Culture Shock: What I've Been Watching: One Day (2011)

This is the film adaptation of a book I've long wanted to read but haven't quite found the time for just yet... David Nicholls published the text in 2009 and it was shortly adapted into the 2011 silver-screen version starring Anne Hathaway as UK Northern lass (with a terrible put-on accent) Emma and the beautiful Jim Sturgess as Dexter.

Now, this is one of those books that I've wanted to read, but only really because other people rave about it. That's probably why I never got round to it, because I didn't know enough about the plot and was never totally and completely drawn to it. I think the fact that Anne Hathaway is in the film kind of put me off even reading the book because I've really never liked any of her works at all. Nonetheless, when I was full of flu today I decided to make the most of the fact the film was available on Sky Anytime and settled down with my Halls Soothers and lemon tea and began to endure nearly two hours of what reminded me of one of my other least favourite films which scandalizes everyone around me, When Harry Met Sally.

The plot follows Emma and Dexter who spend graduation night from Edinburgh University together but decide not to bonk eachother's brains out. Then through a series of unfortunate events years and years pass and they still don't bonk eachother's brains out. In fact, Dexter becomes a horrendously boring coke-head television presenter and Emma becomes and even more horrendously boring frigid school teacher with a hilariously nerdy 'comedian' boyfriend called Ian (Rafe Spall).

Consequentially, although Ian only plays a small part, he is one of the best characters in the whole film. He's possibly the only character I actually related to throughout because he is just so normal and genuine, doing everything he can to please his girlfriend and although he sometimes gets it wrong, ('Choose anything from the menu, Em... as long as it is cheaper than £14... only joking... get whatever you want... within... reason' *INSERT CHEESY SMILE WHICH MAKES YOU INWARDLY CRINGE BUT EQUALLY WANT TO CUDDLE THE POOR GUY*) his heart is generally in the right place and he worships the ground she walks on.

Another character that I loved throughout was the character of Dexter's mother Alison (Patricia Clarkson) who begins as a vibrant, young-at-heart, proud mother but ends as a disappointed, desperate, disheartened cancer sufferer who ultimately succumbs. She tells her son that she doesn't 'like' him any more but that she has faith that one day he will be a good man. I just felt so sorry for her that my eyes even watered a little bit.

Even Dexter's grumpy misogynistic father Steven (Ken Stott) had a bigger likeability factor than either of the main characters. At one point he states that if Dexter shows up in the same intoxicated state to see his dying mother as he did the previous time, he won't permit him access no matter how much Alison wants to see him. I loved this because this was the only realistic part of the whole film in my opinion. The only part that I could imagine relating to.

I'm not going 'ruin the surprise' or spoil the (terribly disappointing) climax of the film for you, but I felt a bit cheated when it all ended to say the least.

This is because essentially the whole film is about two people that end up letting themselves drift away from one another, wasting all their time letting 'life' get in the way, using up all their spare time on lacklustre love interests when they would quite obviously make a much better plot if they just pursued the romance that is staring them in the face. I don't enjoy films when I spend most of my time being annoyed at the characters because they seem so blindingly stupid. It is a bit like horror film when the brainless teenager walks into the dark and allegedly haunted mansion.  When I want to scream 'YOUR WIFE IS CHEATING ON YOU', 'YOUR SON IS A COKEHEAD', 'YOUR BEST FRIEND IS THE ONE' the whole way through, I just can't relax. Then again, it isn't really in my nature to relax.

Anyway, since watching the film (which by the way speeds through the lives of the two characters so quickly that what would usually have been the climax of the whole film, where they finally do bonk eachother's brains out, is skimmed right past without almost any reference) I am even more torn about reading the book. Part of me says, 'NONONO it will be an even further waste of your time DO NOT DO IT, it will only make you angry'... But then another part of me says, 'Maybe it is just a REALLY TERRIBLE film adaptation and the book is quite as good as everyone says...'

I don't know! What do you think? Have you read One Day by David Nicholls? Have you seen the film? Do films like this make you angry?

Love and snuggles
GabriellaSofia
x

Culture Shock: What I've Been Watching: The Hunger Games (2012)

As a self-confessed fan of all films fantasy (Twilight, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Avatar etc...) I was surprised that I was patient enough to wait to watch The Hunger Games until it came live on Sky Box Office. However, once it was available for purchase this Sunday just gone, I was one of the first to buy the film. I settled down with my blanket and a Galaxy chocolate skinny latte and got ready to be wowed.

*She so pwetty. She's also one of my body idols.*

For me, I think it is really important to watch a film adaptation before you read the book it was adapted from if you can help it, solely because I had always found adaptations to be disappointed with adaptations. At least if you watch the film first then you stand a better chance of enjoying it without the restrictions of comparison running through your brain. So before you ask, no, I haven't read The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins just yet. But it is definitely on my list.

Anyway, back onto the film.

I was so on-the-fence about The Hunger Games at the beginning. Although the film is opened by a captioned blurb in order to set the scene in time, location and context, I found myself lost through the majority of it. Unexplained flashbacks, seemingly significant glances between characters and inhuman brutality throughout just put me in such a weird state of confusion that I struggled at time to concentrate on even the basics of the plot. This continued for the first half hour.

From what I can understand, the film is set in some sort of North American nation in the future (in spite of the archaic experiences which the characters go through such as bathing in a tub of cold water, next-to-no access to technology and hobbies such as hunting with a bow and arrow) where there are twelve different 'districts' surrounding one Capitol. As a punishment to the poor districts for attempting a rebellion years earlier, the Capitol forces each district to select one boy and one girl  between the ages 12 and 18 each year by a random lottery to compete in a brutal version of the Olympics, whereby they must be let go into an 'arena' which is basically like a big huge forest. In order to win, they must kill one another until the final child, or 'tribute', standing wins. The District 12 lottery chooses Primrose Everdeen. However, he older sister Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) volunteers in her place and becomes a 'tribute' with fellow District 12er Peeta Mellark.

The rest is history really! There is a bit of action, a bit of romance, a few father issues, a LOT of bravery and generally a very Darwin-esque approach.

After watching for a little while, I started to understand the plot slightly better because I just let go of my preconceptions about how unrealistic the whole idea was. I mean, isn't that the whole point of fantasy? To let you invest yourself in a different world, to escape from reality.

The casting was generally brilliant, especially with Jennifer Laurence able to play the most kick-ass babe in the games. Similarly, her little ally Rue (played by Amandla Stenberg) gave me an awesome sense of girl power and how if we are united we can conquer the world! I also really liked Lenny Kravitz in the slightly camp role of 'stylist' Cinna, and Stanley Tucci (perhaps better known from The Devil Wears Prada, Easy A, Burlesque and The Lovely Bones amongst others...) as bitchy broadcast host Caesar Flickerman. The one-to-watch for me in this film is Elizabeth Banks in the role of Effie Trinket who is a control-freak, image-obsessed, optimist. Although some might say the role is slightly over-acted I saw a lot of Wicked's Madame Morrible in her performance and as a Wicked-fanatic I really couldn't complain!

Although they may find the plot a bit too fluffy, I think tech-y film fans might like this one, because the range of shots and sound techniques is really quite impressive, even for those of us who know nothing whatsoever about film.

This is a film which takes a lot of concentration, but is well worth the effort. I even found myself mentally cheering the tributes on and having a bit of a lump in my throat during a couple of different stages throughout. However, I was expecting something I would be a little MORE passionate about, like Avatar where I cried like a baby or Harry Potter where I was literally sat on the edge of my seat, or Twilight where I spent many a night dreaming about my very own forbidden-romance vampire-lover... But The Hunger Games is a good film nonetheless. Even if I do feel like there are bits I missed... maybe I'll have to watch it again.

Have you seen The Hunger Games? Which other films would you compare it with? Do you like watching film adaptations of books?

Love and snuggles
GabriellaSofia
x