Rejean
Whooshite Candidate
Posts: 95
|
Post by Rejean on Jun 17, 2004 23:13:32 GMT -6
I just finished a book by H.N. Turtletaub, called The Gryphons Skull. For anyone interested in ancient Greece, AKA Xenaland, it is a ficional account of a trading voyage in the Aegean Sea set in 309 B.C. Story isn't much, but there is lots of detailed information of life in that era, with reference to current characters, legends of various gods & goddesses, and everyday life in the years following the times of Alexander the Great and the turmoil caused by his successors. A good read for any Xenite as background to XWP.
rejean
|
|
|
Post by Crstlmichallet on Jun 28, 2004 23:50:17 GMT -6
Isn't that sad? I read a book like that once. It was written by a couple, a husband and wife team who were anthropologist. They were really good with all the facts, and the historical aspects but the story led nowhere. It was a big let down. oh well, thank goodness there are plenty of books, and better writers out there! Crystal
|
|
|
Post by piper on Jul 24, 2004 3:48:36 GMT -6
When I read, I like to read fun frivolous stuff. Not really a deep type of person. Let's see I've read a few things in the last few months and stopped reading mostly to catch up on my video games and watching DVDs.
Anways, last thing I've read was "Dracula," and before that "Frankenstein." The reason why I read these books is because of the movie "Van Helsing" that came out earlier in the summer. Well, I didn't actually go and see the movie, but I did buy the old "Universal Monsters" series DVD boxed set. I bought them seperate, not the huge collectors sets with the statues, because I wanted to save room for other stuff.
Well, the books I got in paper back format and were included in one volume alone with "Dr. Jeckell and Mr. Hyde" with a forward written by Stephen King. "Frankenstein" was the first book in the volume. The monster in the book was nasty and grotesque. Way more grotesque than in any of the movies. What surprised me was that he was smart and articulate. He also had the power of speech.
I didn't feel sorry for the monster like I did in the movie, except for when he was observing this one family in the distance with the old blind man and his two children. He studied their habits and eventually learned to speak by watching them. Finally, he got up the courage to come out of hiding and introduce him to the family, and they didn't accept him, because they found him frightening and like I said before, grotesque. This set off the monster and he went off to torment Frankenstein for having creating him. It's a tragic story with a not so happy ending, but a good read. Not too long neither, I literally finished reading it within a few days, and I'm a slow reader.
"Dracula" on the other hand is a very long book. Close to 400 pages. I've always liked Bela Lugosi's dipiction of the monster, more so than the recent movie with Winona Ryder and Gary Oldman as "Dracula." The modern version of the movie is closer to the book, but they take liberties as well; like connecting the literary Dracula to the historical Vlad the Impaler. Stoker's only connection from monster to historical figure was in name only. Also in the movie, they had Dracula fall in love with Mina, which did not happen in the book. That was my gripe with the movie in the first place to begin with, because it seemed too over done and sappy, and forced and contrived.
However, my favorite parts in the books where the Reinfield parts in the Assylum, and the Van Helsing parts. Van Helsing is a frail old man, and a brilliant scientist, but he also can sound sexist at times. Like when Mina suggests some things, Van Helsing says that she must have a mind of a man. This implies that a woman can't think. He's still a likable character however, plus you have to keep in mind when the story was written, so many people thought that way back then. I loved Mina in the book she stays true to herself even after being under Dracula's spell, and make no mistake about it, unlike the movie, her heart stays true to her husband Jonathan Harker. The parts I like with her is how she stays brave while she's slowly turning into a vampire and offers to let Van Helsing hypnotize her so that they kind find out where Dracula's going next during their pursuit back from England to Transylvania. This makes Mina the heroine of the story, just as Van Helsin is with his brilliant mind and Jonathan Harker with his bravery. A great read. I reccommend it highly.
Before I read these books, I've read most of the Ian Fleming James Bond books. Got all the movies up to date on DVD last Christmas and decided to read the books. I'll talk about that on a later date.
|
|
|
Post by Crstlmichallet on Jul 25, 2004 1:17:27 GMT -6
I love gothic novels! I've read them all, Frankenstein being my favorite. Shelly is perhaps one of the best gothic writers and her story is a tragic one. I can really see what influenced her writing after learning about the tragadies in her life. I never cared for Ian Flemming. Taking three pages to describe a single putt in golf was 2 1/2 pages too long, imo. Crystal
|
|
|
Post by piper on Jul 25, 2004 10:38:34 GMT -6
I love gothic novels! I've read them all, Frankenstein being my favorite. Shelly is perhaps one of the best gothic writers and her story is a tragic one. I can really see what influenced her writing after learning about the tragadies in her life. I never cared for Ian Flemming. Taking three pages to describe a single putt in golf was 2 1/2 pages too long, imo. Crystal Don't care for that part of Goldfingah aye? I like when Fleming did that kind of descriptive stuff. Like when he opened up "Diamonds Are Forever" with the scorpion in the desert thing. I liked Frankenstein a lot too and you maybe interested to know that Hallmark of all people are doing a made for TV version that's supposed to be very true to the original text by Shelly. Supposed to premier in late October. Check out some photos here: www.hallmarkent.com/property.php?propertyId=Frankenstein&page=photos
|
|
|
Post by Crstlmichallet on Jul 25, 2004 11:52:48 GMT -6
For descriptive writing I prefer John Steinbeck. My favorite of his is East of Eden. I just couldn't get into Ian Flemming's writing. If he would pull away and describe things around him, maybe. But when it's completely focused on only putting a golf ball, then I'd rather torture myself and watch a real golf game on tv! LOL
I'm not sure if I would be happy with a remake of Frankenstein. I've always been the type that likes the novels over the books. There is just so much more that can be put into books that the movies can not include.
Crystal
|
|
|
Post by Joxcenia on Jul 26, 2004 20:53:23 GMT -6
Please continue this thread in the one that I had already started... thanks.
|
|