Movies We've Just Watched discussion

Anybody read anything good lately?

I read Jonathan Franzen's new and very very HYPED novel, FREEDOM. I liked it a good deal, but can't think that the hype is entirely deserved. I certainly read it in record time: 577 pages went by in almost nothing flat. My annoyance with the characters eventually lessened when I realized that I was mainly annoyed with them because I was identifying with them in some way; I wouldn't have gotten so upset if I hadn't cared on some level.

But there's something missing, some deep down lack of magic or energy or life that keeps me from being able to get as excited by it as I have by other novels.

I'm currently reading Rafi Zabor's THE BEAR COMES HOME, about a saxophone playing bear and his adventures, and am as excited by the first couple of chapters as I never really was when I was reading FREEDOM.

I just finished a nature journal/travelogue by Rick Bass, who moved to remote northern Montana at the age of 30, called WINTER: NOTES FROM MONTANA. I picked it up mainly because I just got back from a father-and-sons fly-fishing trip in Montana. Really a beautiful, simple book; one of those slim little unpretentious volumes whose insight into how you live your life surprises you after you put it down. The old cliches "slow down, stop and smell the roses, etc" certainly apply here, though Bass is too gifted an observer to rely on those old saws.

I'll definitely pick up more by Bass; probably just his travelogues/journals/essays, as I'm not so sure about his fiction.

I'm about 70 pages into THE FIXER by Bernard Malamud. Too early to come to conclusions, though there is a definite palpable sense of urgency/dread/macabre here.

Last week I finished reading JD Salinger's, Raise High The Roofbeam, Carpenters. I've always loved his stories involving the Glass family more than anything else, and this just blew me away.

tom,

the bear comes home is good fun. i really enjoyed it. there's a lot of insider jazz humor in there, but i think it translates to a wide audience.

baxter,
raise high the roofbeams is vintage salinger - love it.

Oh, and thanks for your words on FREEDOM, Tom. It's certainly on my to-read list, but I usually wait a bit after a hyped-up book's initial release. I feel like it clears the mind and helps me to take the book on its own.

i'm forever re-reading thomas pynchon's mason and dixon, a very entertaining novel - but quite long and i have the hardback edition, so i can't drag it on the train with me on my commutes, which is when i usually get a lot of reading on. a wonderful book - not everyone's cup of tea, but i'm a pynchon fan, and it speaks to me. i'm also working on setting one of rilke's sonnets to orpheus for orchestra and choir, so i have been reading and re-reading those amazing verses lately.

LOL re: Pynchon and hardbacks. I actually stopped reading AGAINST THE DAY because I have the hardback edition. Yes: impossible to bring on a commute or pack with you on a plane. I'll pick it up again, but I'll grab a paperback from the library.

i read against the day in hardback, and it took a long time - for the same reason stated above. it's REALLY worth it though, steve-o - get back to it when you can - the ending is amazing.

Phillip, the current paperback of MASON & DIXON is much more portable, and the print isn't as eye-strainingly tiny as you might thing. I'm sure you can pick up a used copy fairly affordably. Much easier than lugging around that hardcover.

I'll probably give AGAINST THE DAY another go, but it is the Pynchon I liked least on a first read.

I burned through Ryu Murakami's Audition last night. I was extremely disappointed with it. The movie (directed by Miike) was tense, disturbing, and got under my skin, but the book just came across as cheesy. Every so often he threw in terrible foreshadowing lines like, "little did he know the horrors he would soon face". And it all built up to a wonderfully forgettable ten pages at the end.

Next up for me is Anna Karenina.

Baxter, which translation of ANNA will you be reading? Not to be pushy, but I can recommend that Pevear/Volokhonsky translation -- it goes down like a glass of water, just incredibly readable. I couldn't put it down.

baxter: what tom said regarding the richard pevear and larissa volokhonsky translation - that team (husband and wife) is doing the very finest translations of russian literature, and their anna karenina is no exception.

and, if you ever get into dostoevsky (you should, if you haven't already), read their translations of his works.

Tom wrote: "Phillip, the current paperback of MASON & DIXON is much more portable, and the print isn't as eye-strainingly tiny as you might thing. I'm sure you can pick up a used copy fairly affordably. Much..."

i suppose i should pick up the soft cover edition, but it always seems silly to me to have two editions of the same book, unless it's a different translation. it would certainly solve my principal problem - perhaps i should do a trade, but the hardback i have is a first edition.

Thanks for the info on the translations Tom and Phillip. Turns out the copy I bought is translated by David Magarshack. I'll make my way through this version anyway since I just bought it, but I'll keep those names in mind for future reference. And I've tried to read some Dostoevsky, but my copy of Crime and Punishment has an unbearably dull translation to it, so I'll try Pevear and Volokhonsky for that too.

the pevear and volokhonsky translation of C&P is excellent. i've read it back to back with a few others, and it just leaves them in the dust.

further, the brothers karamazov is my vote for the greatest 19th century novel - brilliant on so many levels. if you ever get around to reading it, give a shout and let me know what you thought.

Kate, are you going to watch the 1984 film with John Hurt? I really like that film a lot. Gets the ethos and atmosphere and general "feel" of the book down very well IMO.

Baxter wrote: "I burned through Ryu Murakami's Audition last night. I was extremely disappointed with it. The movie (directed by Miike) was tense, disturbing, and got under my skin, but the book just came acros..."

Damn, this is depressing. I was one of the people bombarding Kodansha (who normally release Murakami, wonder why he went with another publisher on this one?) for ten years with emails begging for an English translation. I've got it on the books for next year, along with Piercing (I think that'll complete my survey of English-translated Murakami).

recently finished Let the Right One In. Because I love you miscreants, you get to be the first to see the review (which will probably go up in the usual spots later this week).

* * *

John Ajvide Lindqvist, Let the Right One In (Thomas Dunne Books, 2004)

Let the Right One In was hands-down the best movie of 2008, and in my estimation, one of the greatest achievements in film to date; it followed that I'd have to read the book eventually. It took me a while to get there, but I just finished it, and I find myself having to look at the two as entirely separate works. In hindsight, the film is reductionist almost to the point of absurdity (while still being brilliant); so much of the book is trimmed away that I even find myself being slightly optimistic about the American remake slated to come out two days from now as I write this. It's obvious Lindqvist (who wrote both adaptations) left a whole lot of material that was still ripe for mining in his 2008 screenplay. Hopefully he dug into it for the 2010 version.

The movie is a simple coming-of-age love story. The book is that, but it is also a straight vampire novel in many ways the movie is not; it is far more Stephen King than Stephenie Meyer (and hooray for that indeed). As well as focusing on the Oskar-and-Eli storyline familiar to those who have seen the film (and if you haven't seen the film, you should immediately), there are a number of others. We get a lot more insight into Oskar's personality; we see a lot more of him being bullied (which makes the climactic scene in both book and film a lot more solid), we see an aborted weekend with his divorced father. And then there's Eli. Almost, but not quite, a completely different character. A lot more savage than portrayed in the film, and... different. (I can't tell you how without major spoilers, just trust me on this.) As well, there are two other major subplots. The group of alcoholics who meet at the Chinese restaurant, who pop up in the film now and again but never really qualify as major characters, are very much that here; they get as much screen time as do Oskar and Eli, especially Lacke and Virginia, whose old, doomed romance is such a wonderful parallel to Oskar and Eli's young, doomed romance. And then there is Tommy, who lives in the building on the other side of Oskar from Eli. Tommy doesn't appear at all in the movie (I just had to check IMDB to make sure, and his character is entirely erased). His mother is dating one of the police officers who's investigating the recent murders in the area, and aside from being a friend/mentor figure to Oskar, he plays a very pivotal role in a section of the book that was excised from the film.

As a completely different piece of art, I could rate it differently than the film, but I chose not to; this is quite possibly the best piece of vampire literature to come down the pike since 'Salem's Lot, and may in fact be better even than that. Where the movie chose to focus on the tenderness, the book encompasses that tenderness in a sort of inevitable brutality (of which we got only the tip of the iceberg in the movie's climax, and that mostly offstage). That's a very delicate balance, and Lindqvist plays it like a Stradivarius. It's obviously a bit early to call this a classic, but if there's been a better vampire novel in the past thirty years, I can't think of it. *****

for fans of the novel 1984, i would recommend yegeny zemyatin's dystopian work WE, written in 1921 and a big influence on orwell's book. i discovered it last year and read it quickly, you can see how and why orwell was influenced by it - more of the russian/soviet perspective, but it translates really well for western readers.

Phillip, I'm just crazy bout that damn Bear.

robert,

nice review on the novel let the right one in. i enjoyed reading it, although not as much as i enjoyed the film. the film really speaks to the kind of understated cinema that i love. the novel IS more stephen king in its broad bombast (nice comparison, sir), which makes me fear that the american remake will be a much more typical hollywood affair. a lot of that stuff worked really well on the page, and while i did enjoy many of the additional subplots and cataclysmic ending, i heartily applauded everything the film director chose to omit.

i've seen the trailer for the new american remake "let me in", and i think i'll pass. part of me is intensely curious, and part of me just doesn't want to see an american version of this outstanding film.

Phillip wrote: "i've seen the trailer for the new american remake "let me in", and i think i'll pass. part of me is intensely curious, and part of me just doesn't want to see an american version of this outstanding film. "

Agreed on all counts, but I'm cautiously optimistic about an American remake; they don't all suck (though those that don't tend to feel unnecessary, like Shutter, Quarantine, and The Echo), and like the Requiem/Exorcism of Emily Rose duality, the stuff that Alferdson omitted is exactly the stuff American filmmakers play to (I can't remember offhand who's directing the American version and am too lazy to check right now), so I think we may get a movie that's almost entirely different. If that's so, I can probably compartmentalize them in my head, the way I do with movies so entirely different than the book that they might as well not even have a common ancestor ('Salem's Lot being the obvious example). So I will hope, and I will probably be disappointed...

Phillip wrote: "for fans of the novel 1984, i would recommend yegeny zemyatin's dystopian work WE, written in 1921 and a big influence on orwell's book. i discovered it last year and read it quickly, you can see h..."

I read We last year and thought it was fantastic. Unlike 1984, you could really see that old sci-fi style in We, giving it a slightly ridiculous feel, but ridiculous in the best way possible.

As for Let the Right One In, I've had that on my to-read list for ages now. Need to see the movie again too, I don't remember much of it at all.

great comment on "we" baxter - "ridiculous in the best way possible". that is so distinctly russian.

robert,

with a film like let the right one in, which just blew me away, i really hesitate when considering to view or not to view a remake. i felt the same way about soderberg's "solaris", based on tarkovsky's classic (well, i think it's a classic anyway). i was OFFENDED that a remake was ever considered. then eventually i saw it, and was surprised that i liked it a lot more than i thought i would. it failed to have the master's touch, so eventually, i just come back to the question i so often have in these cases: WHY?

Tom wrote: "Phillip, I'm just crazy bout that damn Bear."

you're reading the bear goes home, right? yeah - LOVED it.

Yeah, THE BEAR GOES HOME. Whoa. Why isn't this better known?

i don't know. a lot of my fellow musicians have read it, but you're the first non-musician that i know that has read it - or is reading it. i'm glad you're enjoying it!

The American version of LET THE RIGHT ONE IN seems to be getting a very positive reception. My current allergy to those damn vampires might abate long enough for me to sit through the original on netflix.

oh, PLEASE see the original. it's not your typical vampire film. it's beautifully shot, and the performances by the young kids in the film are unprecedented, especially the young girl that plays eli.

i have read some good reviews of the remake. still not convinced. that trailer i saw really turned me off.

Kate wrote: "actually it was what I've read about the graphic content of LET THE RIGHT ONE IN that sort of put me off."

Actually, there's almost none. Though what there IS is, shall we say, very very effective (and this from a fan of extreme horror movies).

the graphic material is really understated and mostly suggested, not shown. i was kind of shocked when i read your post, kate - this is a very understated movie - things happen in the dark that you can't see. the final conflict between the main characters is brilliantly portrayed .... don't want to spoil the ending, so i'll just leave it at that. i haven't seen the remake, so i have no idea whether or not they were able to act with similar restraint.

The Master and Margarita. I just can't get over it, what an amazing book. Few books really have that effect on me.
I'm almost done with Lord of the Flies.
I so want to buy Mason & Dixon, my only Pynchon's hardback edition is Inherent Vice, thank god Against the Day isn't.

so glad you liked the master and margarita!

I've missed this cool link, slowly reading a few books at a time including Pynchon's Inherent Vice. Some recent books that I've read are Walks With Men - good, something a little different from the formula for Ann Beattie, Cold Dog Soup - good, it would've read better in the 80's, and A Confederacy of Dunces - hysterical.

Good old CONFEDERACY OF DUNCES, man. It never gets old, does it? That might be up for a re-read soon...

I liked INHERENT VICE a good deal, enough to re-read it within a few months of the first read. The book's sadness was a lot more apparent the second go-round.

I can imagine that'll be the case on Inherent Vice. For all the "good times" and "histories" of the character's, it's not always happy.

Yeah, Confederacy is a great read. After a little character background early on, its a light and fun read. You can predict what's next in almost each scenario, but you can't tell exactly how it'll be done or what is said.

for you pynchon fans, here's a little trailer the great writer did for penguin for inherent vice:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjWKPd...

yes, that's pynchon reading (!!!)

And of course there's his "appearance" on The Simpsons, heh.

Phillip wrote: "for you pynchon fans, here's a little trailer the great writer did for penguin for inherent vice:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjWKPd...

yes, that's pynchon reading (!!!)"

Thanks for the share. Good stuff. :-)

I finally finished Inherent Vice and Back to Girl With the Dragon Tattoo.

IV was a great read. Not at all a fast or easy read for me. I learned a lot and had some great laughs and thought about social issues and politics from the 60-70's that I'd never have thought of without reading the book. I enjoyed the first hundred pages and then got lost in the next hundred pages, and i got full clarity of the characters in the 300's--finally. Wow.

Pynchon OCD's read below: I became so aware of Pynchon's vernacular and currents that I had to fact check. Intriguing, I had no idea that Taco Bell was around in the late 60's--70's in this novel. He had a reference to groupies frying twinkies, while I couldn't find that online who originated it, or i stopped a few google pages, but someone told me this was Evis's doing.

I think most culinary disasters wind up being laid at Elvis' door. Or they come from Texas.

Pynchon's books are usually very carefully researched, as far as I can tell. There's a guidebook available to GRAVITY'S RAINBOW that lays out a lot of the source material. Very handy book, it can really help you keep your bearings.

i grew up in LA and came of age during the era that pynchon is writing about, so inherent vice really spoke to me. yes, it's INCREDIBLY well researched - i can remember the food giant on sepulveda that he mentions off-handedly. little things like that really brought the book to life. yes, there were taco bells early on in LA - most of the fast food chains originated in southern california - mc donald's, in-n-out, carl's junior ... jeeze, it's a wonder i can cook. or maybe it's no wonder i learned to cook at an early age. :)

even in his "lite" fiction, pynchon gives you stuff to struggle with, usually in how all the characters fit together. against the day delivered a similar experience - at around page 800 (in a novel that clocks in around 1,200 pages), all of a sudden it all fits together!

i want to check out that guide to gravity's rainbow - i read the novel again last year - a second reading was really helpful, but it would be great to see what that book has to say on a few points of interest.

Phillip and Tom, I want you to know that one day I'll give GR a chance probably I'll read LOT 49 first.

LOT 49 is a lot more accessible, certainly. It was the first Pynchon I read.

I'm finishing up THE BEAR COMES HOME, and am having some mixed feelings about the ending. The Bear's lady love is suddenly acting like a real selfish cow, basically invading the Bear's home and booting him out without anything like the vaguest bit of decency or regret or even simple consideration, and nobody, least of all the Bear himself, is calling her on her really appalling callousness. And that doesn't seem to be the point, either.

We'll see.

jim, crying of lot 39 is a lot more accessible, as is vineland. i liked them both.

tom,
me thinks the ending sequence of the bear is about the alienation that artists face again and again throughout the course of life. people who you thought were in your corner suddenly reject you for no reason (that you can understand).

....just my reading of it.

Philip, yeah, I guess that's a valid take on it, but I found Iris' behavior to be just simply inexcusable, and the literary definition of Gross Ingratitude. And it never occurs to either of them, at any time, to sit down and say, "honey, what the fuck?"

It reached a point where I felt that the Bear would have been fully justified in kicking Iris and her sullen little brats (however traumatized they are by their terrible life, which, let's not forget, is as much Iris' fault as anyone's) out on their lily-white asses.

i would agree on how i would have LIKED to have seen all that resolved. but i think it's also part of this commentary on the artists' consciousness that we expect to be shit on by others. or that we are not surprised by it when it happens. and that we are capable of enduring a lot of abuse ...

i also think he's destroying the fairly common myth/image that the artist has the loving devoted partner that always comes through and supports them no matter what. "behind every great man is a great woman" (NOT!)

Points taken, but I have to say that it never felt like any points were being made, if you see what I mean, except of course that Iris is an ungrateful bitch that the Bear is probably better off without in the long run. The book had been so interesting and challenging up to that point, and to see these relationships unravel over the issues involved really seemed phony, like a forced crisis. The characters I had been reading about up to then would have dealt with this in ways that they didn't wind up doing.

i hear you, but i can't help that this particular character was bound to fall prey to the irrational aspect of "love". that thing that no one ever understands. the thing we can never rationalize or justify when all is said and done.

and, several people have told me that they didn't like the ending of the book.

Picked up Philip K. Dick's UBIK yesterday, enjoying it so far. Love the poisonous little details, like the door that will not open without payment, and threatens legal action when it is removed from its hinges. Did Douglas Adams have this in mind when he wrote about the terribly and annoyingly co-operative doors in HITCH-HIKER'S GUIDE, the ones who open and say, "glad to be of service!"