Better Than the Book?

I watch a lot of movies. I also read a lot of books. Lucky for me, Hollywood makes a lot of movies based on books that I like to read. But usually, the book is better. Let's face it, there's only so much literary thought that can be translated to screen, and some books just have way too much side story to incorporate into a movie without making it six hours long. So we get cut up versions of our stories, or some new version that we haven't heard yet.Most often, I'm not disappointed in the movie adaptation of my favorite books, they're just a different telling of the story that I know so well but sometimes I don't totally enjoy the movie because of the missing bits or the little additions. (Stardust, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and The Harry Potter Series come to mind. And don't even get me started on The Count of Monte Cristo.) Tonight, I found the exception to this rule. I watched Peter Jackson's adaptation of Alice Sebold's The Lovely Bones and it was the first time that I can think of where I liked the movie better than the book.

Perhaps it was Peter Jackson's images of purgatory and heaven. Maybe it was Stanley Tucci's ability to make me hate his character, even though I've loved his character in every other movie for all of time. (I still can't believe how loathsome he was in this movie.) It might even be because I don't remember the book that well. I do remember starting the read, putting it down to read The Count of Monte Cristo again, and then trying to finish reading the rest of The Lovely Bones. I have a hard time sticking with a book that doesn't keep me attached to the characters and maybe there was some other distraction that kept me from really enjoying this book, but I was enthralled with this movie. I even ignored my bladder, which for me is quite a feat. (Anyone that knows me will vouch for the fact that I have the world's smallest and most impatient bladder.) It was wonderful, sad and stunning.


 
The story takes place in the early seventies. Suzie Salmon is 14 years old. She is a normal 14 year old, she seems to be popular. She is the oldest of three children; she has a sister who is only a couple years younger and a brother who is much younger. Her father adores her, they have a special connection.

Suzie narrates the story and introduces the viewer to her killer early on. This is Stanley Tucci. I had to check IMDB to make sure because he was so absolutely deplorable. You hate him. He makes your toes curl and your teeth grind. George Harvey (Tucci) lives in the same neighborhood as Suzie and he starts to watch her. Then, we see him making a plan. One night after school, Suzie is running late. She travels through a corn field behind her house where the neighbor is waiting, like a creepy bastard, and she knows that something's not right. But he's also smart, and he lures her into this underground "clubhouse" that he built. It's full of fun stuff that kids like; he says that Suzie can be the first kid inside. She can't deny this privilege because she's a typical 14 year old in the seventies. People weren't as bad as they are now. They could be trusted and she was going to be the first to see this special place. So she goes into this hole in the ground and has a coke with him. When she tries to leave, he stops her and then we see her running across the field at a girl from school and then she disappears. Yep, the creepy neighbor bastard killed her.

She doesn't know she's dead until a young lady comes to her in the purgatory that she's trapped in and tells. The young lady calls herself Holly Go Lightly, because her name can be whatever she wants. She tells Suzie that she's dead and that she must go forward to heaven and not look back. But Suzie can't go forward. She has too much left on Earth. And this is what the movie involves. I won't say more because it would spoil it and I think this is a good movie to watch without knowing what happens. Its heart wrenching but I didn't cry. It has intensity that's driven by the plot. The score tries to add to the intensity at times, but I think it was a little grating. Susan Sarandon is wonderful as the grandma. Rachel Weisz is stunning, as always. And this was the first movie with Mark Wahlberg that I didn't have to imagine him in his underwear to enjoy it. (Just kidding, the football one was good too.)

The Lovely Bones was an okay book. I finished it, so it can't have been too terrible. And after watching the movie, I may end up reading the book again. I have to know if this is really the first time that I've liked the movie better. I'm sure I'll keep you posted.

How I Learned to Use the Internet

The internet has been around for a long time, at least half of my life that I know for sure. It's an incredible resource of information and entertainment. But for me, it's primarily been a source of reference material and shopping for books and electronics. I searched for whatever information I needed and then returned to whatever I was working on before. I'd watch TV or play Peggle if I got bored of what I was doing. I never thought to turn to the internet for fun because I didn't seem to know where to look, until now.

Yes, I know that it's been used for fun for quite a while now. There are entire websites built for the sole purpose of fun. But that's not the type of fun I'm referring to. There's only so many times you can look at the ROFL cats before they start to look the same and the People of Walmart are all nasty and just downright absurd. Pictures don't entertain me like story does. And I don't care about piddley little Facebook games that can suck away your time. A lot of people play them, and I'm glad for them, but I need to focus on my dreams. Never mind my Peggle/Plants vs. Zombies (best games ever!) addiction that I deprive myself of for the sake of my writing.

As for how I learned how to have fun on the internet, I have to thank Facebook and I'm figuring out Twitter. I didn't realize until recently that I can click on the links in my friends posts and find new and exciting things on the internet. Prior to my recent revelation, I was content with just reading the blurb about whatever I was looking at. I know, you don't get much story from that, but most of them were silly or too damn sad. (The puppy throwing girl? Really?) Aside from the occasional glance at The Oatmeal or i can has cheezburger , I pretty much stayed on my Facebook home page until I got tired of reading the same posts over and over, then I'd close my browser and do some writing, or whatever. Anyway… a couple of days ago my sweetie posted a link on Facebook to an article that had no blurb. The link took me to a site that I'd never been to. After cruising around on the pages, I started to recognize articles that he'd read to me. "Brilliant!" I said to myself. "He always finds the best websites." And before I knew it, I was clicking links into new tabs and reading articles like a fiend. And they were funny. If you've never been to it, or if it's been a while, I highly recommend Cracked.com It's funny and I think it might be based on facts. And Drunk History is always fun and surprisingly accurate. If you haven't seen that, go watch it now. It's every bit as entertaining as it sounds.

And then there's Twitter. It's tricky, but I retweeted something today, so I feel like I'm figuring it out. I learned that if I follow interesting people, I will learn interesting things about them or they will share interesting things with me. And, I can click links on my phone and look at interesting things everywhere. It's always been my goal to gather a lot of wisdom, and now I have access to wisdom that's entertaining and informative pretty much all the time. I only wish that I'd figured this out earlier.


 

The Lesser of Two Evils

I'm taking a break from my usual writing to talk about something that I usually won't talk about. But with the large white envelope arriving in our mail box this week; it's been on my mind.

Election time is upon Oregonians again. And again, I feel like I'm voting for the lesser of two evils. I know I'm not alone in this. I also know that I'm not as informed about politics as I ought to be, but neither is the average voter. I'm smart enough to understand it, but disinterested enough to find better things to learn about. So, in ignorance I get to select from whatever media has been presented to me, and most of what I've seen this campaign is a lot of bad news. Our states in big trouble if anything that any of the mailers, radio ads, TV ads or billboards I've seen is true. Not to say that all of the candidates for all of the offices are bad news (I know one personally and I believe him to be a decent person), but it looks and sounds like the gubernatorial race is in bad shape. And I did actually read the voters pamphlet to see what each one stood for, and based on that, my decision was clear. But then I'm inundated with slanderous material, consistently delivering opposing information to my thought process. I do know that I can choose to believe what I want, but when you haven't been told good things about a person, only facts from a catalogue and bad things from others, it's definitely harder to see them as a good person. So I decide based on what I know, and I know so many bad things that I don't feel like any of them are a suitable candidate anymore. And I vote for the lesser of two evils.

My proposal is this: Be decent and then run for office and remain decent. Being decent will stop the bad news from spreading because there won't be any. Be the kind of person who wants to serve the public, who gets personal satisfaction out of it. I want a candidate that works to keep his or her good name and will make their decisions based on what they know is best for our state. They should be thinking about the benefits to the state and their own satisfaction with a job well done.

Be decent.

I realize that I ought to spend more time watching the news and reading the paper to learn more. And it's my fault that I'm not as knowledgeable as some on the political going's on, but I am like the average voter. We can only go by what we are told, and we need to be told something good about the people we're voting for. I have guilt when I vote for someone because of their political party, which is what I'll be doing this election, because I never really know if I'm choosing the best person, or the person whose party closest matches my ideals. I am capable of thinking outside my box when it truly benefits the people.

I receive my ballot in the mail, like every Oregon voter. All I have to do is fill it out and send it back and I've participated in democracy. It's pretty awesome. I just wish that I knew that every candidate I selected was truly the best man or woman for the job.



And that concludes my thoughts on politics this year. I'll fill out my ballot and send it in and hope for the best, like I do every election. Let's hope next time is different.