the plot of the novel/film. The other specialised in social science and answered questions about relevant social issues, e.g. transhumanism, the morality of playing with genetics. There were some very interesting questions. I asked about why they thought the scriptwriter had decided to include the Monster's bride in the film adaptation, and also about what they thought was the reason for what I thought was a decidedly more active and symbolic role taken by Victor's friend Henry in the film adaptation over the novel, i.e. in the film he's presented as much more of the "nice guy" compared to Victor, and for some reason also doesn't end up dying. Not sure why. After the discussion was done, I went down to speak briefly with the 19thCent specialist (1. because 19th Cent lit is awesome, and 2. because I need to do NETWORKING and such things!) and I discovered that she actually preferred the end of the 19th Cent. I asked her what she thought were some good 19th Cent novels to read, and she said that she couldn't tell me all of it right there and then! and handed me her card and said I should pop in to see her at the uni instead. I explained that my favourite 19th Cent novel was The Picture of Dorian Gray and she said that I DEFINITELY should pop in for a chat then! :D Yay fellow Dorian Gray fans in the form of lecturers!
Anyway, it was EXTREMELY interesting, not to mention intellectually stimulating - I learnt quite a lot on some of the intricacies of the issues raised by the story of Frankenstein, and also learnt some about social science and transhumanism in general. I had loads of fun and was pretty bloody pleased with myself for going and not skipping out because it was 20 minutes away in town or because I had to go by myself. And I think I was possibly the only fresher attending the event. (And then on the way home I passed a bunch of fellow uni freshers heading out to clubs, including someone from my seminar group who recognised me. How awkward.)