Tag: classic

books

Are There Really 100 Books You HAVE to Read Before You Die?

maymargaret

I love a good list. And a good book. So when I see a list of books I should apparently read before I die, I have to take a glance. Often just to count of how many I’ve read, and feel a sense of achievement. When I’ve read one on my bucket list poster, I love scratching off of the little square, for that same buzz of productivity.

And yet, often people read these books despite actually hating the experience. Presently, I’m reading Les Miserables, and while I don’t hate it, I’m not personally enjoying the experience. The overly descriptive scenes of settings typical of Hugo’s style, pages and pages spent describing a character of little relevance to the grand scheme of things. At this moment, I’m reading it because I’m in too deep. But I’m not enjoying it.

I didn’t get into my love of reading by the classics route. Instead, it began when I was around 14, with teen fiction. A few vampires, werewolves and a tremendously unrealistic romance, and I was happy. Books such as Shiver by Maggie Stiefvater and Nightworld by L G Smith. None of these turn up on the 100 Books You have to Read Before You Die. And yet, I loved them. Most importantly, I’ve probably had more enjoyment out of them, too, than a number of the books on these lists.

I know why so many books are considered with this level of importance. Books such as To Kill a Mockingbird for social issues, War and Peace for there literary influence and educational quality. They’re regular contenders, and for good reason. But I’m a sucker for sappy romances and the cold yet handsome anti hero.

So, read what you like. If you’re like me, and like to tick off the next book you must read, then by all means, its good to have that guide. Sometimes, they even help introduce some new blood into your typical reading trends. But make sure to deviate from that every once in a while with what made you love reading in the first place. If that’s classics then great, but sometimes a melodramatic drama between a gutsy heroine and a troubled supernatural young fellow is what you need. With ice cream, for extra indulgence.

Uncategorized

What is Actually Wrong With Love Actually?

maymargaret

I love ‘Love Actually’, actually, to quote Kitty from Ghosts. British romcoms just have that thing about them, from my totally biased British opinion. They are cosy and unrealistic and feature a barrage of clumsy bumbling characters. Usually featuring Hugh Grant if you’re thinking of a certain time period for British romcoms. But yes, I love them. I love the stiff upper lip awkwardness, the double entendre, and yes, there are plenty of stereotypes. But movies have stereotypes. And, and this is my main point, movies are fictional.

You’ve probably seen the following kind of article lately. I watched this and I have questions. I watched that classic film and I was horrified. I’m watching love actually for the first time and it’s AWFUL!!! Yes. We get it. It was made in 2003 and you’re super offended by its lack of 2020 standards (and “oh the Andrew Lincoln scene is just creepy”). But is it that bad? I don’t think so. In fact, there’s so many good things about Love Actually that these people don’t seem to realise. The smattering of jokes unique to British humour. The singing priminister’s guard, the irony of a pair of movie body doubles struggling to ask each other out. Emma Thompson’s acting. References to the passengers aboard the planes of 9/11.

The scene between Keira Knightly and Andrew Lincoln is still my favourite scene. As he mentions, he’s confession to provide an explanation, clear the air. Not with any other motives. “With no agenda.”

The criticism around Love Actually and other films of the like, such as Four Weddings and a Funeral, has increased in the last year or two. The key criticism being too straight, or too white. As I say, we are not in the time we were. As for Four Weddings, in my opinion, it features one of the most modern and respectful depictions of a gay couple, even by the depictions used today (such James Corden in that Netflix film… Prom, is it?). In a sea of incorrect and potentially hurtful stereotypes of gay men, we saw a couple that weren’t characatures for cheap jokes. We just saw a couple, the only couple among that group of romantically unsuccessful friends, fully accepted by all.

We need to edge away from the idea that all movies need to depict social issues, need to shoehorn characters in for the sake of diversity. So many films focus on one group of people, and yet today there seems to be this pressure to feature as many racial, cultural and LGBTQ groups as possible into mainstream movies. So much so that it deviates from a true story. Love Actually may have its issues when viewed from the lenses of today, but it wasn’t made for that. It was made for audiences of then. Movies used to be made for escapism. To reflect technological advances. To tell a story. Today, even in a fantasy or a superhero flick, we are being reminded of social issues and imbalances. In the time we are currently in, do we need to be reminded in the evenings too that the world isn’t perfect? Do we need our TV shows to preach to us in a time of what we want to use for relaxation and switching off?

Yes, some movies should be made to deliver a message. But other movies can simply exist to have fun with. To watch when we just want to feel warm and fuzzy, or cry like no one is watching. What, I ask, is wrong with that?

Uncategorized

Classic Movies – Why I Recommend Them

maymargaret

I love old movies. When many people hear this, or they think of an old movie, they think of something made in the 80s, or even the 90s. I still struggle with the concept that really, those movies made in the 90s, the ones that came out around the time I was born, are now considered old.

But the old movies I’m talking about were made back in the 30s, 40s. Cary Grant, Katherine Hepburn, James Stewart. Fast spoken comedies, everyone in suits regardless of their jobs. Random dance scenes. No CGI whatsoever. To me, this was the best of cinema. To me, too many people don’t give them a chance. So here is a list as to why I think you should. Yes, I know. But I love lists. They’re so organised!

1. The storytelling – many romcoms that come out today use tried and tested formulas. Boy meets girl, fall in love. For the classic movies, these formulas were fresh, new, lacking the convolution of what we have today. Sure, some of the screwball comedies had certain common traits; ‘Made for Eachother’ and ‘Vivacious Lady’ both feature James Stewart falling in love with a woman and marrying her after one night of knowing her (both happen within minutes of the film starting, so no spoiler there), while Cary Grant remarries his ex wife in both Philidelphia Story and His Girl Friday (yes spoilers, but both are delightful watches and predictable anyway). But nonetheless, these films were where the ideas started, where the cliches began.

2. It’s probably been remade – You’ve Got Mail is a remake of The Shop Around the Corner, and predictably i think the latter is better. Now I do like You’ve Got Mail, and it’s so similar in its concept that its impossible to dislike it too much beyond certain cheesy moments. But The Shop Around the Corner takes place in mostly one place, and gives the romance the scale that fits it. It’s not a lowly book store owner falling for a millionaire competetor without realising. Its two people working in a store, always around each other. Its plausible in ways that You’ve Got Mail isn’t. And it’s modern in its writing; the shop staff are fleshed out. The main characters are intelligent and well read, and not because they work with books. They don’t, but Meg Ryan knows all there is to know because she works with books, and thats kind of it.

3. A different time – these movies were made in a different time. Standards were different, the age was different. Today, some ask for the deletion of these movies because they do not match up to todays standards. But I think this is why we need to watch them, and keep them around. I watched a movie the other night in which a character put black make up on his face as a disguise, but that was okay then. While we might cringe now, I think these films should be around just to see how far we’ve come. And that goes for the treatment of women, too.

4. The Style – just the look, the sound of everything. Quick quips, sharp suits and equally sharp dresses. Everyone was so well dressed, and spoke so fast, and with such wit. It was classy, and fashionable, or at least it was on film.

5. Just storytelling – Frankenstein (1931) was one of the earlier uses of contact lenses in film… and they looked so damn uncomfortable. Sounds were made using materials at hand rather than a computer, and invention had to be used for the rest if something new was to be made. The Lady Vanishes, for example, was groundbreaking for showing dream like visuals such as double vision. It was relevant to the story, and didn’t distract from it in any way. Besides that, movies focused on the story, acting and dialogue. No distractions to increase the run time, and if we were shown something truly mindblowing, chances are it was a first.

A new take – novel adaptions were very popular back then, but they werent always faithful to the book. Sure, they were essentially the same story, and ended in much the same way, but there were also some tweaks. For example, Pride and Prejudice (1940) made one certain cretinous character ultimately act in the interest of the characters’ happiness, rather than social conventions of the time. Little Women (1949) almost entirely focused on Jo’s story, creating a sense of perspective as opposed to dipping in and out of the girl’s lives like subsequent adaptions.

The drama – finally, just the drama of it all. Today, many romcoms go for the understated quirky characters, quietly neurotic and loudly mundane in their lives. But classic characters wear their hearts on their sleeves, swooning all over the place and being all passionate and all that. And they could make drama out of anything too, with the right lead.

.