Hello readers! I seem to be making a habit of awfully long summer breaks in blogging, which I don't particularly like... But now I'm back with the second half of the Ask Me Anything event I hosted in April.
Before I get to that, let me remind you of another, rather more international-scale event that should be of interest to bookworms across the world: the Banned Books Week, 27.9-3.10. It's mostly an American event, initiated by libraries and booksellers, who are often pressured to remove "unsuitable" books from their selections. The Banned Books Week raises awareness of censorship and celebrates people's freedom to read and as these issues are relevant to readers everywhere in the world, I don't think we should let America celebrate all alone! Therefore, I'm inviting you all to pick a book that has been notoriously challenged or even banned and discuss it during the upcoming week in any medium available to you – blog, social media, circle of friends, anything that enables you to introduce this book and reflect on why you should have been prohibited from reading it. The American Library Association keeps lists of frequently challenged books from recent years, but there are plenty of notoriously challenged books all across the history of literature. I'm going to review Khaled Hosseini's The Kite Runner (2003), it would be great to see all of you fellow book bloggers participate with whatever you choose. Please throw me a link to your posts if you do! Let's really discuss censorship and read whatever the heck we want!
Now, moving on to the actual topic of the day. I'll be answering Hamlette's and Olivia's questions that they asked many... many months ago, and this little celebration for the second anniversary of Music & My Mind comes to an end. Thank you all for participating, I have had tremendous fun thinking up answers to all of these questions!
Hamlette asked:
What animated movie do you wish they would make a live-action version of next? Who would you cast?
As I'm supposed to be honest here, I'll have to tell you all that I'm completely bored and frustrated with this persisting Disney trend of live-action remakes. Not that I resist remakes on the whole or think that all of these Disney films are of bad quality – I'm absolutely open to the suggestion that some of them might be good films in their own right, even if I haven't bothered to see most of them myself.
The real reason why I don't applaud live-action remakes is that for me, the magic and the intrigue of the original Disney films is largely to do with the beautiful work they did with the animation. The older I got, the more awed I was by the fact that people could actually draw things like sunlight, thunderstorms and water – if you really stop to think about it, isn't it quite an achievement to animate even such an ordinary thing as a moving person? So I don't really see what the artistic gain is in telling essentially the same story as a live-action version. I hate to be cynical, but I get the feeling that Disney is after some easy profit in continuing with this trend.
What musical NEEDS a movie version but doesn't have one yet? Again, who would you cast?
I think some stage musicals are better off left on the stage in their awesomeness, but to be honest, I would be quite happy to see a film version of Jekyll & Hyde. The score is wonderful, the themes of addiction and ethics will never get old, and the Victorian setting would look gorgeous on screen – there would be so many things in this film's favour! As for casting, all I would ask for is actors with a strong musical background and at most a minimal amount of stunt casting. I would much prefer an unknown, interesting new talent with a gorgeous singing voice to a big-name Hollywood star who took a singing crash-course just before shooting.
Olivia asked:
What is your opinion on the subject of Ramin Karimloo?
I can tell you that if you were to watch me listening to Ramin Karimloo, you might witness something rather peculiar. There's this half-dreamy, half-zombie look in my eyes, I tend to clasp my hands really tight and perch on the very edge of whatever I'm sitting on. My goodness, what a voice. What a stage presence. Have you seen that look on his face when he plays Enjolras in the Les Misérables 25th anniversary concert and sings "The ABC Café Song"? And how, as the Phantom, he has incredibly expressive hands that more than make up for the fact that the mask hides half of his face? Just... wow.
Have you seen the new Cinderella movie? If so, what did you think?
I haven't, and as you can probably judge by my response to the question about Disney re-makes, I wasn't in a hurry to see it. However, a friend of mine saw it and told me that Cate Blanchett was magnificent, which I can easily believe!
Do you plan to pursue a career in theatre/musical theatre? Are you a soprano or an alto?
I would love to write plays and writing a musical is a crazy, ambitious dream that may or may not come true. I do like to sing though, and I'm definitely more of a soprano than an alto because my lower range is very limited and my belt voice is, quite frankly, pathetic.
What is your favourite version of The Phantom of the Opera? (Meaning any book, movie, or stage adaptation.)
That would be the stage musical composed by Andrew Lloyd Webber. I was lucky enough to see it at Her Majesty's Theatre in London, and it was one of the most impressive experiences of my life. Not only hearing but feeling the power of the music reminded me why I love musicals so much. I have also read the original novel by Gaston Leroux, which was quite a disappointment, unfortunately.
Wednesday, 23 September 2015
Wednesday, 15 April 2015
Ask Me Anything: The Answer Post, Part 1
The blog birthday is here! I'm so excited to share my answers to the Ask Me Anything questions that some of you readers sent me. In fact, there were so many more questions than last year and I ended up giving such lengthy answers to some of them that I thought it might be a good idea to do the Answer Post in two parts. Today's post will include the questions from Hannah and Siiri L. – thank you both, for coming up with such interesting questions and for being such great blog friends all this time!
Hannah asked...
If you could play any character in a musical and/or play, who would it be and why?
I'm going to pick one character from a musical and one from a straight play. My musical character choice would be Éponine, without a doubt. "On My Own" and "A Little Fall of Rain" are among my favourite songs from Les Misérables, and although the character in the musical is often criticized for lacking the complexities of her Victor Hugo counterpart, I think there would be plenty of chances for an actress to explore more of the derangement and instability that characterize Éponine in the novel. Everyone loves a good stage death, and Éponine departs singing a beautiful duet and fills the remaining rebels with new resolution to keep fighting. Plus, I really love that hat.
August: Osage County is my favourite modern play so far, and Ivy – the middle one of Violet Weston's three grown-up daughters – is one of the most interesting characters in it. She makes her sisters uncomfortable with her blunt and apparently cynical comments, but with Little Charles around she becomes a completely different person, which just adds up to the devastation that the romance ultimately brings her way. She shows deliberate indifference to what are often perceived as commonplace feminine values; her mother nags at her for not caring about her looks, and she appears completely fine with the fact that she can't ever have children. Like Éponine, Ivy has a wonderful last scene in the play, involving emotional breakdown and finally breaking away from the mother whose problems she was forced to deal with as her sisters moved away. All the different layers in Ivy's personality and that heart-wrenching character arc would be just wonderful to play.
Can you rank the Dickens novels that you've read so far?
I'll be more than happy to do that! I have only read three and a half of his novels so far, plus A Christmas Carol which I'll also include in the ranking even though it's a novella. I'm seriously working on my Dickens education, though – just look at my Classics Club list! I would like to point out that I have loved every Dickens novel I have read so far, they are all brilliant in different ways. Therefore, even the works that I have placed low on this ranking are not bad – just less amazing than the ones above them.
1. A Tale of Two Cities
This one bounced straight up to my list of "all-time favourite books of literary magic which will affect me for the rest of my life" – as soon as I was finished with despairing over the cruelty of the human race and crying about that bloody guillotine. Dickens does something very different than his usual thing here; the setting is in the late 1700s exploring the devastating effects of the Revolution and the Terror on the French society, there is none of Dickens' trademark satirical humour, and the page count is just over 400. The result is an absolutely heartbreaking account on how humanity's struggle for "justice" leads to tragedy both nation-wide and in the lives of ordinary men and women. I don't think any other book ever has sent my mind reeling so wildly, both during and after reading it.
2. Nicholas Nickleby
This was my first Dickens experience and it will most likely stay high in my esteem no matter how many Dickens novels I will read after it. It is a big book in terms of length and story, covering diverse layers of Victorian society in their various pursuits. However, the focus stays on young Nicholas Nickleby of idealistic values, as he develops one of literature's loveliest bromances with poor Smike, and learns to stand his ground against his miserly uncle Ralph. Nicholas Nickleby is many things, which makes it such an engaging read – it's viciously funny and unflinchingly tragic, a broad social commentary as well as an eventful coming-of-age adventure.
3. A Christmas Carol
I'm a complete junkie for fantasy, character development and the Christmas spirit, so if there exists a story about a sore old miser finding redemption through supernatural intervention at Christmastime, written in brilliant Dickensian prose, is there anything else for me to do but adore it? As always, Dickens' masterful pen creates literary images so awe-inspiring that it is best described as pure magic.
4. Little Dorrit
I'm exactly halfway through this one while I'm writing this blog post so I won't say much right now, but I'm fairly certain that Little Dorrit will rank somewhere hereabouts once I'm finished with it. The book is very slow-paced at times, but the good parts are very good. It explores themes such as the effects of institutionalisation (in this case, in a debtors' prison), the vapid constructions of high society, and the importance of a fulfilling life in great depth. Arthur Clennam is an interestingly atypical literary hero and the reader gets to really delve into how his past experiences have shaped his personality and current views of life.
5. Oliver Twist
As I discussed in my review about a year ago, this book has some structural flaws and Oliver Twist himself is not the most interesting or realistic of child heroes, but there is still more than a fair share of brilliant bits to be found here.
Would you rather J.K. Rowling wrote a series about the Hogwarts Founders, a series about the Marauders or a series about the next generation at Hogwarts?
Each of these ideas holds its own element of intrigue, but being such a history person, I would most like to hear about how Hogwarts came to be. I just happened to do some reading on the Anglo-Saxon period in British history, and how amazing would it be to know what that era was like for witches and wizards? And even compared to all the countless magical people that came from Rowling's imagination, the four who founded Hogwarts must be terrifically interesting characters!
If you could put various Doctor Who Doctors and companions together for a one-off episode, who would you pair up?
Oh, I was hoping Hannah might come up with a Doctor Who question, and this is a wonderfully interesting one! (Hannah, I want your answer on this in the comments.)
First of all, I would pair up the Twelfth Doctor with Donna simply because, as this article points out, it would be hilarious. Donna would first ask what the hell "Caecilius" was doing in the TARDIS and why he was even bothering to do such a lousy impersonation of the Doctor – the accent? being all grumpy? WHAT?!
Now, the Doctor that Donna knows – the Tenth – would have to go with one of the Eleventh's companions, and I would pick post-marriage Amy and Rory – I love them best when they're together, so that's a package deal. I don't really know what we might expect to happen with these three. The Doctor might notice that Amy has succeeded in being ginger, unlike him. He would also, for once, get to meet a pretty young woman who doesn't fall for him, and that young woman's husband whom he can't call an idiot, unlike the "companions' boyfriends" that he met. He would also witness two companions whose lives don't revolve entirely around TARDIS traveling.
Because Martha is my favourite companion right after Amy and Rory, I would definitely want to see her somewhere in this mix-up. She and Nine would make up a very interesting, business-like TARDIS team, wouldn't they? Nine might also appreciate her talents more than Ten did, and I think Martha would lecture the Doctor on how he's not allowed to label all humans as "stupid apes".
Martha and Donna being taken, the only regular companion left for the Eleventh Doctor would be Rose, and I can't really see anything interesting coming out of this. Maybe I'm just biased against Rose. Anyway, I had another idea... Captain Jack Harkness. He's not one of "the" companions, but think about it, seriously! The "Captain of the Innuendo Squad" paired up with the Doctor who doesn't understand why a married couple doesn't want bunk beds – endless hilarity! Also, my favourite Doctor + my favourite supporting character from series 1-4 would mean an extra birthday for me...
What are your top 5 Disney films?
A Disney question, yay! First of all, I did some thinking on what sorts of things make my personal favourite Disney films stand out from all the good Disney films. Here is a list of things that really matter to me regarding this question. All of my Top Five don't have all of these qualities, but mostly they do.
2. The Princess and the Frog
This film carries none of the childhood nostalgia that I get from The Lion King and Pocahontas and the likes, because it came out as late as 2009 and in fact I only saw it a year ago – so I was quite surprised at how high it jumped (frog-like) into my favourites list, I simply loved it straight away! New Orleans makes a wonderfully imaginative setting and I love how the "Disney Princess" concept gets a modern update in Tiana, who is one of my favourite Disney heroines ever. She knows wishing and dreaming won't get her anywhere – she's gonna work for it! She's also got Anika Noni Rose's voice, which is such a perfect fit for a Disney princess. I'm very happy with how her relationship with Naveen develops throughout the film; they go through a lot together and actually make each other better people, so when they (spoilers, sort of) fall in love and start a life together, it feels like they have truly earned it. I really enjoy the music in this film and Charlotte, Louis and Ray (sniffles!) are some of my favourite Disney supporting characters! This is the only film on my list that I haven't heard the Finnish version of, but Tiana's voice actress (including the singing) is Laura Voutilainen, whom I liked very much as Megara in Hercules.
3. Mulan
Mulan is another wonderful heroine! She is such a great role model for anyone out there who feels like they don't fit in. She's smart, selfless and butt-kicking! She might even have actually existed! Again, the film looks beautiful and I really like the Chinese setting. It's possibly one of the funniest Disney films ever and makes me literally roar with laughter, but among the things I love most about it is the lovely relationship Mulan has with her father. "The greatest gift and honour... is having you for a daughter." Almost all of the earlier Disney heroines' relationships with their fathers were built on the fact that their mothers just weren't there, but I don't think any of their Disney Dads can top that line by Mulan's father. The soundtrack is amazing. The singing voices for both the original and the Finnish Mulan (Lea Salonga and Heidi Kyrö respectively) are very good, the scene where Mulan leaves her parents gives me the chills every single time, and this one below is one of my favourite work-out songs! (Shang's Finnish voice actor, Santeri Kinnunen, also voiced John Smith.)
4. Aladdin
Just hearing the first beats of "Arabian Nights" gets me all excited. By the time I finish watching, I think "Wow, this was even more awesome than I remembered", every single time! The setting in Agraba is full of mystery and excitement and Jafar is damn impressive as the villain. Jasmine is definitely on the smarter side of the Disney Princess line-up as she sees right through "Prince Ali's" pretense and fools Jafar into thinking she's suddenly smitten by him (I never stop giggling at that scene). Like Tiana, she gets to have adventures with Aladdin and learn things about him before she decides he's the man. The Finnish voice cast actually received some sort of a Disney award for best dubbing, with special recognition to the Finnish Genie, Vesa-Matti Loiri. He's a long-time household name over here and a man of many talents, and the energy and character that he brings to the Genie is spectacular. I do appreciate Robin Williams' portrayal as well.
5. Pocahontas
I wonder what people might think about me placing Pocahontas in my top favourites, because it seems that nobody particularly likes it. However, for me it was one of the most important films of my childhood. In all honesty, I can say that the importance I place on anti-racist and environmental values originates from how profoundly affected Little Me was by Pocahontas. Years later, when I had to give a presentation of a hero for a school assignment, I chose the real-life Pocahontas. I love the look of the film, the character designs and the colours (of the wind). Watching Pocahontas is also one of those times when being a Finn is a vast advantage, because you get to hear Arja Koriseva and Santeri Kinnunen as the leads. I don't really like Judy Kuhn's singing, whereas Arja Koriseva's voice seems to vibrate with the forces of the wind, the earth and the river that she sings about. I also find John Smith much more believable when he doesn't speak with the voice (and the American accent) of Mel Gibson. Now listen to Arja Koriseva sing like a goddess.
Honourable mentions: Fantasia because of its amazingly imaginative re-interpretation of some of the greatest compositions of classical music, and The Great Mouse Detective because it's such a fun tribute to Sherlock Holmes.
Have you seen any Jane Austen adaptations? If so, which did you like best?
I haven't seen many Jane Austen adaptations and, to be honest, I'm not terribly enthusiastic about them. In my opinion, Jane Austen's strongest asset is her distinctive, sharp and witty narrative voice – when that gets inevitably eliminated in the process of adapting to screen, the result is mostly leisurely-paced relationship dramas with very predictable endings. Therefore, I often get a little bored when watching Austen on screen. I have seen the Pride and Prejudice film from 2005, The Lizzie Bennet Diaries web series, the 1995 film and part of the 2008 miniseries of Sense and Sensibility, and the 2009 miniseries of Emma. My favourite of these would be The Lizzie Bennet Diaries because the modern update is very cleverly done! Out of the actual period dramas, the film version of Sense and Sensibility is my top pick because it has a good cast, a couple of additional scenes that really advance the characters, and beautiful directing by Ang Lee.
You're a polyglot: what's your favourite word in Finnish, Swedish, English, French and Spanish?
What an interesting question – and what a challenge! It's impossible to give definite answers to this one, but I tried to come up with something.
What's your favourite pizza topping?
Pineapple! It's one of the best fruits ever, not just in pizza – when it's fresh, actual pineapple, that is. The sickly-whiteish bits that swim around in tin cans do not deserve to be called pineapple.
Siiri L. wanted to know my Hogwarts house, wand and Patronus.
I am a Ravenclaw according to every single Hogwarts test I've ever found on the Internet, including Pottermore's, and I completely agree with the results. I have always identified with the bookish, knowledge-valuing Ravenclaw crowd, and when Pottermore revealed that the house also values creativity and originality (to the point where others call it being just plain weird), it sounded exactly like my old high school which specializes in performance arts and is locally famous as the "artsy weirdoes' school". (Note that I use the phrase as a term of endearment.)
Hannah asked...
If you could play any character in a musical and/or play, who would it be and why?
I'm going to pick one character from a musical and one from a straight play. My musical character choice would be Éponine, without a doubt. "On My Own" and "A Little Fall of Rain" are among my favourite songs from Les Misérables, and although the character in the musical is often criticized for lacking the complexities of her Victor Hugo counterpart, I think there would be plenty of chances for an actress to explore more of the derangement and instability that characterize Éponine in the novel. Everyone loves a good stage death, and Éponine departs singing a beautiful duet and fills the remaining rebels with new resolution to keep fighting. Plus, I really love that hat.
Can you rank the Dickens novels that you've read so far?
I'll be more than happy to do that! I have only read three and a half of his novels so far, plus A Christmas Carol which I'll also include in the ranking even though it's a novella. I'm seriously working on my Dickens education, though – just look at my Classics Club list! I would like to point out that I have loved every Dickens novel I have read so far, they are all brilliant in different ways. Therefore, even the works that I have placed low on this ranking are not bad – just less amazing than the ones above them.
1. A Tale of Two Cities
This one bounced straight up to my list of "all-time favourite books of literary magic which will affect me for the rest of my life" – as soon as I was finished with despairing over the cruelty of the human race and crying about that bloody guillotine. Dickens does something very different than his usual thing here; the setting is in the late 1700s exploring the devastating effects of the Revolution and the Terror on the French society, there is none of Dickens' trademark satirical humour, and the page count is just over 400. The result is an absolutely heartbreaking account on how humanity's struggle for "justice" leads to tragedy both nation-wide and in the lives of ordinary men and women. I don't think any other book ever has sent my mind reeling so wildly, both during and after reading it.
2. Nicholas Nickleby
This was my first Dickens experience and it will most likely stay high in my esteem no matter how many Dickens novels I will read after it. It is a big book in terms of length and story, covering diverse layers of Victorian society in their various pursuits. However, the focus stays on young Nicholas Nickleby of idealistic values, as he develops one of literature's loveliest bromances with poor Smike, and learns to stand his ground against his miserly uncle Ralph. Nicholas Nickleby is many things, which makes it such an engaging read – it's viciously funny and unflinchingly tragic, a broad social commentary as well as an eventful coming-of-age adventure.
3. A Christmas Carol
I'm a complete junkie for fantasy, character development and the Christmas spirit, so if there exists a story about a sore old miser finding redemption through supernatural intervention at Christmastime, written in brilliant Dickensian prose, is there anything else for me to do but adore it? As always, Dickens' masterful pen creates literary images so awe-inspiring that it is best described as pure magic.
4. Little Dorrit
I'm exactly halfway through this one while I'm writing this blog post so I won't say much right now, but I'm fairly certain that Little Dorrit will rank somewhere hereabouts once I'm finished with it. The book is very slow-paced at times, but the good parts are very good. It explores themes such as the effects of institutionalisation (in this case, in a debtors' prison), the vapid constructions of high society, and the importance of a fulfilling life in great depth. Arthur Clennam is an interestingly atypical literary hero and the reader gets to really delve into how his past experiences have shaped his personality and current views of life.
5. Oliver Twist
As I discussed in my review about a year ago, this book has some structural flaws and Oliver Twist himself is not the most interesting or realistic of child heroes, but there is still more than a fair share of brilliant bits to be found here.
Would you rather J.K. Rowling wrote a series about the Hogwarts Founders, a series about the Marauders or a series about the next generation at Hogwarts?
Each of these ideas holds its own element of intrigue, but being such a history person, I would most like to hear about how Hogwarts came to be. I just happened to do some reading on the Anglo-Saxon period in British history, and how amazing would it be to know what that era was like for witches and wizards? And even compared to all the countless magical people that came from Rowling's imagination, the four who founded Hogwarts must be terrifically interesting characters!
If you could put various Doctor Who Doctors and companions together for a one-off episode, who would you pair up?
Oh, I was hoping Hannah might come up with a Doctor Who question, and this is a wonderfully interesting one! (Hannah, I want your answer on this in the comments.)
First of all, I would pair up the Twelfth Doctor with Donna simply because, as this article points out, it would be hilarious. Donna would first ask what the hell "Caecilius" was doing in the TARDIS and why he was even bothering to do such a lousy impersonation of the Doctor – the accent? being all grumpy? WHAT?!
Now, the Doctor that Donna knows – the Tenth – would have to go with one of the Eleventh's companions, and I would pick post-marriage Amy and Rory – I love them best when they're together, so that's a package deal. I don't really know what we might expect to happen with these three. The Doctor might notice that Amy has succeeded in being ginger, unlike him. He would also, for once, get to meet a pretty young woman who doesn't fall for him, and that young woman's husband whom he can't call an idiot, unlike the "companions' boyfriends" that he met. He would also witness two companions whose lives don't revolve entirely around TARDIS traveling.
Because Martha is my favourite companion right after Amy and Rory, I would definitely want to see her somewhere in this mix-up. She and Nine would make up a very interesting, business-like TARDIS team, wouldn't they? Nine might also appreciate her talents more than Ten did, and I think Martha would lecture the Doctor on how he's not allowed to label all humans as "stupid apes".
Martha and Donna being taken, the only regular companion left for the Eleventh Doctor would be Rose, and I can't really see anything interesting coming out of this. Maybe I'm just biased against Rose. Anyway, I had another idea... Captain Jack Harkness. He's not one of "the" companions, but think about it, seriously! The "Captain of the Innuendo Squad" paired up with the Doctor who doesn't understand why a married couple doesn't want bunk beds – endless hilarity! Also, my favourite Doctor + my favourite supporting character from series 1-4 would mean an extra birthday for me...
What are your top 5 Disney films?
A Disney question, yay! First of all, I did some thinking on what sorts of things make my personal favourite Disney films stand out from all the good Disney films. Here is a list of things that really matter to me regarding this question. All of my Top Five don't have all of these qualities, but mostly they do.
- Well-rounded main characters whose background, motivations and hopes are properly explored
- Great music
- Beautiful animation
- An interesting setting
- A well-paced, eventful story that has equal measures of touching and funny moments
- A good voice cast – I watched most Disney films with Finnish dubbing first, and I still think many of the Finnish voice actors are better than the original ones, no matter how objective I try to be.
So, getting to the point, my Top 5 Disney films are...
1. The Lion King
This was an easy choice to make; there has never been and never will be a competitor to how much I adore just about everything in this film. The music is wonderful, the animation is gorgeous, I love every single character (including that classic, awesome Disney villain Scar) and no matter how many times I watch it, I'm always completely heart-broken about how Mufasa's death affects Simba way into adulthood. No other movie in the world makes me cry three times in one viewing. The story is truly inspiring and I wish I could have Timon and Pumbaa as my best friends – the Finnish voice actor for Timon, Pirkka-Pekka Petelius, really stands out. Let me give all of you non-Finns a piece of him:
2. The Princess and the Frog
This film carries none of the childhood nostalgia that I get from The Lion King and Pocahontas and the likes, because it came out as late as 2009 and in fact I only saw it a year ago – so I was quite surprised at how high it jumped (frog-like) into my favourites list, I simply loved it straight away! New Orleans makes a wonderfully imaginative setting and I love how the "Disney Princess" concept gets a modern update in Tiana, who is one of my favourite Disney heroines ever. She knows wishing and dreaming won't get her anywhere – she's gonna work for it! She's also got Anika Noni Rose's voice, which is such a perfect fit for a Disney princess. I'm very happy with how her relationship with Naveen develops throughout the film; they go through a lot together and actually make each other better people, so when they (spoilers, sort of) fall in love and start a life together, it feels like they have truly earned it. I really enjoy the music in this film and Charlotte, Louis and Ray (sniffles!) are some of my favourite Disney supporting characters! This is the only film on my list that I haven't heard the Finnish version of, but Tiana's voice actress (including the singing) is Laura Voutilainen, whom I liked very much as Megara in Hercules.
3. Mulan
Mulan is another wonderful heroine! She is such a great role model for anyone out there who feels like they don't fit in. She's smart, selfless and butt-kicking! She might even have actually existed! Again, the film looks beautiful and I really like the Chinese setting. It's possibly one of the funniest Disney films ever and makes me literally roar with laughter, but among the things I love most about it is the lovely relationship Mulan has with her father. "The greatest gift and honour... is having you for a daughter." Almost all of the earlier Disney heroines' relationships with their fathers were built on the fact that their mothers just weren't there, but I don't think any of their Disney Dads can top that line by Mulan's father. The soundtrack is amazing. The singing voices for both the original and the Finnish Mulan (Lea Salonga and Heidi Kyrö respectively) are very good, the scene where Mulan leaves her parents gives me the chills every single time, and this one below is one of my favourite work-out songs! (Shang's Finnish voice actor, Santeri Kinnunen, also voiced John Smith.)
4. Aladdin
Just hearing the first beats of "Arabian Nights" gets me all excited. By the time I finish watching, I think "Wow, this was even more awesome than I remembered", every single time! The setting in Agraba is full of mystery and excitement and Jafar is damn impressive as the villain. Jasmine is definitely on the smarter side of the Disney Princess line-up as she sees right through "Prince Ali's" pretense and fools Jafar into thinking she's suddenly smitten by him (I never stop giggling at that scene). Like Tiana, she gets to have adventures with Aladdin and learn things about him before she decides he's the man. The Finnish voice cast actually received some sort of a Disney award for best dubbing, with special recognition to the Finnish Genie, Vesa-Matti Loiri. He's a long-time household name over here and a man of many talents, and the energy and character that he brings to the Genie is spectacular. I do appreciate Robin Williams' portrayal as well.
5. Pocahontas
I wonder what people might think about me placing Pocahontas in my top favourites, because it seems that nobody particularly likes it. However, for me it was one of the most important films of my childhood. In all honesty, I can say that the importance I place on anti-racist and environmental values originates from how profoundly affected Little Me was by Pocahontas. Years later, when I had to give a presentation of a hero for a school assignment, I chose the real-life Pocahontas. I love the look of the film, the character designs and the colours (of the wind). Watching Pocahontas is also one of those times when being a Finn is a vast advantage, because you get to hear Arja Koriseva and Santeri Kinnunen as the leads. I don't really like Judy Kuhn's singing, whereas Arja Koriseva's voice seems to vibrate with the forces of the wind, the earth and the river that she sings about. I also find John Smith much more believable when he doesn't speak with the voice (and the American accent) of Mel Gibson. Now listen to Arja Koriseva sing like a goddess.
Honourable mentions: Fantasia because of its amazingly imaginative re-interpretation of some of the greatest compositions of classical music, and The Great Mouse Detective because it's such a fun tribute to Sherlock Holmes.
Have you seen any Jane Austen adaptations? If so, which did you like best?
I haven't seen many Jane Austen adaptations and, to be honest, I'm not terribly enthusiastic about them. In my opinion, Jane Austen's strongest asset is her distinctive, sharp and witty narrative voice – when that gets inevitably eliminated in the process of adapting to screen, the result is mostly leisurely-paced relationship dramas with very predictable endings. Therefore, I often get a little bored when watching Austen on screen. I have seen the Pride and Prejudice film from 2005, The Lizzie Bennet Diaries web series, the 1995 film and part of the 2008 miniseries of Sense and Sensibility, and the 2009 miniseries of Emma. My favourite of these would be The Lizzie Bennet Diaries because the modern update is very cleverly done! Out of the actual period dramas, the film version of Sense and Sensibility is my top pick because it has a good cast, a couple of additional scenes that really advance the characters, and beautiful directing by Ang Lee.
You're a polyglot: what's your favourite word in Finnish, Swedish, English, French and Spanish?
What an interesting question – and what a challenge! It's impossible to give definite answers to this one, but I tried to come up with something.
- Finnish: possibly valo, which means light (the noun). I'm not even remotely sure about this, though – it's really hard to evaluate my first language in this way! Eino Leino, one of the greatest Finnish poets (1878-1926), liked to use words with the back vowels a, o and u, and I really like the Finnish sound of them as well.
- Swedish: Swedish words are almost always cluttered with sounds like d, j, ä, g, and r (seriously, there are so many r's!) which don't make the pleasantest combinations if you ask my ears. There is also an abundance of weird phonemes which involve s in the front and a variety of other consonants right after it. Himmel is a nice, soft exception, and it means sky.
- English: Damn, this isn't any easier than the two previous ones! English is my favourite language and I'm constantly impressed by the scope and variety of its vocabulary. If I had to pick one, I might go with dramatic. It sounds exactly like what it means – dramatic!
- French: Oh, everything sounds beautiful in French, even vulgarities and words like trash ("Oh là là, this pubelle is rotting!"). Avenir is a particularly nice one, I think – future. It's rather clever too, as it's constructed from à venir, which means upcoming.
- Spanish: On my last visit to Spain, I stayed near to a village that has the word arroyo (brook) in its name, and I realized that even though the rhotic r is one of my least favourite sounds in Finnish and Swedish, in Spanish it sounds passionate and vivacious.
What's your favourite pizza topping?
Pineapple! It's one of the best fruits ever, not just in pizza – when it's fresh, actual pineapple, that is. The sickly-whiteish bits that swim around in tin cans do not deserve to be called pineapple.
Siiri L. wanted to know my Hogwarts house, wand and Patronus.
I am a Ravenclaw according to every single Hogwarts test I've ever found on the Internet, including Pottermore's, and I completely agree with the results. I have always identified with the bookish, knowledge-valuing Ravenclaw crowd, and when Pottermore revealed that the house also values creativity and originality (to the point where others call it being just plain weird), it sounded exactly like my old high school which specializes in performance arts and is locally famous as the "artsy weirdoes' school". (Note that I use the phrase as a term of endearment.)
According to Pottermore, my wand is of maple and unicorn hair, 10 inches and surprisingly swishy. Unicorns are my favourite mythological creatures and maple wands are supposed to fit for travelers and explorers who don't like to stay in one place, so I think it fits pretty well! The Patronus question is a tricky one because I don't think it's something you can choose, but I would love a wolf Patronus. Fear and hate of wolves is a deeply-rooted mindset in the Finnish population, but I've always thought they're beautiful and mysterious (though I do understand how people who live in the heavily wolf-populated areas where children are sometimes afraid to walk to school might find it hard to agree with me). The Starks' direwolves are one of my absolute favourite things in A Song of Ice and Fire!
The Ask Me Anything event finishes tomorrow with my answers to Hamlette's and Olivia's questions! :) Please feel free to share your own thoughts on the questions above!
Monday, 23 March 2015
Time for another blog birthday: Ask Me Anything!
My recent Blogger Recognition Award post gave me the chance to look back on how my blog came to be. Now, dear readers, April 15th – my blog birthday – is approaching again, and I had so much fun celebrating the occasion last year that I'm going to do it again, and in similar fashion – by hosting an Ask Me Anything event.
Ask Me Anything is quite self-explanatory – if there's any question under the Sun to which you would be interested to know my answer, here's your chance! While coming up with words of advice to new bloggers for the Blogger Recognition Award, I discussed how I think it considerably ups a blog's readability if you get the feeling that there's a real person behind the blog posts. So, this is a chance for my readers to maybe get to know me a little better, and to ask any questions that don't really fit into our normal means of blogger-reader communication – the comments section, that is.
So does Anything really mean... Anything? Basically, yes! While I'm always happy to discuss anything related to my usual blog content – books, fictional characters, trends in the culture scene, and some more books, etc. – you don't necessarily have to stick to these. The only real limits I can think of are 1) I obviously won't be giving out any personal information such as my phone number or my whereabouts and I still don't want to share any pictures of myself, 2) everything concerning my family members and friends is strictly off the Internet. Now I can't really see why anyone would have a burning desire to ask anything that oversteps these two rules, but there they are, properly worded, for clarity's sake. Obviously, I reserve the right to ignore any questions that I don't feel comfortable answering for one reason or another, but it's more a precaution than an actual worry. Honestly, the more creative and thought-provoking questions you come up with, the more excitement it will bring to me as a blogger!
I hosted my first Ask Me Anything event last year, you can see here what my readers asked back then. This year, I will give the Answer Post on the proper anniversary date, April 15th. So, you have a little over three weeks to submit your questions to the comments section of this post. Don't be shy, we'll have fun celebrating! It makes no difference whether you are a regular guest or a new visitor, an active commentator or a quiet reader – everyone is sincerely invited to celebrate the second anniversary of Music & My Mind!
Oh, in case anyone was wondering why there haven't been that many blog posts lately (because I was) – honestly, I've just got too many great blogging ideas zooming around my head and I can't decide in which order to deal with them! And as if my already-existing projects (such as all the various reading lists you can see on the top bar) weren't enough, some ungovernable part of my mind decided that now was the good time to start re-watching Doctor Who from the 2005 Series One onwards, with a notebook – yes, I really do that when I want to review something properly. So, expect crazy-long reviews of the eight series of "new" Doctor Who; I really hope to finish them by the time Series Nine arrives!
That will be the end of this not-so-short announcement – let's get ready to party!
Ask Me Anything is quite self-explanatory – if there's any question under the Sun to which you would be interested to know my answer, here's your chance! While coming up with words of advice to new bloggers for the Blogger Recognition Award, I discussed how I think it considerably ups a blog's readability if you get the feeling that there's a real person behind the blog posts. So, this is a chance for my readers to maybe get to know me a little better, and to ask any questions that don't really fit into our normal means of blogger-reader communication – the comments section, that is.
So does Anything really mean... Anything? Basically, yes! While I'm always happy to discuss anything related to my usual blog content – books, fictional characters, trends in the culture scene, and some more books, etc. – you don't necessarily have to stick to these. The only real limits I can think of are 1) I obviously won't be giving out any personal information such as my phone number or my whereabouts and I still don't want to share any pictures of myself, 2) everything concerning my family members and friends is strictly off the Internet. Now I can't really see why anyone would have a burning desire to ask anything that oversteps these two rules, but there they are, properly worded, for clarity's sake. Obviously, I reserve the right to ignore any questions that I don't feel comfortable answering for one reason or another, but it's more a precaution than an actual worry. Honestly, the more creative and thought-provoking questions you come up with, the more excitement it will bring to me as a blogger!
I hosted my first Ask Me Anything event last year, you can see here what my readers asked back then. This year, I will give the Answer Post on the proper anniversary date, April 15th. So, you have a little over three weeks to submit your questions to the comments section of this post. Don't be shy, we'll have fun celebrating! It makes no difference whether you are a regular guest or a new visitor, an active commentator or a quiet reader – everyone is sincerely invited to celebrate the second anniversary of Music & My Mind!
Oh, in case anyone was wondering why there haven't been that many blog posts lately (because I was) – honestly, I've just got too many great blogging ideas zooming around my head and I can't decide in which order to deal with them! And as if my already-existing projects (such as all the various reading lists you can see on the top bar) weren't enough, some ungovernable part of my mind decided that now was the good time to start re-watching Doctor Who from the 2005 Series One onwards, with a notebook – yes, I really do that when I want to review something properly. So, expect crazy-long reviews of the eight series of "new" Doctor Who; I really hope to finish them by the time Series Nine arrives!
That will be the end of this not-so-short announcement – let's get ready to party!
Monday, 2 March 2015
Blogger Recognition Award
Hamlette has awarded me with the Blogger Recognition Award! Salutations and thanks to you, Hamlette – I hope you already know how much I appreciate and admire your dedication to your blogs, those fun blog events you have hosted, and all those vastly intelligent comments you have made while visiting here. You probably also know how eagerly I'll jump at any kind of blog challenge or tag that is thrown my way, so here I go!
Rules and Regulations:
Rules and Regulations:
- Attach the award.
- Thank the person who nominated you.
- Provide a link to the original post at Edge of Night
- Give a brief story of how your blog got started and a piece or two of advice for new bloggers.
- Select 15 blogs to nominate.
- Comment on each nominee's blog and let them know that you've nominated them.
How it began
Somewhere around the spring of 2013 I started having the feeling that I had quite a lot to say about the way I experienced literature, music and drama. At the time I hardly had any people in my life who shared those interests with the same enthusiasm and critical eye as I did, so because of the lack of arts-related face-to-face communication, I had the idea of putting up a blog. I remembered my favourite literature course in (the Finnish equivalent of) high school where our assignments included reading a controversial classic novel and writing a review on it. Even though I read Gustave Flaubert's Madame Bovary for that assignment and I didn't appreciate it much, that course was among the best of my high school experiences because the teacher was the best ever and I discovered that writing reviews was something that really resonated with me.
The best decisions I've made in my life have always been spur-of-the-moment. Once the idea of starting a culture blog had settled nicely in my head, I spent the next day or two setting up an account on Blogger, and on April 15th, 2013 I wrote my first blog post.
Many different bloggers served as inspiration and role models for Music & My Mind, but there was a person with the online-name Frankie Savage who deserves a special mention. She was my friend in the Blogiverse as well as in real life, and she was the one who answered my silly questions when I first couldn't figure out how Blogger worked. The reason why I have to refer to Frankie in past tense is that she sadly passed away just before Christmas in 2014, due to a long and serious illness. She was just 24 years old and one of the wisest, strongest, simply the best people I have ever known. All the comments on this blog made by Frankie Savage or Kristallikettu are hers, and though I'm over the worst shock of her passing, it still makes me terribly sad to think that I'll never get to talk to her again. Still, I'm glad I'm able to at least show her a bit of gratitude in this blog post.
Advice for new bloggers
- First and foremost, write about the things that interest you, in a style that feels natural to you!
- Using labels and tags on your blog posts makes it loads, and I mean it, loads easier for your readers to browse around your blog and target the posts that would most interest them, and to get a general overview on the topics that you write about.
- Experiment with different forms of writing. For example, if you have review blog like me, you don't always have to write the regular kinds of reviews. You could do Top Ten lists, comparison posts, open letters... Just use your imagination! It will make your blog so much more interesting.
- Be cautious with your blog's layout. Most people find neon-green text on a bright red background a little irritating to read.
- Even if your blog is not intended as a diary of your personal life and you should always be very careful about sharing personal details online, I would still suggest that you give your blog a little touch of your personality. I like to feel like what I'm reading comes from a real person, rather than a fact-sprouting machine. Make your blog sound like you, write an introduction page that makes readers feel welcome, and demonstrate how the things you write about stem from your real-life experiences.
- This is something I should really work on myself: visit other blogs as often as you can, and look out for new blogs to add on your reading list. You want people to comment on your blog, right? The best way to achieve this is commenting on other people's blogs. Also, participate in any interesting blogging events that you can find. They are always loads of fun (if they are hosted well) and it's one of the best ways to find bloggers who share your interests and expand your social blogging circles.
Now, nominating 15 other blogs is the tricky part. Like I said, I haven't been very actively working on my blog circles, so I'll just see how many nominees I can come up with.
- Hayden at The Story Girl
- Mariah Martinez at Godwottery Shenanigans
- Miss Dashwood at Yet Another Period Drama Blog
- Miss Laurie at Old-Fashioned Charm
- Siiri L. at Some Superfluous Opinions
- And a posthumous nomination for dearest Frankie Savage
Happy blogging and blog-surfing to you all!
Saturday, 21 February 2015
The Nominees for Best Original Song Academy Award in 2015
The 87th Academy Awards will be taking place on Sunday, and I'm hugely excited to be once again having an Oscar Party with my best friends – unlike last year, now I've actually seen some of the nominated films: Boyhood, The Grand Budapest Hotel, The Theory of Everything, The Imitation Game and the last Hobbit film.
However, none of those films are going to be the real subject of this post. Just like last year, I'm going to rank the nominees for Best Original Song and comment on them – again, without having seen the movies for which these songs were written. All in all, though, I have to say that the competition in this category is appallingly mediocre in my opinion. There is no Let It Go this year. Alright, let's take a look at the five nominees. Or a listen.
However, none of those films are going to be the real subject of this post. Just like last year, I'm going to rank the nominees for Best Original Song and comment on them – again, without having seen the movies for which these songs were written. All in all, though, I have to say that the competition in this category is appallingly mediocre in my opinion. There is no Let It Go this year. Alright, let's take a look at the five nominees. Or a listen.
#5. 'I'm Not Gonna Miss You' from Glen Campbell... I'll Be Me
Music and lyrics by Glen Campbell and Julian Raymond
This melody and the instrumental background bore me so much that I could use this as a lullaby. Except that I've actually made a "go to sleep" playlist for myself and I tend to only include songs that I like in there. I don't like this song at all. I have no patience for the kind of break-up songs where they say "I don't need you in my life" but really they think the opposite and they're just desperate for attention.
#4. 'Everything Is Awesome' from The Lego Movie
Music and lyrics by Shawn Patterson
I still haven't figured out exactly what a song like this – with lyrics about as meaningful as an empty balloon and not even a decent dance beat to save it – is doing on a list of nominees for the Academy Awards. Seriously, try listening to this so that you actually concentrate on the lyrics. Did you? Yep, I know – that's a minute and a half that you'll never get back.
#3. 'Glory' from Selma
Music and lyrics by John Stephens and Lonnie Lynn
I liked how this song started off. The background instruments set the atmosphere very well and the chorus works. Then the rap verses kick in, with lyrics so overwhelmingly preachy that they must have been written while ticking off the "Most Clichéd Phrases for Freedom-fighting Songs" list. If you want to handle a theme like this with beauty and earnestness, try a little subtlety, please.
#2. 'Grateful' from Beyond the Lights
Music and lyrics by Diane Warren
Finally, moving up on the list to songs that do not annoy me in almost every possible way. "Grateful" is very listenable indeed. Too bad that practically every female pop singer does a variation of the "I endured hardships but I'm glad about it because it made me a stronger person" ballad and this song doesn't have anything terribly interesting or creative to say on the subject.
And the Oscar should go to... 'Lost Stars' from Begin Again
Music and lyrics by Gregg Alexander and Danielle Brisebois
I wouldn't say this is a great song, but it's the only one out of these nominees that doesn't feel pretentious, boring or meaningless to me. It has a nice, relaxed feel about it, but if you listen to the lyrics properly it is actually quite thoughtful. I will of course always appreciate a touch of the piano and the guitar on the background, and the chorus has a good beat about it.
Are you going to watch the award show this year? How much do you usually care about the Original Song category? I'm off to do some more Oscar blogging!
Saturday, 14 February 2015
Romantic Duets for Valentine's Day
Romantic duets are one of the basic ingredients in the musical genre – which is why they have to be really good in order to stand out from the mass. A simple, dull "I love you", "I love you too" will not do. The best lovers' duets express joy and affection, and occasionally the hardships of love, without resorting to sappy lyrics riddled with clichés.
So, what else should a musical-loving blogger do on a Valentine's Day than list her Top Ten romantic musical duets? I know, right!
9. 'Sixteen Going On Seventeen'
7. 'As Long As You're Mine'
5. 'I'll Cover You'
2. 'Last Night of the World'
1. 'All I Ask Of You'
So, what else should a musical-loving blogger do on a Valentine's Day than list her Top Ten romantic musical duets? I know, right!
10. 'We Kiss in the Shadow'
The King and I
Tuptim and Lun Tha
Music by Richard Rodgers
Lyrics by Oscar Hammerstein II
Tuptim and Lun Tha have to meet in secret because Tuptim is a concubine of the King of Siam. The agony of forbidden love ensues. The lyrics aren't as memorable as some of the others on this list, but I do like the melody.
Tuptim and Lun Tha
Music by Richard Rodgers
Lyrics by Oscar Hammerstein II
Tuptim and Lun Tha have to meet in secret because Tuptim is a concubine of the King of Siam. The agony of forbidden love ensues. The lyrics aren't as memorable as some of the others on this list, but I do like the melody.
9. 'Sixteen Going On Seventeen'
The Sound of Music
Liesl and Rolf
Music by Richard Rodgers
Lyrics by Oscar Hammerstein II
Alright, so this song is maybe a tiny bit depressing in hindsight, knowing what Rolf decides to do with his life in the end. I think for me, most of the appeal is in the specific performance by Charmian Carr and Daniel Truhitte in the film version (which I've linked above) rather than in the song itself, which frankly doesn't have an awful lot to say. I just love Liesl's dress and the dance in the gazebo.
8. 'A Heart Full of Love'
Music by Richard Rodgers
Lyrics by Oscar Hammerstein II
Alright, so this song is maybe a tiny bit depressing in hindsight, knowing what Rolf decides to do with his life in the end. I think for me, most of the appeal is in the specific performance by Charmian Carr and Daniel Truhitte in the film version (which I've linked above) rather than in the song itself, which frankly doesn't have an awful lot to say. I just love Liesl's dress and the dance in the gazebo.
8. 'A Heart Full of Love'
Les Misérables
Marius and Cosette
Music by Claude-Michel Schönberg
Lyrics by Alain Boublil and Herbert Kretzmer
Music by Claude-Michel Schönberg
Lyrics by Alain Boublil and Herbert Kretzmer
I adore every bit of music that Claude-Michel Schönberg has ever composed, but even considering we're in the realm of theatre where the rules of credibility are frequently experimented with, I find myself shaking my head at Marius and Cosette who vow eternal love after literally just bumping to each other on the street for a couple of seconds.
7. 'As Long As You're Mine'
Wicked
Elphaba and Fiyero
Music and lyrics by Stephen Schwartz
Rather than a promise of eternity, Elphaba and Fiyero go for "just for this moment". I love the intro to this song, it enticingly foreshadows the passion for life and the slightly fatalistic tone of the rest of the tune.
Music and lyrics by Stephen Schwartz
Rather than a promise of eternity, Elphaba and Fiyero go for "just for this moment". I love the intro to this song, it enticingly foreshadows the passion for life and the slightly fatalistic tone of the rest of the tune.
6. 'Mountain Duet'
Chess
Florence and Anatoly
Music by Benny Andersson and Björn Ulvaeus
Lyrics by Tim Rice and Björn Ulvaeus
Music by Benny Andersson and Björn Ulvaeus
Lyrics by Tim Rice and Björn Ulvaeus
Once again we get a bit of a different angle to the traditional "love duet" because this is set in a reluctant, awkward meeting between Anatoly the Russian chess player and Florence, the assistant to his American opponent. It begins with the characters wondering what the heck they are supposed to be doing here, and then Anatoly goes "Listen, I hate to break up the mood..." And the mood really gets going from there!
5. 'I'll Cover You'
RENT
Angel and Collins
Lyrics and music by Jonathan Larson
I'm sure I've already gushed about the earnestness of Angel and Collins, the absolute joy that this song expresses, and Angel's overall awesomeness as a character. Lyrics, melody, mood, characters, I just adore the whole package.
Lyrics and music by Jonathan Larson
I'm sure I've already gushed about the earnestness of Angel and Collins, the absolute joy that this song expresses, and Angel's overall awesomeness as a character. Lyrics, melody, mood, characters, I just adore the whole package.
4. 'One Hand, One Heart'
West Side Story
Tony and Maria
Music by Leonard Bernstein
Lyrics by Stephen Sondheim
Music by Leonard Bernstein
Lyrics by Stephen Sondheim
This is on a much more solemn side. So why am I pointing the finger at Marius and Cosette's sudden confessions of love but ranked Maria and Tony practically rehearsing their wedding on fourth place? Well, I think West Side Story devotes a bit more more time and explanation to the main couple's character histories and setting up the premise that their lives are lacking fulfillment which they try to patch up with an admittedly hasty commitment. The tune overall has a beautiful simplicity to it. If I ever happen to get married, I want this song at my wedding.
3. 'Come What May'
3. 'Come What May'
Moulin Rouge!
Christian and Satine
Music and lyrics by David Baerwald
What power there is in three short words, 'Come what may'. I never get bored of this song! Once again, the tactic of starting soft and quiet and building up to a massive power blend of two voices works wonders.
Music and lyrics by David Baerwald
What power there is in three short words, 'Come what may'. I never get bored of this song! Once again, the tactic of starting soft and quiet and building up to a massive power blend of two voices works wonders.
2. 'Last Night of the World'
Miss Saigon
Kim and Chris
Music by Claude-Michel Schönberg
Lyrics by Alain Boublil and Richard Maltby Jr.
Claude-Michel Schönberg does it again, there's something about this melody that makes me obsess over it. The world around Kim and Chris is dark and dangerous, but they have this lovely song. And the solo saxophone.
Music by Claude-Michel Schönberg
Lyrics by Alain Boublil and Richard Maltby Jr.
Claude-Michel Schönberg does it again, there's something about this melody that makes me obsess over it. The world around Kim and Chris is dark and dangerous, but they have this lovely song. And the solo saxophone.
1. 'All I Ask Of You'
The Phantom of the Opera
Raoul and Christine
Music by Andrew Lloyd Webber
Lyrics by Charles Hart and Richard Stilgoe
Music by Andrew Lloyd Webber
Lyrics by Charles Hart and Richard Stilgoe
There never was any debate in my mind as to which duet should be the top of the list. Out of the overall amazing score in The Phantom of the Opera, this song has always been my favourite (though Past the Point of No Return and The Music of the Night aren't far behind). As a rule, I turn into an emotional wreck as soon as 'Anywhere you go, let me go too' comes out. I'm also eternally thankful to whoever oversaw the casting of the 25th Anniversary performance because they gave us the chance to hear Sierra Boggess and Hadley Fraser sing this song to perfection.
Thursday, 15 January 2015
Action Holmes
I love to blog about things that I've enjoyed, because what better way to show appreciation and pass the goodness to others who might enjoy it too? I also love to blog about things that I intensely dislike, I'll admit – I absolutely adore the creative challenge of expressing my disapproval in the sharpest, yet most elegant manner possible. (My readers may have noticed that I had way too much fun reviewing the novel Le Fantôme de l'Opéra.)
So what is it like to blog about things that... just don't evoke any emotions, positive or negative? I'll tell you, and I'm probably not alone with this opinion: it's an absolute, brain-freezing writer's block. And that's exactly the reaction I get out of the two recent Sherlock Holmes films directed by Guy Ritchie, so bear with me when I try to "make bricks without clay", as the great detective himself might have said. This post has been in the draft stage for ages.
Anyone who has paid the least bit of attention to current trends in the entertainment world will know that we are living in a fairly recent but extremely productive wave of Sherlock Holmes zeal. We now have two modern interpretations of Mr Holmes sleuthing away on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean, and an older version played by Sir Ian McKellen to look forward to next year. However, the first notable take on Holmes' adventures on the 21st century screen was the big-budget blockbuster Sherlock Holmes of 2009, directed by Guy Ritchie and starring Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law as Holmes and Watson. A sequel, A Game of Shadows, soon followed, and we might expect a trilogy-fication to this franchise some day.
I saw the first film before reading any of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's works, but it was quite interesting to see that when I did read a couple of those books and short stories and then watched both films, it didn't really affect how I viewed them. The experience was equally non-plussing both times!
Most people whose reviews I've read seem to find A Game of Shadows an improvement from Sherlock Holmes – I disagree. For me, the first film was a generally bland experience with a couple of good things going for it, and the sequel was just unremarkable in every respect. Let me explain why.
The main characters are, of course, the same in both films: Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson, portrayed by Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law respectively. Well, even before I'd read any of the original stories which would have provided me with expectations as to what Sherlock Holmes was "supposed to be like", I wasn't really buying Downey Jr. as Holmes. I would assume that even a person who knows nothing about this character would expect to see someone very British with a remarkable skill of observation, and Downey Jr. doesn't really deliver any of this. My main issue is not the fact that these films have re-imagined the character as more action-oriented and physically capable – I was just confused that they so absolutely under-used Holmes' celebrated intellect! The only scenes where I can truly remember him being the smartest person in the crowd was the boxing scene in the first film where he predicts his opponent's moves, and the final confrontation with Moriarty in A Game of Shadows which is a little too similar, except that Moriarty can do the same trick as well. Does nobody else find it weird that in the first film, instead of using his deductive powers to figure out what happened, he does some psycho pentagram-and-drugs ritual and apparently finds the solution in... I don't know, some drug-induced higher consciousness? Doesn't that kind of go against the very essence of what makes the character of Sherlock Holmes so special?
Now I do admit that I am very partial to Jude Law. I actually like it very much that Dr Watson in these films is close to Holmes' equal in terms of age and useful skills – instead of the cuddly older man he's usually portrayed as, or a Nigel Bruce dunderhead for goodness' sake. Until Sherlock came up and gave us the gift of Martin Freeman's Watson, I think this kind of an approach was quite unique in Holmesian adaptations. Downey Jr. and Law also work really well together, even when their exploits are a bit too messy and over-the-top for my liking. Of course the boys are allowed to have fun and be bros on their adventures, but these films generate suspense out of the numerous, massively special-effectful action sequences rather than the mystery of the case at hand. This is especially apparent in A Game of Shadows where we get the interminably long train ride which includes a clown-makeup-wearing Holmes, and a likewise interminable chase through the woods which seems to take especially long because of all the slow-mo.
Both of the films have their sinister villain and their obligatory filler female character, and I think the first film has the better one in both departments. While I'm not entirely convinced that a society of dark magic works especially well as a villain entity against Sherlock Holmes, Mark Strong's Lord Blackwood makes my blood freeze. In A Game of Shadows we're then given Professor Moriarty – Holmes' The Enemy – and I couldn't figure out why I was expected to be especially apprehensive or impressed about the character Jared Harris was playing. In the best hero/villain constructions, I find that the opponents often have some vital element in common which is a source of attraction as well as disdain for them both – the more subtle the mirror effect is the better, but it's definitely there. However, this film's Sherlock Holmes and Professor Moriarty don't have much anything in common, no reason at all why they would share this kind of a bond.
As for the obligatory filler women in both films – yes, I'm going to call them that. They seem to exist for the sole purpose of avoiding criticism about a male-heavy cast, and the plot would very well survive without them. Irene Adler is better served in the first film in terms of "getting to do stuff", but the character is both unremarkably portrayed by Rachel McAdams and written in the most unimaginative manner possible – she's Holmes' ex-girlfriend. Even before I read A Scandal in Bohemia, this treatment had a suspicious "easy way out" feel about it. In A Game of Shadows, the female lead is taken over by Noomi Rapace, and I want to make sure you know she's actually a very impressive actress. However, as Madame Simza her main function is to say a couple of Gypsy-stereotypical lines about the power of Tarot cards and have a problematic brother. I love her costumes, though. Kelly Reilly's Mary Morstan Watson, who appears on both films, has no personality at all, except perhaps a slightly annoying one. However, I was positively surprised at how she was involved in the resolution for A Game of Shadows. These films are never abundant in exquisitely clever plot twists, but that one at least came close.
In both of these films, I like the music and the production design very much. Hans Zimmer's music is very atmospheric and suspenseful, with a feeling of adventure and mystery. I find myself quite immersed in the Victorian setting, which is a bit dark and gritty and includes other layers of society besides top hatted gentlemen and hoop-skirted ladies. There is so much more to this long era in English history than Victorian values and a perpetually mourning queen; for example, great technological advancement, which is handled in both films. Of course, a World War geek like me would get excited about the WWI foreshadowing in A Game of Shadows, even though I spent the rest of the film battling with my attention span.
I just don't see why the solution for marketing Holmes and Watson to a new generation would have to be "make Sherlock Holmes an ungroomed, badass action hero and blow stuff up". Why does the Great Detective have to be dumbed down? Why do we need elaborate action sequences at the cost of a well-balanced, properly contained plot? The steadily expanding part of my brain that is possessed by the "nitpicker of dramatic structure" personality is especially peeved by the fact that Holmes fake-dies twice in A Game of Shadows, twice in the space of one movie which frankly isn't otherwise very interested in providing emotional, character-building moments! Then we have to watch Dr Watson being devastated over the loss of his friend, twice, knowing perfectly well that Holmes is going to jump back up any minute. Lord Blackwood's fake death in the first film has much more weight and purpose to it, and when he dies for real it happens on an awesome, half-constructed Tower Bridge. Have I told you before that my love affair with London began from seeing a picture of Tower Bridge?
So, I hope I've provided something of an explanation to why I find Guy Ritchie's take on Sherlock Holmes so unremarkable, and why I was more bored watching A Game of Shadows than watching the first film. What about you? Is an action film portrayal of the Great Detective refreshing or blasphemous in your opinion, unless it's something in between? Do you like one film more than the other? Do you want to see a third film in this franchise? Do you feel like ranting in defense of or against Downey Jr.'s British accent?
There was an unexpected couple of days' gap in my Sherlockian blog posts, but now that I'm back in business there are still two more similarly themed blog posts to come. I'm going to do a joint review of A Study in Scarlet and The Sign of Four and finish off by mercilessly pitting Sherlock and Elementary against each other while having a shameful amount of fun doing so. It's been great to see how willingly and insightfully you readers comment about Holmesian things, and I sincerely invite you to continue doing so, perhaps even after I'm finished (for the time being) with this theme!
So what is it like to blog about things that... just don't evoke any emotions, positive or negative? I'll tell you, and I'm probably not alone with this opinion: it's an absolute, brain-freezing writer's block. And that's exactly the reaction I get out of the two recent Sherlock Holmes films directed by Guy Ritchie, so bear with me when I try to "make bricks without clay", as the great detective himself might have said. This post has been in the draft stage for ages.
Anyone who has paid the least bit of attention to current trends in the entertainment world will know that we are living in a fairly recent but extremely productive wave of Sherlock Holmes zeal. We now have two modern interpretations of Mr Holmes sleuthing away on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean, and an older version played by Sir Ian McKellen to look forward to next year. However, the first notable take on Holmes' adventures on the 21st century screen was the big-budget blockbuster Sherlock Holmes of 2009, directed by Guy Ritchie and starring Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law as Holmes and Watson. A sequel, A Game of Shadows, soon followed, and we might expect a trilogy-fication to this franchise some day.
I saw the first film before reading any of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's works, but it was quite interesting to see that when I did read a couple of those books and short stories and then watched both films, it didn't really affect how I viewed them. The experience was equally non-plussing both times!
Most people whose reviews I've read seem to find A Game of Shadows an improvement from Sherlock Holmes – I disagree. For me, the first film was a generally bland experience with a couple of good things going for it, and the sequel was just unremarkable in every respect. Let me explain why.
The main characters are, of course, the same in both films: Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson, portrayed by Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law respectively. Well, even before I'd read any of the original stories which would have provided me with expectations as to what Sherlock Holmes was "supposed to be like", I wasn't really buying Downey Jr. as Holmes. I would assume that even a person who knows nothing about this character would expect to see someone very British with a remarkable skill of observation, and Downey Jr. doesn't really deliver any of this. My main issue is not the fact that these films have re-imagined the character as more action-oriented and physically capable – I was just confused that they so absolutely under-used Holmes' celebrated intellect! The only scenes where I can truly remember him being the smartest person in the crowd was the boxing scene in the first film where he predicts his opponent's moves, and the final confrontation with Moriarty in A Game of Shadows which is a little too similar, except that Moriarty can do the same trick as well. Does nobody else find it weird that in the first film, instead of using his deductive powers to figure out what happened, he does some psycho pentagram-and-drugs ritual and apparently finds the solution in... I don't know, some drug-induced higher consciousness? Doesn't that kind of go against the very essence of what makes the character of Sherlock Holmes so special?
Now I do admit that I am very partial to Jude Law. I actually like it very much that Dr Watson in these films is close to Holmes' equal in terms of age and useful skills – instead of the cuddly older man he's usually portrayed as, or a Nigel Bruce dunderhead for goodness' sake. Until Sherlock came up and gave us the gift of Martin Freeman's Watson, I think this kind of an approach was quite unique in Holmesian adaptations. Downey Jr. and Law also work really well together, even when their exploits are a bit too messy and over-the-top for my liking. Of course the boys are allowed to have fun and be bros on their adventures, but these films generate suspense out of the numerous, massively special-effectful action sequences rather than the mystery of the case at hand. This is especially apparent in A Game of Shadows where we get the interminably long train ride which includes a clown-makeup-wearing Holmes, and a likewise interminable chase through the woods which seems to take especially long because of all the slow-mo.
Both of the films have their sinister villain and their obligatory filler female character, and I think the first film has the better one in both departments. While I'm not entirely convinced that a society of dark magic works especially well as a villain entity against Sherlock Holmes, Mark Strong's Lord Blackwood makes my blood freeze. In A Game of Shadows we're then given Professor Moriarty – Holmes' The Enemy – and I couldn't figure out why I was expected to be especially apprehensive or impressed about the character Jared Harris was playing. In the best hero/villain constructions, I find that the opponents often have some vital element in common which is a source of attraction as well as disdain for them both – the more subtle the mirror effect is the better, but it's definitely there. However, this film's Sherlock Holmes and Professor Moriarty don't have much anything in common, no reason at all why they would share this kind of a bond.
As for the obligatory filler women in both films – yes, I'm going to call them that. They seem to exist for the sole purpose of avoiding criticism about a male-heavy cast, and the plot would very well survive without them. Irene Adler is better served in the first film in terms of "getting to do stuff", but the character is both unremarkably portrayed by Rachel McAdams and written in the most unimaginative manner possible – she's Holmes' ex-girlfriend. Even before I read A Scandal in Bohemia, this treatment had a suspicious "easy way out" feel about it. In A Game of Shadows, the female lead is taken over by Noomi Rapace, and I want to make sure you know she's actually a very impressive actress. However, as Madame Simza her main function is to say a couple of Gypsy-stereotypical lines about the power of Tarot cards and have a problematic brother. I love her costumes, though. Kelly Reilly's Mary Morstan Watson, who appears on both films, has no personality at all, except perhaps a slightly annoying one. However, I was positively surprised at how she was involved in the resolution for A Game of Shadows. These films are never abundant in exquisitely clever plot twists, but that one at least came close.
In both of these films, I like the music and the production design very much. Hans Zimmer's music is very atmospheric and suspenseful, with a feeling of adventure and mystery. I find myself quite immersed in the Victorian setting, which is a bit dark and gritty and includes other layers of society besides top hatted gentlemen and hoop-skirted ladies. There is so much more to this long era in English history than Victorian values and a perpetually mourning queen; for example, great technological advancement, which is handled in both films. Of course, a World War geek like me would get excited about the WWI foreshadowing in A Game of Shadows, even though I spent the rest of the film battling with my attention span.
I just don't see why the solution for marketing Holmes and Watson to a new generation would have to be "make Sherlock Holmes an ungroomed, badass action hero and blow stuff up". Why does the Great Detective have to be dumbed down? Why do we need elaborate action sequences at the cost of a well-balanced, properly contained plot? The steadily expanding part of my brain that is possessed by the "nitpicker of dramatic structure" personality is especially peeved by the fact that Holmes fake-dies twice in A Game of Shadows, twice in the space of one movie which frankly isn't otherwise very interested in providing emotional, character-building moments! Then we have to watch Dr Watson being devastated over the loss of his friend, twice, knowing perfectly well that Holmes is going to jump back up any minute. Lord Blackwood's fake death in the first film has much more weight and purpose to it, and when he dies for real it happens on an awesome, half-constructed Tower Bridge. Have I told you before that my love affair with London began from seeing a picture of Tower Bridge?
So, I hope I've provided something of an explanation to why I find Guy Ritchie's take on Sherlock Holmes so unremarkable, and why I was more bored watching A Game of Shadows than watching the first film. What about you? Is an action film portrayal of the Great Detective refreshing or blasphemous in your opinion, unless it's something in between? Do you like one film more than the other? Do you want to see a third film in this franchise? Do you feel like ranting in defense of or against Downey Jr.'s British accent?
There was an unexpected couple of days' gap in my Sherlockian blog posts, but now that I'm back in business there are still two more similarly themed blog posts to come. I'm going to do a joint review of A Study in Scarlet and The Sign of Four and finish off by mercilessly pitting Sherlock and Elementary against each other while having a shameful amount of fun doing so. It's been great to see how willingly and insightfully you readers comment about Holmesian things, and I sincerely invite you to continue doing so, perhaps even after I'm finished (for the time being) with this theme!
Sunday, 11 January 2015
5 + 1 screen adaptations of The Hound of the Baskervilles
It is quite safe to say that The Hound of the Baskervilles is the most well-known of Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson's many adventures. One can only imagine what a craze it induced in 1901 when it started appearing in The Strand Magazine in serial form eight years after Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's pen tipped Mr Holmes down the Reichenbach Falls, and nowadays it serves as an introduction to Sherlock Holmes for many curious readers – despite the fact that A Study in Scarlet is the first book in the Holmes canon, in publishing order as well as chronologically.
The Hound of the Baskervilles is also by far the most screen-adapted Holmes story. There have been films, TV films and serials all across the globe by various production companies – the BBC alone has commissioned three adaptations of this story over the years. As I liked the book so much and the long, long list of screen adaptations looked like a rather fun field for investigation, I set out on a mission to find The Best Adaptation. I'll admit right now, though, that I've only watched through five (plus one) of them so far. I picked out the ones that are most well-known, easily available, and represent different decades in film and television history.
So, here's a condensed list of the adaptations I'll be comparing, before I go into them in more detail:
Now that I've made clear how I'll be comparing the different adaptations, let's finally move on to business! Here are the five screen adaptations of The Hound of the Baskervilles that I've chosen for this post, in chronological order.
Oh, by the way, there's also an episode in Elementary called "The Hound of the Cancer Cells". It has nothing to do with Sir Arthur Conan Doyle except the clumsy wordplay in the title.
The Hound of the Baskervilles is also by far the most screen-adapted Holmes story. There have been films, TV films and serials all across the globe by various production companies – the BBC alone has commissioned three adaptations of this story over the years. As I liked the book so much and the long, long list of screen adaptations looked like a rather fun field for investigation, I set out on a mission to find The Best Adaptation. I'll admit right now, though, that I've only watched through five (plus one) of them so far. I picked out the ones that are most well-known, easily available, and represent different decades in film and television history.
So, here's a condensed list of the adaptations I'll be comparing, before I go into them in more detail:
- The 20th Century Fox film from 1939, starring Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce as Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson
- The Hammer film from 1959, starring Peter Cushing and André Morell
- The BBC serial from 1982, starring Tom Baker and Terence Rigby
- The Granada TV film from 1988, starring Jeremy Brett and Edward Hardwick
- The BBC TV film from 2002, starring Richard Roxburgh and Ian Hart
- ... and what's with the "+ 1"??? You'll find out... Or you might have guessed already.
In order to make a fair comparison of all these very diverse adaptations, I also made up a list of certain points of assessment – these are elements that, having read the original novel, I feel are important to have in a good adaptation of The Hound of the Baskervilles. The elements I'm going to compare in all of these adaptations are:
- Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson – how they work as individual characters, but most importantly what their relationship is like. Do they have the all-important chemistry with each other? Do both of them get enough to do? I'm paying special attention to their reunion scene as I think that's an excellent marker on how the screenwriter, director and actors perceive the Holmes&Watson dynamic.
- The supporting cast. One of my favorite things about the book was Sir Henry's neighbours! Therefore, a good adaptation has to have memorable supporting characters, and if they actually match with their book counterparts, that's a definite plus. I'm going to mention the supporting characters that made the biggest impression on me, good or bad. Just to be clear, Sir Henry will also be considered a supporting character – I know it might be a bit of a stretch, especially as he actually gets top billing in one of the adaptations, but I don't want a third wheel in the Holmes&Watson space! Oh, and if you've read my review on the novel, you'll know how important dear Dr Mortimer is to me – any adaptation that doesn't get him right simply can't get into my good books, at least not entirely.
- The Dartmoor setting. In the book, there's a complete change in atmosphere as the setting moves to Sir Henry's home in Dartmoor, and I want to see that on screen as well. I want to feel the bleakness and danger on the moor and the depressing heaviness of Baskerville Hall that Dr Watson describes to Holmes in his reports.
- The flow of the story. Whether it's a film or a miniseries, the plot has to advance and build up the story and the characters to relevant directions. Adapting from book to screen always involves adding scenes here and chopping off from there, but some screenwriters succeed better than others. Adding completely pointless scenes and inducing boredom while watching will be frowned upon.
- The final hound chase scene. It's not just one scene among the others – everyone spends so much time speculating about the old legend and whether there's really a hound on the moor, that when it finally appears, it had better pay off.
Now that I've made clear how I'll be comparing the different adaptations, let's finally move on to business! Here are the five screen adaptations of The Hound of the Baskervilles that I've chosen for this post, in chronological order.
Basil Rathbone & Nigel Bruce film, 1939
 |
| Left to right: Dr Watson, Dr Mortimer, Sherlock Holmes, Sir Henry |
Screenplay by Ernest Pascal
Directed by Sidney Canfield
Running time 1 h 20 min
Holmes and Watson
This is kind of a sad situation. I really like watching Rathbone's Holmes, he very much looks the part and has got so much style. Nigel Bruce's Watson, however, is a complete idiot. There's just no other way to put it. Dr Watson in this film speaks almost exclusively in questions and is made such a dumb sidekick that it just makes me cringe cringe cringe from start to finish. If Sherlock Holmes is supposed to possess such a superior brain, why on Earth does he put up with this film's Watson? Why does he send him off to Dartmoor as Sir Henry's protection, or let him carry a gun? How did this Dr Watson even graduate from medical school?! The reunion scene is the most cringe-worthy in the entire film. First, Holmes shows up in a disguise and Watson... he... tries to face off the "stranger" by loudly claiming that he's the Great Sherlock Holmes. This scene would be a total head-desk moment even if Holmes himself wasn't standing right next to him, listening to it all. Then he reveals himself to Watson, who spends the rest of the scene sulking like a little kid. This, dear audience, is what 1939 Hollywood made of the most notorious friendship portrayed in literature.
The supporting cast
Richard Greene, who plays Sir Henry, was billed as the main actor in this film because he was, at the time, more well-known than Rathbone and Bruce, for whom this was the first in a series of Sherlock Holmes films. Greene is pretty much the typical, romantic male lead that films in those days and for decades since liked to have, but he plays the part charmingly enough. Wendy Barrie as Beryl Stapleton is quite a lifeless "pretty blonde girl" and her accent is terrible, which is quite bizarre as the actress is actually English! The household staff at Baskerville Hall are called Mr and Mrs Barryman for some unfathomable reason. Mr Frankland is particularly entertaining in this adaptation, whereas Dr Mortimer is an occultist who holds séances with his wife... Yes, you read that correctly. Isn't it just terrible? He doesn't even obsess about skulls in this film. Apparently, skull-collecting is a much more suitable hobby for the film's baddie than butterfly-collecting, so they give Dr Mortimer's skulls to Stapleton in this film. No one, I repeat, NO ONE should ever ever ever take Dr Mortimer's skulls from him. This blogger is not happy.
The Dartmoor setting
I'm actually giggling to myself now, because I'm about to write: this movie has a Stonehenge in Dartmoor. I didn't find myself much affected by the atmosphere in Dartmoor while watching this, but then again I often have that problem with black-and-white films. I also remember reading somewhere that they had to stage all the moor scenes in the studio, which of course sets some limitations. But even with budgetary restrictions, they just had to have that Stonehenge where it doesn't belong.
The story
This screenplay actually works really well in some places. It opens with Sir Charles' death, while the hound howls on the moor. We then see the Barrymans, the Stapletons, the Mortimers and Mr Frankland being questioned about the circumstances of Sir Charles' death before we get to 221b Baker Street. Sir Henry's arrival in England shows his new status as a highly desirable bachelor, which is a good addition. Later on, there's quite a well-placed scene where Sir Henry is about to stumble into the mire when Miss Stapleton, who's out riding, warns him. In the book, the affection between these two seems to build up rather quickly with little justification besides "he's a dashing young man and she's a pretty girl", but this film actually manages to build some sort of a groundwork for it. Also, I just have to mention that Miss Stapleton's horse is really pretty. The flashback to Sir Hugo and the beginnings of the hound legend is a bit clumsy, but the gravest offense that this film commits storytelling-wise is that completely unnecessary spirit séance conducted by Dr Mortimer's wife. It. Is. Pointless!
The hound chase
This scene might have benefited from some tension-building background music. There's just a lot of running around on the moor, Sir Henry wrestles with the hound a bit and doesn't seem to be in very much mortal danger, then Holmes and Watson fire some shots and the hound limps away. It seems like the filmmakers wanted to quickly wrap this scene away so that Stapleton could lock Sherlock Holmes in a Neolithic grave in the next one.
Peter Cushing & André Morell film, 1959
Screenplay by Peter Bryan
Directed by Terence Fisher
Running time 1 h 27 min
Holmes and Watson
Here we have my favorite Holmes&Watson duo out of all these adaptations. Peter Cushing's Sherlock Holmes possesses the exceptional intellect as well as the social quirks of the great sleuth, you really get the feeling that this man's mind works differently than the average person's. André Morell gives us a Dr Watson who is not only watchable, but actually capable. This film, more than all the others in this posts, shows how Dr Watson is useful to Holmes in other ways besides sending him reports. The two have a couple of really nice scenes together where Holmes and Watson discuss the case and this genuinely helps Holmes make sense of everything that's going on and enables him to reach his conclusion. Their reunion scene is quite unique in that there's very little talking about and the duo almost immediately jump back into action. This wouldn't work at all if the actors weren't so good at communicating through their expressions. You get the feeling that these two have worked together so long and have perfected their dynamics to such extent that they simply don't need to exchange too many words about why Holmes was secretly hiding on the moor. The film ends with the two of them having tea back at Baker Street in perfect harmony. It's lovely.
The supporting cast
We obviously have to talk about Sir Christopher Lee first. He plays Sir Henry and boy is he dashing. He's quite good at acting too, in case you didn't know. He works wonderfully in the role, but I'm sorry to say the rest of the supporting cast don't. The most mind-boggling of all is Miss Stapleton, who is now called Cecile. In the 1939 we had a stereotypical bland blonde; here we have a stereotypical exotic bad girl who runs around the moor barefoot and is bitchy to everyone for no apparent reason... except, it turns out that she's totally with Stapleton in his evil plans – and Stapleton is her daddy. Marla Landi does quite a bit of hilarious over-acting and it doesn't help at all that she's struggling with the fake Spanish accent. Yes, this film takes quite many liberties with the source material... Frankland is a batty old bishop and Dr Mortimer isn't really Dr Mortimer at all.
The Dartmoor setting
The outdoor locations are quite stunning here, but it doesn't really look like Dartmoor at all. There's no mist hanging about, we get pretty sunsets instead. Baskerville Hall is quite dark and creaky, which is good. This was the first Hound of the Baskervilles film in colour!
The story
This adaptation deviates from the original book most of all, and the changes and additions don't always seem to serve the plot entirely. There's an unnecessary tarantula in Sir Henry's boot, lots of talk about an ancient blood rite that doesn't seem to serve any purpose, and quite a long scene down in a mining shaft that similarly doesn't take the plot much anywhere. Sir Henry has a heart condition, the only function of which is that Dr Mortimer can point out that Sir Charles had a similar problem. Some of the long conversations could do with a bit of chopping. Then again, there are some genuinely suspenseful moments, and all those good scenes with Holmes and Watson that I mentioned earlier. This film opens with the horrible history of Sir Hugo, which is quite a good move because all the other adaptations have a bit of a struggle slapping in a flashback while Dr Mortimer presents the case.
The hound chase
Cecile Stapleton pretends to take Sir Henry out on a romantic walk but then leads him straight where Daddy Stapleton awaits with the hound, who is supposed to look more terrifying with a funny mask on. Cecile makes some pretty comical facial expressions when Holmes and Watson turn up, but at least Sir Christopher Lee knows how to act properly terrified while being mauled by the hound. His paralyzed expression when it's all over and he realizes that Cecile betrayed him is especially heart-wrenching.
Tom Baker & Terence Rigby serial, 1982
Screenplay by Alexander Baron
Directed by Peter Duguid
Running time 4 x 25 min
Holmes and Watson
Tom Baker's portrayal of Sherlock Holmes doesn't seem to be very popular – most people seem to think he hadn't quite managed yet to let go of his role as the Doctor. Well, I have to say I quite liked watching him. I haven't seen any of his Doctor Who episodes, so maybe that keeps me from drawing comparisons between those two roles. Terence Rigby, on the other hand, is a ridiculously annoying Dr Watson. Only Nigel Bruce can top his Watson in uselessness. He doesn't do much anything in any scenes, he just stands in the sidelines! I can't really say anything about the dynamic between Holmes and Watson because there doesn't seem to be any. I can't even remember what their reunion scene was like.
The supporting cast
This is the first adaptation in the list that includes Laura Lyons, and Caroline Shaw is by far the best actress in that role. She delivers the bitterness of the abandoned wife most excellently. The Barrymores are also very book-accurate, as is Stapleton, who doesn't immediately get the "bad guy" stamp on his appearance – in the book, too, he seems like a perfectly normal man, until the very end. I like it very much that this serial stays truthful to that. The best bit, however, is dear Dr Mortimer. Finally, an accurate Dr Mortimer! He even obsesses about Holmes' parietal fissure! Thank you so much! Sir Henry is a bit bad-tempered and abrasive in this version, which is bizarre but doesn't fatally ruin anything.
The Dartmoor setting
Well, this looks like Dartmoor finally. Baskerville Hall seems quite comfy in this version, and the background music doesn't really up the atmosphere – it's actually quite terrible throughout the series. The first time the hound howled, the sound effect was so unconvincing that I actually missed it completely and then wondered for a while why all the characters suddenly looked so frightened.
The story
A serial format always runs the risk of dragging in some places, but this one keeps the pace very well throughout. Each 25-minute episode ends with a nice cliffhanger. The screenplay is very faithful to the book so it doesn't commit any horrible travesty by changing things around unnecessarily, but neither does it attempt to make any creative choices that would make watching more interesting for someone who already knows what's going to happen.
The hound chase
Oh, the music is so terrible that it ruins the whole scene. The hound looks ludicrous and there's something a little off about the editing when it attacks Sir Henry.
Jeremy Brett & Edward Hardwicke TV film, 1988
 |
| Dr Watson, Dr Mortimer <3 and Sherlock Holmes |
Screenplay by Trevor Bowen
Directed by Brian Mills
Running time 1 h 45 min
Holmes and Watson
Please don't fling your deerstalkers at me when I say I haven't really warmed up to the Granada series like most of the population has. I don't find any particular fault with it, or the two lead actors Brett and Hardwicke, but it's not my cup of tea. Jeremy Brett's dedication for his role shows throughout the series, but I also can't help noticing his deteriorating health. In The Hound of the Baskervilles, the close-up shots already show a man not in the best health, and it makes me sad. Edward Hardwicke's Dr Watson isn't stupid at all, which is wonderful. He's steady and loyal, if a tad bit too "safe" in my opinion. This adaptation has the best Holmes & Watson reunion scene, though. As in the 1959 film, you get the impression of true partnership. Added bonus for displaying Holmes' lack of culinary abilities, and Watson's delightful frankness when he tells him so.
The supporting cast
Alright, Dr Mortimer in the 1982 miniseries was amazing, but this one is... absolutely perfect! I'm actually working really hard now to restrain myself from filling this section with hearts, smiley faces and exclamation marks. Alastair Duncan's portrayal of Dr Mortimer will be a never-ending source of happiness for me, proving just how perfectly a literary character can be transferred to screen on a rare occasion. I love the scene at Baker Street where he lets his spaniel jump on the furniture, completely oblivious to Holmes' disapproval – and the scene where he shows Dr Watson his recently unearthed skull. Oh my. Right, there were probably some other supporting characters in this film too that I should mention... Yes, Stapleton. He's really good in this too and sticks to his book-accurate pastime of butterfly hunting. Laura Lyons is included as well, but she isn't very impressive. To tell the truth, I always find the female characters in the Granada series bizarrely bland! They even managed to make a flat Irene Adler and Violet Hunter, how weird is that! Does anybody else feel this way?
The Dartmoor setting
I don't seem to have anything important to say about this point, which probably means that I felt the setting worked reasonably well but didn't impress me in any particular way. This is what I mostly feel like when watching the Granada series.
The story
The pacing dragged a tiny bit now and then, but I really liked what this film did with the middle part where Holmes is apparently absent from the story. There are little scenes sprinkled here and there that show someone collecting Watson's letters from the post office, and a close-up of Holmes' boots right before the reunion scene. Good work. You might also guess that I wasn't bothered at all that Dr Mortimer's role was expanded a little in this. He sits around with Dr Watson when he tracks down the mysterious "man on the tor" and replaces Lestrade in the hound attack scene.
The hound chase
The hound isn't terribly frightening, but the atmosphere is suitably eerie and Sir Henry seems genuinely affected by the attack. The composer was much better than the one in the 1982 serial!
Richard Roxburgh & Ian Hart TV film, 2002
 |
| Holmes on the right, Watson on the left |
Screenplay by Allan Cubitt
Directed by David Attwood
Running time 1 h 40 min
Holmes and Watson
This film does the weirdest thing with the friendship of Holmes and Watson; they seem so fed up with each other I'm quite surprised they're living together in the first place. There's nothing Holmesian whatsoever in Richard Roxburgh's portrayal, and there's a terrible scene after Mortimer has presented the case where Holmes calls Watson an idiot, slams the door to his face and retreats to shoot up cocaine in peace. Um, did Allan Cubitt just completely ignore the bit in Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's stories which clearly states that Holmes would only seek for stimulation in drugs if he didn't have a case to work on? So why is he now doing it right after he's been given a case? Watson is only fractionally better portrayed than his partner – I initially liked having a Watson who's closer to Holmes in age and portrays the rarely seen kind of Watson whom you can actually believe has seen the Afghan war and knows damn well how to handle a gun. There's also a nice detail about him being unbeatable at billiards. But then it appears that Ian Hart brings very little life and soul to the character. He's bad-tempered and surly most of the time, though that's quite understandable considering what an abrasive Holmes he's paired up with, and his last words in the film are: "I don't trust you, Holmes." ...Excuse me, what?
The supporting cast
So the leads are cringy, but hey, here we have the best Beryl Stapleton in the bunch. She's very pretty and, most importantly, she seems capable of showing real emotions, especially towards Sir Henry, with whom she has a couple of useful extra scenes. Sir Henry's character is perhaps a little overdone, but this film makes the most effort in exploring what it must have felt like for him, suddenly learning that he's heir to a large property on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean. There's a particularly clever scene where he sits at the dinner table and looks furtively at the paintings of his ancestors, clearly feeling quite out of place. Richard E. Grant plays Stapleton, and he's a bit too obviously evil from the very beginning. And once again, Stapleton steals Mortimer's skulls. Mortimer himself has nothing to do with his literary counterpart. Aargh.
The Dartmoor setting
Whatever the numerous faults with this film, I can honestly say that the cinematography is excellent. This is the only version that manages to build up real tension when Sir Henry and Dr Watson arrive at Baskerville Hall. I actually felt the chills on their journey there, it was so well shot. Baskerville Hall is quite gorgeous too.
The story
I like the beginning. It shows the prisoner Selden being pursued by policemen across the chilly moor, and we get quite a disturbing glimpse of how fatal the mire can be. This film then takes a leaf out of the 1939 film's book and shows how the investigation of Sir Charles' death proceeds, and this is very well done. Unfortunately, the film also recreates the damned séance scene which, once again, is completely useless. There are some extra scenes that give more depth to some characters, though in the case of Holmes and Watson it only works to highlight their incompatibility... At one point there's a time jump and suddenly it's Christmas! There's a huge party at Baskerville Hall, and there's a really stupid play for the guests' entertainment. Well, not a play exactly, just people tottering around in costumes. One of them is dressed as a black dog which I suppose was meant to be ominous foreshadowing, but I was laughing too hard at this point to pay attention to it. Laura Lyons doesn't exist in this film, so there is no explanation to why Sir Charles was waiting around outdoors in the first place.
The hound chase
Well, the hound in this version shows that special effects have progressed a little since the '80s though it could have been done much better, otherwise there isn't much to say. There's such an awful lot happening after the climax that it kind of diverts the viewer's attention. Beryl Stapleton is found dead. That's just awful and unnecessary. Watson gets shot, which enables Holmes to be suddenly concerned for his companion's welfare for a while, which is quite unexpected given how he's been acting earlier. Holmes follows Stapleton to the mire, where he almost drowns himself, but Watson comes to the rescue. I get the feeling that the screenplay started off wanting to cook up as much friction as possible between Holmes and Watson, then, after the hound chase, it suddenly occurred to it that this relationship should develop somehow and these guys were actually supposed to be friends – hence the shooting and drowning. All this forced development then amounts to nothing as Watson utters his last words.
------
Now, did I find The Best Adaptation among all of these? Well, as you can see from my assessments, each of these five adaptations has something good about it. Sometimes they fail miserably in some areas, and at times they play too safe. Overall, I think the Granada version manages to deliver a most consistent adaptation, but for me it's not the kind of Favourite Adaptation that I would absolutely want in my DVD collection, though I would like to keep that Dr Mortimer. So, I'm still waiting to see an adaptation that does proper justice to the main characters and their partnership, doesn't ruin any of the supporting characters, delivers the haunting atmosphere of Dartmoor, and gives us a properly scary hound.
What about that mysterious "plus one", then? Dear readers, that is actually my favourite Hound adaptation but I couldn't place it alongside the others because... yes, it's the Sherlock episode "Hounds of Baskerville"! As it is a modern re-telling rather than an adaptation of the book, with different locations, characters and plot points, it isn't entirely comparable with the rest of the list. However... as it is a very good re-telling, it actually delivers all of the five elements that I was looking for in a Hound screen adaptation. Let's take a look.
------
Now, did I find The Best Adaptation among all of these? Well, as you can see from my assessments, each of these five adaptations has something good about it. Sometimes they fail miserably in some areas, and at times they play too safe. Overall, I think the Granada version manages to deliver a most consistent adaptation, but for me it's not the kind of Favourite Adaptation that I would absolutely want in my DVD collection, though I would like to keep that Dr Mortimer. So, I'm still waiting to see an adaptation that does proper justice to the main characters and their partnership, doesn't ruin any of the supporting characters, delivers the haunting atmosphere of Dartmoor, and gives us a properly scary hound.
What about that mysterious "plus one", then? Dear readers, that is actually my favourite Hound adaptation but I couldn't place it alongside the others because... yes, it's the Sherlock episode "Hounds of Baskerville"! As it is a modern re-telling rather than an adaptation of the book, with different locations, characters and plot points, it isn't entirely comparable with the rest of the list. However... as it is a very good re-telling, it actually delivers all of the five elements that I was looking for in a Hound screen adaptation. Let's take a look.
"The Hounds of Baskerville" in Sherlock, 2012
Screenplay by Mark Gatiss
Directed by Paul McGuigan
Running time 1 h 28 min
Directed by Paul McGuigan
Running time 1 h 28 min
Holmes and Watson
I'm going to be writing more about Sherlock in a couple of days, so I'll save most of my raving about how perfectly cast and portrayed the lead characters are for that post. These two are my favourite Holmes and Watson without a doubt, and I love watching how their friendship evolves throughout the series as well as in this episode alone. In this version, Sherlock comes to Dartmoor with John and Henry in the first place, so there isn't a reunion scene – however, I think the "I don't have friends. I've just got one." scene serves a similar function, and I love that moment to bits.
The supporting cast
So, instead of upper-class Dartmoor residents we've got a severely traumatized Henry Knight, a couple of whitecoats and army officers at a military base, and Henry's therapist. The supporting characters pay homage to the book counterparts in familiar names, but they function very differently. They all serve a purpose, however, and are very memorable. I like Doctor Stapleton especially, and the two innkeepers who were added in.
The Dartmoor setting
I love the locations in this episode. Changing Baskerville Hall from a shady, ancestral mansion to a blindingly white-walled, sinister army base is a brilliant modern update. It's absolutely scary, as is Dewer's Hollow. The editing and the music set the increasingly tense atmosphere excellently.
The story
This episode explores how fear works in the human mind, and it's quite compelling. Numerous red herrings are thrown around involving sugar, Morse code and an actual dog. It's one of my favourite episodes in Sherlock overall! It doesn't go by the original book, but pays homage to it in brilliant little ways.
The hound chase
We don't know till the very end of this scene whether the hound is real or drug-induced... or both. Once again the editing, and the unique visual style employed in Sherlock, really works to up the adrenalin.
-----
Have you seen The Hound of the Baskervilles adapted to the screen? Which one do you like most out of my list? Can you recommend an adaptation that wasn't mentioned in this post? What do you think are the ingredients for a great Hound adaptation? Let's get some proper discussion going in the comments!
Oh, by the way, there's also an episode in Elementary called "The Hound of the Cancer Cells". It has nothing to do with Sir Arthur Conan Doyle except the clumsy wordplay in the title.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)