The BookParent Rating: R for sexual themes, disturbing themes, and language. Synopsis: Rachel is the worst. She’s had a rough go for sure, but her terrible choices in reaction to every bad happenstance takes her from pitiable to downright unlikeable. While most heroines rise above their situation, Rachel takes every opportunity to throw herself into self-pity, ill-health, and drunken rages. She has pushed away anyone who tried to help her, destroying her friendships, job, and marriage. Discarded after husband's affair becomes his real family, she spends her days watching from the sidelines. Two doors down from the house and husband she lost, she fixates on a couple who embody what she wishes she ever had. That is until she sees Megan, the wife in the perfect marriage, kissing another man. Rachel feels betrayed all over again. Her rage is cut short by Megan's subsequent disappearance and Rachel's foggy memories of that night. Review: I enjoy unreliable narrators. Usually they go the route of trying to charm the reader into believing them. This one tries to make you feel so bad for our main character that you doubt everything she says. That’s a fun change of pace, but also a huge turnoff for many who want to like their protagonist. The timeline takes a little getting used to. There doesn't seem to be much reason behind it other than the author is revealing information as she wants the reader to know it. The mystery behind Megan's disappearance ends predictably, so the real reason to keep reading is to find out whether Rachel is ever going to get it together. 3/5 stars for being a different sort of mystery. Docked points for not being a particularly impressive construct. The FilmIn an attempt to not know anything about the story before I saw the movie I avoided all previews. But I did see a screenshot of Emily Blunt cast as our main character Rachel. I considered this a bad decision as she is traditionally more beautiful than the character is written (which is actually an important characterization for this particular story) and I didn’t see any evidence that she had gained significant weight for the role.
After watching, her acting was fine and she does acting as a drunk and slightly creepy. However the Director clearly never wanted to portray her as revolting like our Book Rachel. In fact this Rachel is actually vindicated in the climax. Not a bad choice to make her more sympathetic, even though it’s a large departure from the book, but that was what separated this story from others. If I hadn't read the book I would be confused why they bothered making the film. Nice decision by the writers to make Rachel more of a suspect. She wasn’t much of one in the book but the movie gives her false memories more weight. And then the false memories implicating Tom are also well done. Good casting with Luke Evans (who has the only scenes that carry any suspense before the mystery is solved), Rebecca Ferguson, Allison Janney. Bizarre choice to play Dr. Kamal Abdic, particularly when they emphasize that he is Hispanic (not middle eastern) and have some of his dialogue in Spanish. Movie could have benefitted by emphasizing the visual aspect of Rachel’s memories of the night of the murder. That’s something the medium could have beat the book, but in all the flashbacks they rarely show it. Most of the jumps forwards and backwards are inconsistent and lessen the suspense. Movie would have benefited more from a dual linear timeline. With true memories slowly coming more into focus. 3/5 stars for the movie as a film. 4/5 stars for its portrayal of the book.
0 Comments
While normally I recommend everyone read a book before seeing its film or tv counterpart, every now and again the original is outdone by artists who take the source material further.
Frankly, I hated "The Handmaiden's Tale" novel by Atwood. But the Hulu miniseries takes a modern look at a story that was never grounded in anything remotely frightening, and reminds the Western world that it's not aliens who are enduring this nightmare. Spoilers in the Hulu review, the book review will be second as it's inconsequential. Flowers For Algernon by Daniel Keyes
The premise of this book the first human trial of a science experiment that allows the brain to learn with seemingly no limits. A team of scientists take a mentally retarded man with an IQ of 68, give him the surgery, and watch his progression to become a genius. Charlie was highly relatable because he wanted so badly to learn. The surgery and medication didn't 'give' him intelligence so much as it allowed him to grow. Like a person who has a disease that atrophies their muscular tissue given medication to stop their bodies eating away at itself. We read because we want to learn. We want new experiences. As his intelligence grows, he neglects his emotional maturity. And wisdom is far more complicated than what he can attain from studying. Warning Spoilers ahead. |
about the author.Kav James originates in the paradise of the Pacific Northwest, but now calls the paradise of the South Pacific home. Archives
June 2017
Categories |