RSS Feed

Tag Archives: review

The Delicious Horrors of Dorian Gray

Posted on

*WP has been formatting my blog oddly lately. Please excuse this.*

To him, as to many others, Dorian Gray was the type
of everything that is wonderful and fascinating in life.

The Picture of Dorian Gray (1890) , the lone novel by Irish playwright Oscar Wilde (1854-1900) is certainly wonderful and fascinating. Though I’ve never really read this horrific genre before, it’s a stunning introduction to the style and I wish that Wilde had written more novels in his time.

Heading into the world of Dorian Gray — Victorian London — I expected the same sort of lengthy, dreary narration as other classical novels of that era. I didn’t expect to finish it, just as I never finished Jane Eyre or became interested in the original Sherlock Holmes stories.

I did more than finish it. I devoured it in two sittings.

The characters are marvelous. Hardly have I read a book where the protagonist is not a dashing, romantic hero with good morals. And, that’s how teenage Dorian Gray starts out, but after he accidentally links his soul to a portrait his near-worshipping friend Basil Hallward paints of him, he takes advantage of his eternal youth and descends into a secret world of corruption. Now his portrait will age and take on the visible signs of sin and corruption of his soul, while Dorian remains young, wrinkle-free, and takes with him an aura of innocence that dispels any dark rumour his peers might have heard.

Dorian’s initial horror at this revelation quickly dissipates as he realized what sort of things he can do without tarnishing his physical appearance. Both women and men idolize him, but as years pass and Dorian’s secret, twisted life create unsettling rumours, old friends stay away and new friends come seeking for a taste of the young man with the unreal beauty. Eventually, after the main events of the novel occur, Dorian realizes the monster he’s become, but has little idea how to save his soul. Drugs are not a long-term solution, but I appreciate the turn he took to blot out the memory of his awful wrongdoings. I never expected opium to pop up in a Victorian horror novel! It added to the genuine remorse and disgust the readers feels for the boy who only wanted to retain his beauty.

Lord Henry Wotton, or Harry, is the amoral and rather ridiculous man who takes Dorian under his wing, influencing him for the worst. This is the only character I have a bone to pick with. His flamboyance and long-winded speeches are wearisome, but are charming enough that I can see how Dorian looks up to him. Harry is a man of many words, but the way he manipulates them to control others irks me. He’s an amazing character, don’t get me wrong, but he’s not a person I would wish to cross paths with.

Dorian’s own influence grows he ages — and his body remains a boy of seventeen. Those around him both fear and love him, but many of the people associated in his life take a turn for the worst, adding to the temptation and scandal surrounding the boy, and heightening the interest of the reader. What sort of things did Dorian do? How did such an innocent boy at the beginning of the novel turn into such a horrific figure a few chapters later? Surely Harry was a negative impact on his protegé, but I doubt that the older man had anything to do with the darker, more twisted hobbies of Dorian.

Wilde uses his experience in poetry to paint an eloquent image of romance and scandal. While hardly scandalous by today’s standards, I can imagine the hushed, shocked gasps of Victorian readers. The thought of the imagined reactions in Wilde’s time only intensified my interest in the story, and while he doesn’t go into great detail of the actions that marked Dorian Gray’s descent into corruption, the lack of information here adds to the intrigue. It gives the reader rein to conjure what they think Dorian did that destroyed his soul. The missing pieces give the illusion that his deeds were so awful that they couldn’t be put into words, let alone print.

Adding to the fact that there are several hints at homosexual encounters — at the very least, sex appeal  and attraction between the same gender — Wilde has certainly leapt out the bounds of his time and into ours. Gasp! In today’s views, it’s hardly shocking, but it makes me want to pat Wilde on the back for making such bold literary movements.

I honestly had no idea how it was going to end. The romanticist in me idealized that Dorian would amend his ways, fall in love, and live happily ever after. Remember that I rarely read such novels as this one.

This may not be the novel for you. It focuses on the vanity, physical beauty, and selfishness of Dorian Gray, a boy who is tied to his own youth. Some might perceive his childish notions with annoyance, but I can appreciate Dorian’s mistakes as a message to cherish more beautiful things than physical appearance.  

In 2009, Dorian Gray hit theatres, with the lovely Ben Barnes as the leading role (who cares that Dorian had blond hair, anyway?) and Colin Firth as Harry. I haven’t seen the film, rated R for high sexual content and violence, and can imagine the field day the writers and directors had in filling in the holes Oscar Wilde left for the readers’ imagination. I am also aware that the movie has a slightly different element to it, with the true love that the 21st-century movie-makers can’t seem to get enough.

The story of Dorian Gray is, simply put, stunning in a dark, twisted way. This ain’t no stuffy, dry, boring Victorian novel. The words are delicious, the story intriguing, and the characters horrific and lovely. I had to resist the urge to write down every mouth-watering quote I came across — and there were lots! I heartily recommend it, and luckily for us all, you can read it online!

Are there any books that surpassed your expectations recently?

All Hail Wes Bentley’s Beard!

Posted on

**MEDIUM-DEGREE SPOILERS**

It’s been nearly three years since I first laid my paws on Suzanne Collins’ The Hunger Games — I haven’t let go since. I devoured the first two books (THG and Catching Fire) in the trilogy and had to wait EIGHT MONTHS for the release of Mockingjay. I’d told my friends about this series that was now tied first place with Harry Potter in my heart/bookshelf, and they expressed polite disinterest. “Maybe I’ll read them if I get the chance.”

If only they knew then that by now they’d be just as sucked in as I am.

Last night we all headed out in our best Capitol/tribute attire to participate in the 74th annual Hunger Games. And we clenched hands as the theatre darkened and we waited.

It was good. Obviously not nearly as detailed or intricate as the book, but the screenwriters (one of which was Collins herself) managed to take Katniss’ thoughts and plaster them on the screen without narration — which I was glad for.

District 12 was amazing, nearly everything I imagined. The camera shook and shivered at shots of coal miners, old men, etc…adding an aura of instability and weakness to the poor district. Gale (Liam Hemsworth) was his handsome and irritating/teasing/attractive self, but I personally thought they played up the love triangle too soon in the series. Couldn’t you wait until the second movie, Gary? I really can’t say that much else – other than they needlessly deleted an entire character! Poor Madge; just **poof!**

Josh Hutcherson is a cutie as Peeta, surprisingly convincing as a blond considering his natural hair is black! And, originally I was upset about Woody Harrelson as Haymitch, but I love it. Fabulous, sweetheart. He had the drunk, ironic, crappy mentor down to perfection, in all the little details as he covered his glass from being refilled by an Avox. Oh, and Caesar Flickerman (Stanley Tucci)! He’s exactly who I pictured as the blue-haired master of ceremonies. Excellent job, Debra Zane.

One last little casting comment. Wes Bentley as Seneca Crane. While Seneca doesn’t make a direct or noted appearance in the novels, the film makers took every excuse to have that amazing beard in the shot. I enjoyed that he played a relatively large role, calling the shots from the Game Centre and making decisions. (“Give me a tree.” And a tree falls in front of a fleeing Katniss.) He was as much of a character as Cato, and more so than Clove or Glimmer.

The bloodbath at the Cornicopia was heartbreaking and pleasingly disturbing. I was afraid they would coddle the audience with grunts and tousled hair, but there was blood, there was combat, there was snapping of bones. Good. This is not a kid’s book, and it’s not a kid’s movie.  

Despite the movie’s length (2 hours, 22 minutes) it felt short and unfinished, mostly because they had to shorten and merge multiple scenes into a couple of minutes. I have been hearing some less-than-sunny reviews, and in some cases I agree. It made 100% more sense if you read the book. While the movie on its own was good, the movie with the book was better.

Music: yes. Capitol costumes: goodness yes. Peeta’s blue eyes: non existent. Knocking Peeta out to save him: non existent. Cave scene: nearly non existent.

I know it’s not a very thorough review, but I had to say something about it before I forgot, and really don’t have the time. Read Kristin Cashore’s thoughts on the books. 

May the odds be ever in your favour!

Moustache Jokes: When Is It Too Much?

Posted on

It’s been awhile since my last review, but here I go again! I’ll keep it short this time.

Yesterday I saw Dr. Seuss’s ‘The Lorax.’ Who doesn’t love Seuss? Who doesn’t love small, orange fuzzy things with giant yellow moustaches?

It was cute, though it could have done with a few less musical numbers and a hair less moustache jokes — pun intended. I was a bit confused about who the main character was — the Lorax, Ted, or the Once-ler? — but I don’t feel it took away from the message.

Animation was amazing. I wanted to pet the fuzzy bears and Truffula trees and tweak the Lorax’s giant ‘stache. Danny DeVito as the Lorax was great; he brought the comedy, the caring, and the defiance together and wrapped it up in an orange, fuzzy suit. Zac Efron, Betty White (whom I love dearly), Ed Helms and Taylor Swift finish up the heroes of the story.

It was more geared to a younger crowd than I expected, but I still enjoyed it. The kids around me were certainly enjoying it, though I think they were getting the Lorax and the Once-ler mixed up. So was I at first. Actually, in the beginning I thought the Once-ler was the Cat in the Hat. (You only see his silhouette, okay? And he was wearing a big top hat.)

I do wish they included some more of Seuss’s loveable rhyming. What’s a Seuss movie without a plethora of rhyming creatures? I expected the Lorax to talk in rhyme, but no such luck. Just a “fuzzy peanut” with a moustache.

Thneedville was portrayed with startling parallels to the future we’re heading in. It’s appropriate they decided to release the movie in 2012 — when the world is supposed to end. Again. I feel the kids around me really got the message; I did. I was tapping my feet along with the last musical note of the Thneedville residents as they fought for the very last Truffula seed to grow.

It was funny, cute, inspiring, hopefully will begin a giant-moustache trend and make small children angry regarding clear cutting.

Okay. The answer to the title of this post? *This* is when moustache jokes are too much.

~~~

Unless some like you cares a whole awful lot,

It’s not going to get better.

It’s not.

~Dr.Seuss

The Woman in Black and the Hogwarts Express

Posted on

Dan Radcliffe trades in his wand and broomstick for a briefcase and a hatchet in his new film “The Woman in Black.” Taking up the role of young lawyer Arthur Kipps, I wasn’t exactly sure what to expect… Previews looked classically terrifying and Dan looked wonderful in his Victorian get-up, so what did I, as a movie goer, have to lose?

One my greatest fears going into this film was Dan. I want him to succeed in the movie business, but he’s been Harry Potter for so long that I wasn’t sure if I could see him playing anyone else. And, as I settled down in my back row seat hugging my coat tight, I crossed my fingers, for his sake. There were little more than a dozen other people in the theatre, and it was only the first full day playing — was it that awful?

The short answer? No, it certainly wasn’t awful. The beginning was typical for a ghost story, but it was catching and disturbing, and I heartily approve. Then we meet Arthur Kipps, widowed four years ago and still grief-stricken, with a young son (Misha Handley) he can barely look after. Dan as a father… it wasn’t convincing so early in the film, but little Misha, who is Dan’s real-life godson, was adorably tragic.

For the first ten or fifteen minutes he was still Harry Potter, especially as he left London via a scarlet train, headed for the remote countryside. Luckily, as we meet the one other non-dead prominent character, Mr. Daily (Ciaran Hinds), Dan begins to sink into Arthur’s skin. Arthur’s job is to go through paperwork left behind in a dead widow’s mansion, and when he begins seeing a woman dressed in black the village children begin dying in mysterious ways.

I am disappointed at the depth of the supporting characters. Mrs. Fisher, whose daughters we meet just as the curtain rises, is brimming with plot potential! She’s caring and frightened and there’s just a smidgen of romance between the married innkeeper’s wife and the lonely single father. Mrs. Fisher easily could have added more dialogue, which was as scarce as Hippogriffs! The rest of the villagers, each with their own tragic stories and fears of the mansion, could have easily added a more human and less nightmare-like quality to the film. I almost feel like this would be a better TV mini-series than an hour-and-a-half film.

Ah, and now we reach the star of the film: that creepy, stone, vine-covered, menacingly beautiful mansion, set apart from the rest of the village by a causeway that made it only accessible certain hours of the day. Although if Alice, the deceased owner, had only died a month ago, why was the interior of the house such a mess? Was being haunted by her sister, Jennet AKA The Woman in Black (Liz White), driving her mad and hindering her house-keeping skills?

The nursery was my second-favourite room in the house. Full of creepy wind-up toys like cymbal-clanging monkeys, dolls with glass eyes, and freaky dancing clowns, it’s creep factor pretty much rocketed off the creep-o-scale. Along with the fact that Alice hadn’t bothered touching anything since the death of her adopted son/biological nephew and it’s where Jennet hung herself, the nursery is both haunting and sad.

First favourite part of the house is the staircase, chalk-full of ancient portraits covered with artfully placed cobwebs. I love old paintings, so enough said there.

And, because I’m picky and appreciate details, I’ll whizz through some other things: Music — alright. Underused around the middle of the film. Use of mirrors — awesome, but you have to pay attention. Costumes — amazing. Everyone should dress like that. Font for credits — too modern for my liking. Could have used the same calligraphy used for Jennet’s letters. Ending — I didn’t like it. It felt somewhat rushed and unfinished, and it made me a little angry actually.

There was a 1989 version of The Woman in Black, where an Arthur Kidd was played by Adrian Rawlins, who played Dan’s father in the Harry Potter series. If ever I get my hands on the novel by Susan Hill, I’ll gobble it up to see if the plot and supporting characters are any stronger, and I’ll let you know what I think.

I’ll give The Woman in Black a solid three out of five stars.

And beware of cymbal-clanging monkeys!

PS: It’s not allowing me to post a pic, but you can see some movie stills here.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 92 other followers