Update: The French Lieutenant's Woman (1981)

Meryl Streep as Anna (right) and Sarah (left)

Film: United Artists, directed by Karel Reisz

In a previous post, I wrote about the novel The French Lieutentant's Woman by John Fowles. At that point, I had not seen the film adaption. Last night, I watched the movie and it's quite different from the novel in that it interweaves two different stories: the book's original story of Sarah Woodruff and Charles Smithson in Victorian England and the story of Anna and Mike, the two actors portraying them.

Overall, I thought that the film was pretty good, but I wasn't overly fond of the second story of the actors' love affair. It felt like the original story was far too brief for what the novel actually offered. Although the film is over 2 hours long, the film felt short because so much of the original story was cut in order to make room for the second story. The second story didn't seem neccessary, but I understand how it might add some appeal or interest to the film for some movie viewers. The second story gave the film a more contemporary twist.

Anyway, I wasn't a huge fan of the added story, but I did like the majority of the film. It had a nice balance of tragedy, drama, suspense and romance. Both Meryl Streep (Sarah/Anna) and Jeremony Irons (Charles/Mike) gave strong performances, and they had the right chemistry for the story. Many of the supporting actors also gave strong performances.

 The landscapes (i.e. the Undercliff and the sea) used in the movie were beautiful and they served the story well. Speaking of elements that served the story well, Carl Davis' score for the film was excellent, especially during the unspoken moments between Sarah and Charles. The score also added the right amount of drama to the story without being overdone or melodramatic. Davis' music carried the story along very nicely.

Overall, I enjoyed the film and much of it was well executed and beautifully done. I would recommend this film, but I suggest reading the novel prior to seeing the film because the novel goes into much more depth. I prefer the novel to the film, but I did appreciate the film.

*Also, the ending in the film is much happier than Fowles' ending. I liked the film's ending much better than Fowles' ending because the film's finish is much happier and brighter, although possibly unlikely.

I Remember Nothing: And Other Reflections, Nora Ephron (2010)

★★★★★

Again, this book does not entirely follow the theme of this blog which is Meryl Streep related books/movies, but it did involve some somehwhat related Meryl Streep information:

1. Ephron discusses the book and movie Heartburn, which Streep stared in.
2. Ephron writes about Lillian Hellman and her book Pentimento. A story from Pentimento was turned into the film Julia, which starred Jane Fonda, Jason Robards and Vanessa Redgrave. Streep has a small part in this film, and it was Streep's first film.
3. Ephron worked with Streep three times.

Anyway, I just finished this book, and I really loved it, with the exception of the fact that it made me miss Nora Ephron even more.

The book is really a collection of essays and Ephron's thoughts and reflections on life and how she couldn't remember anything anymore. She writes about everything under the sun from lists of things she will miss (i.e. Fall, waffles, walks in the park)/will not miss (i.e. technology, bras, dry skin) to the "Six Stages of E-mail" to going to the movies to the sequence of chicken soup (before or after?) the common cold. Some of the material in the book is slightly outdated because the book was originally published in 2010. Two years later, some minor details and current events have shifted. Nonetheless, the book was extremley enjoyable.

This book was a quick read, but it was funny, fun and engaging throughout. I got really angry everytime I had to stop reading. Naturally, everything Ephron wrote was hilarious, witty and candid, yet still very intelligent and insightful. Ephron is very honest in her reflections and she doens't hold anything back. I found myself literally laughing out loud during this book, much to the sheer confusion of those around me. This is a total cliché, but this book is pure joy. Only Nora Ephron could have written this.

Some of my favorite quotes from the book:

• "My parents had drinks and there were crudités for us-although they were not called crudités at the time, they were called carrots and celery." (33)
• "Heat up the Teflon pan until carcinogenic gas is released into the air" (70)
• "One of the greatest things about this land of ours, as far as I'm concerned, was that we never fell into the dessert-spoon trap." (74)

and

• The Six Stages of Email ("I have done nothing to deserve this...") (103)
• Ephron's list of things she's refusing to know about (10). This list includes The Kardashians and Twitter.

*Overall, everything in this book is memorable and worth reading.

Update: The Hours (2002)

Film: Paramount Pictures (US)/Miramax Films (Worldwide), directed by Stephen Daldry

In a previous post/review of Michael Cunningham's The Hours, I mentioned at the bottom of the post that I had not yet seen the movie adaptation of the novel. Last night, I watched the movie, and I would like to add some more of my thoughts briefly.

Both the novel and the film were quite excellent. Both were wonderfully constructed, thoughtful and compelling. What I especially liked about the film was that, a lot of the same or similar powerful language/dialogue found in the novel was transferred to the movie. Of course, the dialogue was changed and somewhat different, but I liked that the movie still had a lot of the language that was so beautifully executed in the novel.

Often times, in movies, imagery and visuals have more important role, but in this film, the language was maintained along with the great imagery. The combination of the three stories was well sequenced in a way that the audience would not be confused.

 The film was also accompanied by a great emotional score by Phillip Glass, which realy helped the film along, while providing the right emotional notes for the unspoken and even spoken events taking place.

Overall, the film was excellent and complete with wonderful acting by the three main leads, skilled directing by Stephen Daldry and a great script. In addition to the acting by the three leads in the film (Streep, Moore, Kidman), all of the supporting actors had strong performances that really helped the main stories. In particular, I thought Ed Harris (modern-day Richard Brown), Claire Danes (Julia Vaughan), Allison Janney (Sally) and Jack Rovello (young Richard "Richie" Brown) delivered strong performances.

I highly reccomend the film, and once again, I highly reccommend the novel.

*Of course, the film is an abbreviated version of the novel and I did miss a few of the parts that were cut out of the film. (i.e. Sally's part in Clarissa's life is great minimized, less of Clarissa's history with Louis and Richard is explained)

The Meryl Streep Movie Club, Mia March (2012)

Film: not a movie, but it discusses Meryl Streep movies (obviously) 
★★

The Meryl Streep Movie Club tells the story of three estranged women-two sisters and a cousin-who must reunite at the family inn on the coast of Maine when they learn that their family matriarch (Lolly) has cancer. Interwoven within their stories is Meryl Streep Movie Night and its effect on each of the characters' transformations.

Eh. I wasn't crazy about this book. Of course, I bought it and read it because it's Meryl Streep related, but I didn't like it that much. Firstly, this novel describes three women (Kat, Isabel, June) and the novel alternates between each of their stories. Usually I am fine with reading a novel that has three different characters with separate stories (i.e. The Hours), but often times in this novel, it felt like the author was getting ahead of herself, which made reading confusing.

Also, I felt like this novel didn't do Meryl Streep and her body of work much justice. March selected 10 movies for the characters to view, which was fine. (Although I would have used a few different movies). But when the characters watched and discussed the movies, their discussions often felt simplistic, strange or juvenile. It also just felt awkward when all the characters would sit down and attempt to have deep conversations about the movies. It felt as if March was trying way too hard to make her characters sound profound. I understand that Meryl Streep movies are amazing and they really are. I love Meryl Streep and her movies (who doesn't?). But I didn't enjoy what March did with her characters and their dialogues about the movies, because their discussions didn't seem thorough enough to impact any of the characters' growth.

During their discussions, the characters primarily referred to the characters in the movie by "Meryl" and the other actors' names. (i.e. "But Meryl does...Because she knows Dustin Hoffman, knows her son") In my opinion, this was quite strange because it would be more natural to refer to the characters in the movies by the names of the characters, rather than the names of the actors portraying the characters.

There were also some plot issues. For example, the novel spans more than a month. It starts at the beginning of summer and it ends in September. But at the family inn, it's Meryl Streep Movie month. They usually watch a movie every Friday night. The author does note that they randomly watch movies whenever they feel like it, which is fine. But I think it would have been nice to add a piece about how amazing the movies were, which is why they just kept watching the films way past Meryl Streep Movie month. Of course, you can watch Meryl Streep movies all year round, but I was confused by the timing of the movies.

Anyway, I digress. I wasn't overly impressed with this book, but I suppose it is a nice fluffy beach read or something of the like. And the novel definetly had its strengths. I liked that the novel was based around Meryl Streep movies, because they are really amazing. And I liked that the novel illustrated the general power of art. In this case, it was the power of Meryl Streep's art, but overall this novel spoke to why we-people, anyone, continue to create art in all mediums. People in this world create art for various reasons, of course, but art is still alive today because of its profound effect on people of all kinds.

*I felt like I was really harsh towards this novel. I'm sorry.

The Hours, Michael Cunningham (1998)

              
Film: Paramount Pictures (US)/Miramax Films (Worldwide), directed by Stephen Daldry (2002)
★★★★

The Hours, which won the 1999 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction, centers around the lives of three women on a single day. The story traces each of the character's individuals struggles which are interwoven as one is writing, one is reading, and one is living through horrors. The Hours  explores despair and the desire to still live as we all must live through every hour of our lives.The three women are as follows:

• Virginia Woolf, 1923: as she is writing her novel, Mrs. Dalloway
• Laura Brown, 1949: as she is struggling with the everyday tasks of being a housewife in post-World War II California
• Clarissa Vaughan, end of the twentieth century: as she seems to be living through Mrs. Dalloway's life. In fact, her friend Richard has nicknamed her Mrs. Dalloway. When readers first meet Clarissa she is preparing to buy flowers. ("Mrs. Dalloway said that she would buy the flowers herself")

The Hours was a really beautiful, wonderfully constructed, emotional, touching book, and I highly recommend it. Cunningham is inventive and insightful through his use of the historical record concerning Woolf's life outside of London during the 1920s to create what Woolf's inner life might have been like.  Her struggles, however, are illustrated in a way that her story is still more about living than dying. In addition, the audience is not compelled to pity Woolf and her troubles. Instead, Cunningham makes the audience long to see who she truly was, as he expertly inserts segments of Woolf's writing into his modern phrases.  


Equally impressive to Woolf's well-crafted character is Cunningham's ability to fully create the lives of Laura Brown and Clarissa Vaughan who are each connected to Woolf and to each other. Both Brown and Vaughan have struggles of their own, and yet both characters put others before themselves. Brown continues her role as a loving housewife and mother, despite her unhappiness. She dotes on her son Richie and she ensures her husband's happiness by standing by his side. Vaughan glides through her life as a lesbian in New York City as she concerns herself with trivial tasks such as throwing the perfect party to honor her friend Richard who has just won a major literary prize.


 Both Brown and Vaughan hide their sorrow and pain and they trudge through life as if nothing has happened to make them feel otherwise. And on the surface, nothing happens. Brown bakes a cake for her husband's birthday, talks with a neighbor and reads a book. (Woolf's Mrs. Dalloway). Vaughan buys flowers for her friend Richard's party, prepares the party and receives a visit from an old friend. No important striking action takes place, besides an incident between Richard and Clarissa (near the end). Beneath the surface, however, much action does take place. Both Brown and Vaughan struggle as they long to remain hidden, while they long to come out of hiding. Woolf also struggles tremendously as she longs to return to the bustling, city streets of London, receives a visit from her sister Vanessa, dodges her husband's remarks towards her health and embarks on a new writing journey as she puts Mrs. Dalloway's story on paper.  Much is actually felt, longed for, loved, lost and feared.


 Brown reads Woolf's writing and imagines what death would be like, but of course, she never brings an end to her life, despite the comfort that she finds in knowing that death is possible. Vaughan lives a life similar to Woolf's character Mrs. Dalloway. Vaughan cares for her gay friend and one-time lover, Richard who is on the verge of dying. She concerns herself with his well-being, instead of her own. She is shocked to receive a visit from Richard's former lover Louis. Clarissa also interacts with her daughter Julia, Julia's strange friend Mary and her current lover Sally. 


In other words, The Hours does not contain much action, but each character has their own set of complexities and complex relationships. Also, all three stories are connected, despite their different time periods, locations, family members, friends and situations. This connection is not fully revealed, however, until the end. Throughout the novel, Cunningham makes his readers hunger for more knowledge. Cunningham makes his readers search for the connection between the three stories. Cunningham uses his expertise in story telling by combining the three stories into a single, cohesive, beautifully constructed metaphor for life's repetitiousness. Life repeats. Pain can be found in each and every lifetime, despite what the times may suggest. Pain unites us all in some way or another. Pain breaks us all down in some way or another, and yet, we must keep living through each hour of our lives because after this hour comes another hour. 


"The time to live is hide is over. The time to to regret is gone. The time to live is now."

*I have not actually seen this movie yet, so I cannot compare it to the novel. However, I have seen portions of this movie and I think I can say that both the novel and the film are excellent in their own ways. 

"Above all, be the heroine of your life, not the victim" -Nora Ephron

Nora Ephron:

★★★★★

Last night, Nora Ephron, writer, director, author, producer, filmmaker extraordinaire died at the age of 71. She was well known for great works such as Sleepless in Seattle, Silkwood, When Harry Met Sally and Julie & Julia.

I found out last night that she has passed away as soon as the story was released because I up late cruising the Internet. When I first saw the headline, I thought it was a mistake. My heart stopped. I couldn't believe my eyes. To be honest, I did not know that Ephron had cancer, but from my knowledge of her, I figured she would be the type of person to live forever. Of course, I never knew her and I have never met her, but she simply seemed like an all-around fun, genuinely kind person who loved to laugh and live life to its fullest.

She was also extremely clever and witty in her speeches and in her writing (see videos below). She was always willing to offer up genuine, heartfelt praise to others for their work. She was selfless. And of course, she always knew exactly what to say to get the crowd laughing. She must have been an amazing person.

I realize that often when people pass away, everyone has the tendency to really exaggerate on the deceased person's amazing qualities in order to preserve their memory. But when I write this, I feel as if it really holds true for who Ephron was as a person and as a woman in the male-dominated worlds of film making and writing.  She was truly spectacular. Most importantly, she wasn't afraid to be humbled by those she worked with. She must have had a great collaborative spirit, and she wasn't afraid to integrate new ideas in her writing. She has talked about adding Stanley Tucci's improvised line: "Stuff the hen until she just can't take is anymore" into the final Julie & Julia script by saying "When that happens, when you are the writer, it would be very stupid to say 'What have you done to my script?' I just wrote it down and put it into the final script." Ephron was willing to work with others and humbly share her incredible gifts.

Her work was not always loved by critics (who cares anyway?), but her work was well loved by audiences. I cannot speak for every person who has ever watched an Ephron directed or written film, but I love what I have seen of her work because it is very honest and true to real life. ("I try to write parts for women that are as complicated and interesting as women actually are" -Ephron) She doesn't beat around the bush. She is straightforward and she says exactly what she feels.

As for her romantic comedies, what would the world be like without them?

Ephron was funny, witty, honest, insightful and clever in everything she wrote. Her words will live on in our hearts, because she has captured our hearts through her writing and her work. I had an art teacher who once said "Words cannot just be spat into the air and forgotten."  Granted, my art teacher was speaking about bullying and how we have to watch what we say. But I think this holds true, Ephron words will still linger on, even though she has unfortunately passed away. Her work will live on. Her words and her presence in our lives will not be forgotten. She had a great spirit and she knew how to live her life to its fullest. A spirit like hers cannot die. So, here, today and now, in honor of Ephron: "Be the heroine of your life, not the victim" (Ephron).

 

*Of course I have to somehow bring this around to Meryl Streep. Ephron and Streep worked together three times on Heartburn (based on Ephron's novel), Silkwood and Julie & Julia. Streep says that "Nora looked at every situation and cocked her head and thought 'Hmmmm, how can I make this more fun?'" Streep also says that "You could call her for anything: doctors, restaurants, recipes, speeches or just a few jokes, and we all did, constantly. She was an expert in all the departments of living well."  More of famous friends' final words on Nora Ephron can be seen on USA Today's website (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/entertainment/post/2012/06/meryl-streep-on-ephron-how-can-i-make-this-more-fun-/1#.T-tABbVtrE0) 

Courtesy of one of the greatest websites ever: simplystreep.com 

And for Nora Ephron's greatest hits (in trailer form): http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et-mn-nora-ephron-greatest-hits-video-compilation-20120626,0,3304097.story

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Insane people are always sure that they are fine. It is only the sane people who are willing to admit that they are crazy."

"My mother wanted us to understand that the tragedies of your life one day have the potential to be comic stories the next."

--Nora Ephron


Here's yet another link: Nora Ephron's 27 best quotes: http://www.buzzfeed.com/amyodell/nora-ephrons-21-best-quotes-on-love-life-and-de

The Devil Wears Prada, Lauren Weisberger (2003)

Film: 20th Century Fox, directed by David Frankel (2006)

★★★
     

The Devil Wears Prada tells the story of a young woman fresh out of college who finds herself working for a high-profile fashion magazine (Runway) with a horrible, demanding boss (Miranda Pristley). The stakes are high, and Andrea must decide how much of herself she is willing to give up in pursuit of success and acceptance in the cut-throat fashion world that she doesn't belong in.

When I first acquired this book from the library, one of my first thoughts was: "Wow, why is it so thick?" (It's 360 pages in length.) I had been expecting something much shorter, because in my mind, my knowledge of this book classified the novel as a "fluffy beach read" or something of the like. Anyway, the novel turned out to be much lengthier and more detailed than expected. Overall, the writing was acceptable, but I wasn't a huge fan of the book, especially after I had seen the movie. To me, the characters in the novel version were far more annoying than the characters in the movie.

Andrea, the protagonist complained and cursed a lot. Of course, her constant complaints allowed the audience to see how difficult her job was, but I was weary of her character by the time I reached the middle of the book. The novel seemed to drag on, and I felt that many of the pages were filled with the same action. The majority of the novel details Andrea's complaints/struggles as she must cater to Priestley's insane requests. The pages of this novel also include Andrea's breakdowns and her fall-outs with her friends/family. Andrea's character was very rough around the edges and straightforward in her writing/speaking. This character did not really appeal to me. Therefore, I found the novel difficult to work through.

However, some elements of the novel were much better than those in the film. For example, Priestley's senior assistant Emily, actually sympathizes with Andrea. In the movie, Emily is written as a much harsher character. It was nice to see that the two co-workers could function. Also, the reader was given a detailed inside look into the fashion world, which is often not seen through anything but glossy, air-brushed images. Although I did not personally enjoy the novel, Weisberger must have done something right because her novel is a New York Times Bestseller. I would recommend this novel to people with patience.

As previously indicated, I preferred the movie over the novel. The movie felt more concise and logical. It did not include Andrea's endless complaining. Also, Andrea (Anne Hathaway) was a kinder, sweeter character. Anne Hathaway's Andrea was much easier to sympathize with. The movie did also not put a spotlight on Andrea and her friend Lily, who often gets overly drunk. This was an improvement from the book. Overall, the movie version just seemed to have a better flow. Seeing the designer clothes on screen was fun and also helpful to understanding the glamour that accompanies the hard work. It was also easier for me to see the clothes rather than have to imagine the clothes as they were being described in writing. Finally, Meryl Streep's Priestly helped me, as a member of the audience, to really witness the evil that Weisberger wrote about.

All in all, the book and the movie were vastly different from each other, because the movie was such a loose adaption of the novel. I have compiled a long list of differences between the book and the movie which can be seen in my previous post.