We all know that some book series were fantastic, but the movies and TV Shows were awful (but only if you read the books). Avid readers know the pain of a badly adapted novel, when the directors take creative liberties and change the ending or plot in a bad way. Here we have a list of bad adaptations that were good books.
In the defense of directors and filmmakers, movies are not easy to make. Not everything in the book can fit into a movie timeframe or be made possible. Between scriptwriting, budgets, and what actors are available it is not an easy feat to create a beautiful film. Not all special effects can be put into action and look good. Some actors won't do certain actions. Grace is in order for the directors who tried to make an accurate film. Even so, here are some badly adapted ones that made the connected fandoms scream in frustration.
Twilight
The memes are abundant and the general verdict on the movies themselves are horrible. I think the movies probably slaughtered a good book series. Have I read it? No, but others have and say the books are actually good.
How is it different? Well, timeline for starters. Book 1 is 5 months of relationship, not 3 months. Another thing to take into account is the deeper relationships in the book that didn't translate as well into film. As some other directors have done before, we also lose a few characters to make up for time and reduce complexity to further main plots. Books have a luxury of subplots, but the film industry generally doesn't use all of it for the sake of budget. Speaking of plot, Bella's decision to become a vampire is more fleshed out in words and not movie. Additional plot includes an introduction to three characters who begin to hunt Bella, which doesn't come out of left field in the book plot, but does in the movie. The relationship dynamics and conversations are somewhat stronger toward Jacob in the books, by the way, so consider that if you are team Edward and never read the book. The books are also from Bella's point of view.
Problems in filming real actors, who are portraying vampires (which don't age), can't be helped. This is one place we need to give grace in abundance. Special effects are hard to achieve sometimes. Filmmakers know this well. The supernatural isn't simple to show on stage or screen, so be nice if you know it is hard to do.
The Hobbit
Okay, so you liked this one and so did I, but Tolkien's son did not. Tolkiens followers are avid and sticklers for accuracy. What went wrong here? Let's dive into it.
At the top of the list is the fact that one book became three movies. Part of the issue with inconsistency was time (because the LOTR series was a long project with pre-production work). Another large part of this was production wasn't as controlled and Peter Jackson never felt on top of the process like he'd been before. Material was added to connect it to LOTR, thus it made things a bit more confusing. Overuse of CGI made some dislike the film, too.
The truth about Tolkien anything is that the storyline is complicated, connected, and beautifully intricate. Fans of the series can easily and casually tell you all about it. If you aren't studied in it already you may get lost. It has to be thought out carefully and executed with care, not haste. This film trilogy was done too quickly.
Percy Jackson
With this series I caution you to have grace. Special effects can only take you so far where mythology is concerned. I liked both movies, but if you are a purist in this series you know how much they changed. I have not read the books. They made mythology mistakes, including Persephone being in the underworld in the summer (when the story clearly states she should be in the living world during that time) The first and second movies had two different screenwriters. Apparently, the second one was better and stuck to real mythology, but the first messed up their mythology.
A layered plot doesn't work perfectly into a screenplay and movie. With settings all over the place and scenes missing from the movies that were in the books, it can confuse an audience. CGI can't portray all the weird mythology that is in the books (like the sea horses in the sea being ridden). Frankly, they are not the easiest YA books to transfer to film. Depth in book characters didn't make it to the film, in some cases. The layered storyline is not complete without that character depth, so it doesn't work as well as it should in the books.
Nancy Drew and Riverdale CW Series
I am an absolute nerd about Nancy Drew and like several of the adaptations. I didn't like this one. It is not the Nancy of the books or the games. She is not in Riverheights. Ned Nickerson is nothing like the books. The ghost in the books, believe it or not, are seldom real. Bess is not the same. George is not the same. Carson Drew and his daughter were close and not estranged. It is almost all wrong. They made it what they wanted, and much like Riverdale, created a drama that wasn't anything like the source material.
Riverdale is based on Archie Comics. The fans of these comics were not pleased, much like Nancy Drew fans. It was as unrecognizable as many CW adaptations seem to be. Archie comics are innocent and light humor. First of all, there was no murder in it. Jughead is not the main character in the comics, nor is he all dark and gang leader. Betty and Veronica were also in competition for Archie all throughout, so there's that, and it was all about Archie. The crossovers were also abundant. Reggie is a bully in the comics, too - definitely not the one we see on our TV screen. I could go on, really, so look at my sources to see more.
CW has a habit of making something dark, raunchy, and nothing like the source. I did watch Riverdale and like it for a while, but I caught the drama pattern (which is ramping up the drama, continue the tension, and release with a hint of new tension). I only looked into it for Cole Sprouse, really, so I wasn't disappointed. Nancy Drew is a beloved character to me, so that was different. Frankly, I also see homosexual characters in every single CW series, too, so that wasn't my jam. CW is not my go-to channel.
Maximum Ride
I lived and breathed Maximum Ride in my Jr High years. I read them all. They are complicated, complex characters and plots. Some people are both good and bad at different times - like Ari. It would take a lot of money to do this movie right. All the same, it doesn't truly need one. It would be another Percy Jackson situation. The movie they made for this one was a failure. It had no budget at all, according to reviews. The actors did badly, too, but that may just be the directing and script's fault.
Maximum Ride is a James Patterson book series directed at teens that are about genetically modified teenagers imprisoned in an illegal science facility. After that the plot gets complicated and layered - and swiftly so. They fight, hide like fugitives, are betrayed, betray each other, and discover abilities on the way. It all ends with a bang in the last book. Can all this be contained in a PG13 movie? Heck to the no! It needs a rated R movie to portray all this stuff. One of the characters is forced to watch a surgery that is forced upon her friend years before - surgery with no drugs - for the purpose of night vision (which failed, but he can see if there is an all white background). Is that PG13 or PG14? Definitely not. This is why I advocate we try not to film this one. My friends and I thought they'd bungle it and we were right.
Conclusion
If you liked these I am not shaming you. It is likely you didn't read the books connected to them, or maybe you did and you are open-minded. At any rate, these didn't follow the books at all or only loosely followed them. The actors are probably not at fault in these cases. Directors and scripts tell an actor how to portray these characters. I ask that you don't blame actors here. The best actors in the world, directed badly, will not look good, so I give these people grace in a big way.
Just the other day I opened up an Ian Fleming James Bond novel to find terms that are offensive now, but were not offensive in 1952. If you look up old classic movies and books that are not of our time period we see that the gender roles are more boxed and rigid. My point is simply this; the time period of your entertainment makes a difference and should not be ignored. Let's dive into that.
Photo courtesy of The Guardian
I'm starting this topic with a strong statement. History forgotten is history that repeats itself. If we burned and destroyed every offensive book on the whole earth we'd completely wipe the history shelf clean, have no historical fiction, forget our history, and then live it all over again. This is why banning books and entertainment is a huge problem and should not be happening. Aside from perhaps the books on dark magic (that isn't Harry Potter or fictional), I do not advocate that we get rid of books containing offensive language or ideas, but instead, use them for teaching purposes and set them as reminders of a time we no longer live in. That being said, I also advocate this for all entertainment forms.
Historical settings are places we visit in novels (accuracy is another day's blog topic) since we cannot go back in time ourselves. While some books do a horrible job at transporting you to the past, others do so well of a job that we forget our surroundings. It is important to note that what was common in 1928, 1952, or 1813 is not common now. The Bridgerton novels, now a Netflix series, are a good example of this. We don't debut ourselves as women anymore, for example, and don't court suitors (at least, not in the same way). Phryne Fisher is set in 1928 and mentions that most churches don't advocate birth control or family planning. Ian Fleming's work proves he wrote in 1952 by using words like "Chigro" (Chinese and black genetically together) in his book Dr. No. It is obvious that these books were not set in our culturally sensitive or feministic culture. That doesn't mean they aren't fantastic books. Simply put, don't ban a book because it doesn't jive with our time period.
Romance Novels and History
Historical romance and fiction is a big category favoring highlanders, medieval knights, the civil war and other wars, and the 1800-1900s. It ranges from sexually suggestive to tame covers that reflect a romanticized version of the wars and history, but most of the good writers do their research and do a great job of taking you back in time. Little details might make you gasp when you do your own research later and find they were correct in this or that topic. It is critical to know what was appropriate then and what social rules and role your main character is living with.
Photo Courtesy of Pinterest
In the movie Brave it is actually true that women could refuse to marry and it was considered irresponsible. Not all societies could do that, though. Bridgerton reflects 1813, where a rich, titled English family of 8 are marrying off into the world. The men are not expected to debut themselves and can get away with mistresses, and yet, we see women can't declare they aren't going to marry and support themselves. or have flings and affairs. Today we say "double-standard!" and think that is unfair. Women today are free of quite a few useless and tiresome social rules that used to put us in the property category. Women in 1813 were not so lucky, especially when rich. Merida, in the framework of her time, was dodging responsibility. In our lense, it doesn't come across like that. In our time she is fighting to marry someone she loves in her own time, which may still be true, but she was refusing to grow up in some ways. She was doing the equivalent of bumming it in the basement, should you need it explained in our words. This is precisely why we need to take into account the social rules of the time.
Classics
When I say classic I mean something representing the time period it was written in. Along with that, it must be beloved and touch readers years after it is released. In this way, it has to be relevant to multiple generations. Think about what you had to read in school years for your language arts classes if you need an example.
James Bond novels are considered historical classics, as well as Little Women, The Last of the Mohicans, Pride And Prejudice, and To Kill A Mockingbird. I think you get the general picture of a classic book. These especially need historical viewpoints and a lens of historical knowledge. They don't and won't make as much sense in our society's viewpoint. I said before that Fleming is not culturally sensitive when it comes to referring to black people in his novels, but that makes sense given he lived in the 50s, where quite a lot of people in white neighborhoods were not sensitive at all. His views were common then, thus the offensive terms were not offensive then. This is precisely why you have to understand the time period before you judge the book as offensive or not.
Photo Courtesy of Vanity Fair
Another example is Little Women, set in 1868. The roles of women were far from what they are today.
I read it all and loved it. The thing is that if you don't understand the roles of women in that time you miss some of the importance of the plot. Aunt March will make no sense when she talks about how women can't make their own money outside of acting or running a cathouse (in her eyes, the same thing). Also, the houses have names and you have to pay attention to that (like Jane Austen's book Emma).
Our Culture Versus Then
You see, being culturally sensitive is not what Fleming was going for - he was just writing a spy novel set in the Cold War. He didn't stop and say "what will the next generation think?" because he was living in his own time, which goes for every writer you know. Our culture and its viewpoints are not the same as the previous decade's viewpoints. You have to understand this before you judge a book by its ideas.
Think of the politics of today. This shapes a cultural mindset. The politics of the Civil War, Cold War, WWII, or WWI are different, vastly so. Different terms and lingo are often used in all these different contexts. Jayhawkers don't belong in WWII, but they do belong in the Civil War. Nazi's weren't involved in the Cold War, but they were in WWII. Basic knowledge of political events is in order for even Little Women, where the four March women grow up in the midst of the Civil War. Bond makes no sense without the political context of the Cold War. Atomic Blonde (movie and comic book) would be extremely confusing without knowing about the Iron Curtain.
Photo courtesy of Fashionista
Social practices of our time will not match what the March women lived, or what the Bridgerton family does. Phryne Fisher's life is not what ours' is. The social rules that put us within social propriety would stun women and men from the times we read about. What we wear, say, do, and have the freedom to do today could make us socially unacceptable to other decades. The standard that Bridgertons live in shows undergarments that look like they hurt, when today we don't wear corsets and layers under dresses unless it is a costume. Don't judge the social actions of a character by today's standards if they lived three decades ago.
Language is a factor here. "Samson slew the Philistines with the jawbone of an ass" does not mean he slew his enemy with his buttocks. Ass is another name for a donkey. Simply put, words change context as time passes and you have to know what they mean or you are lost in the storyline. How words are used also matters, given that connotation of a word changes the meaning. Saying that something is gay can mean it is happy in archaic language, but in my lifetime it has had two completely different meanings. One occurred around my Jr High age (I am 26, for reference) and it meant "stupid". Today it means homosexual. The definition in the dictionary didn't change; the use of it in different eras did. Know which era you are reading or watching and do your research. It is a general practice to know what your words mean before you speak them, so think before you speak.
Closing Remarks
Canceling old books and movies that have "offensive" content is like trying to erase history. It needs to stop and we need to start using them as teaching tools that show our history. If you truly want to change the perceptions of others canceling the evidence it was misperceived is not the answer. I advocate that we use our brains and make up our own minds when we read or watch something. Take into account the historical time and context. Don't judge a source of entertainment by the viewpoints of characters that didn't live in the time you did. Don't expect the past to conform to the present - it won't.
We have heard about Harry and Meghan leaving the royal family, but I'd like to invite you on a journey to dig deeper, to look at the cost of fame anywhere. What does it cost you to be famous? What is it like to live in a glass house and be watched, judged, and criticized daily? Put yourself in their shoes for a second.
Photo courtesy of Vanity Fair
If you want the basics on what Harry and Meghan said about the royal family and the whole situation, I have a link here: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/07/world/europe/oprah-interview-harry-meghan.html
Other than that, I'm not going to into the details of it. What I'm focusing on today is how fame and not having a private life can affect the mental health and life of a celebrity (royal or not). When it comes to the royal family and the many social rules of what can be done, as well as expectations and titles, it gets complicated. Fame stresses vary everywhere.
Exciting or dangerous?
With fame comes the idea that you are now a walking target. Another price of fame includes the idea that you now have to be skeptical of people who want something from you and are jealous of what you have. Paparazzi generally don't care about making you look good, so add that to your list of what to keep an eye out for. Some celebrities dress one way for public performance and another for common street errands (like Lady Gaga, who is short in real life and wears heels and makeup for stage appearances). Everyone knows you. You can't have a private moment. The royal family takes this to a new level with touring villages and other gala events.
Reputation is fragile. If you have anything to lose - title, money, acting roles, or otherwise - accusations and trials will kill that. Ask Johnny Depp (falsely accused by a woman that harmed him) about losing an acting role. Ask Meghan and Harry about losing their support. People with something to lose have to stay in the lines to keep what they have, as well, so if they challenge the status quo it can end badly for them (especially if someone cares more about their reputation or the reputation of a group than improving the situation). Innocent people, famous and living life under a magnifying glass, have been ruined to protect others - and I am not just talking about royal families in history. It is amazingly cruel how the public accusations of someone who is lying, and providing false evidence, can lead the public to hate an individual who did nothing. Reputation can be destroyed and the press will eat it up with a spoon. In this way, the public can be manipulated to hate someone and the person who is innocent can be judged and sentenced as guilty, even before a court trial. While some aren't innocent (obviously), we don't have an accurate idea of who is and isn't on the side of good.
Photo by Sonny With A Chance 2009
Fame has a cost when it comes to some sensitive souls and situations that arise from continuing in the celebrity lifestyle unbalanced. We know Demi Lovato had some drug issues due to overwork and has relapsed at times, partly because she doesn't have a private life anymore. The general public has both supported and judged her at different times. Overwork is a serious issue that led the Beatles to do drugs, also, so drugs are a common problem here. Suicide, depression, and mental illness have taken a few celebrities to their graves, either because they lost the fame or had too much of it. Meghan Markle was becoming suicidal in her position, as an example. Anne Hathaway has dealt with depression. Marilyn Monroe overdosed on drugs. The stress and anxiety of living in a fishbowl takes its toll and we see that being at the top is not all glamour and gold. That doesn't mean some celebs can't balance themselves and keep their sanity. What I'm saying is fame is not easy to handle.
Fame and money
Fame can be described as a drug, a need and constant desire for attention and applause from others. It is why we use social media. It is a competition. The need for acknowledgment, excess, and praise is a desire of human nature, one that can lead some to do anything to get it. Max Lorde (a villain in Wonder Woman 1984) illustrates this purpose rather well. Max Lorde came from an unhealthy family situation and felt that he need to be validated and prove himself. Someone who is unbalanced from the beginning is more of a risk. People who have previous issues are not the people that should be on display for all to see. Celebs that decided to find a private place, made sure it stayed private, then used it for their private escape did well for themselves emotionally. We all need time alone (in varying amounts).
What makes an unbalanced human? As I said, not enough time to process emotion and life events.
Photo by IGN
Quick rises to fame don't do well, often, due to the lack of time to balance themselves and create healthy boundaries. Add to this swift rise that the person can't truly make sense of everything going on and we have a big, publicly displayed problem. This embarrasses the person and causes judgment to rain on them (even if it is a small group of people). Judgment leads to anxiety and it all spirals until they could end up in rehab, or worse, overdosed or suicidal. Dramatic? A bit. True? Absolutely. The most balanced celebrities are more mature in age or nature and started from the bottom of the pile, rising slowly while learning how to handle it bit by bit. Fast fame creates messes and disorients the person, but slow fame teaches lessons that benefit them when they are a big name. Big names are often viewed more.
Narcissists, all about themselves, do well here in fame-city because they don't care about what people say and do whatever they want. They take what they want, do whatever, and eat up all the publicity. Likes, dislikes, comments.....It doesn't matter what the public says. It is all about the narcissist. Beware of these people. They are not okay and shouldn't be given attention at all. Attention is their drug and they don't take responsibility for their actions.
Big names, like royalty, also do lots of tours and appear for crowds. If they are suicidal, depressed, or feel anxiety internally you might not see it. After a while celebs put on a mask. Depression is a silent killer because their mindset is to deal with it alone. It makes it harder to get help. Mental issues are embarrassing and give ammo to those who go after reputations. It is not as easy as casually calling your therapist for an afternoon session. Why? Because some people have mouths leaking information, paparazzi, and your own emotions make it hard to ask for help. Put yourself here and ask what you would do in their shoes. Tabloids can take any picture of you and twist it. Do you understand, now? I thought so.
Balanced Celebrities
I mentioned celebrities that were balanced. Here we can talk about how some learned to deal with it. This doesn't mean they are perfect. The information below is about how they cope with it, not how to be perfect. With fame comes responsibility. Fame takes your personal energy away from you to give to people who don't give it back and don't always care about you.
Perfection is unattainable. Stop trying to be everyone's perfect human. You can't please all of the public all the time, so don't. That advice goes for non-celebs, too. Taking advice too personally can lead to lots of issues. Every human you meet has a different point of view, opinion, and background. Your worth is not based on the human races' peer review of you. In this way, you are also no better than the rest of the human race. (I personally believe that in Christ we are all on equal footing and no one human is above another.) You are not superior to anyone. All humans need help at times. Get that help. Go get that counseling. Process your life and emotions.
Boundaries and where you stand on issues are not to be ignored. Make it clear what you will and won't do, and what you want out of your fame. Don't change your mind often on these convictions. Consistency is your friend. It gives you integrity.
Family and friends who will support you, even when your fans won't, are necessary, and shouldn't be neglected for fame, or you will pay. The support system will help you through many issues and crises in the future. Ask these people for help when you need it.
Mistakes happen. Learn from them. Don't repeat them time and time again. This will also give you integrity. Don't be afraid to apologize - but, yet, don't apologize for standing up for yourself when wronged. This is a tightrope walk that your support system can help you with.
I don't know who will be reading this blog, but the last part of this post involves my personal faith in Christ.If you are a Christian and find yourself in the spotlight you might find the advice below helpful.
Christ comes first, in my personal belief, so if you put Him first He will guide you. Not that life will be rainbows and lollipops (it never is, not for anyone), not at all, but my point is simply that Jesus will lead you where you need to be and guide your boundaries and interactions. I don't know your personal journey. I am not assuming anything about you. I advocate that you yield to Christ's leading in everything, all the same.
Writers are constantly observing everything. Anything can show up in our writing, especially people. When we want to base a character off of someone we don't know all that well it may be a bit awkward. How are we supposed to get close and observe their habits for our fictional character without appearing weird or creepy? This blog may help. If you wish to study the human race, please do it correctly and discreetly.
This post is not a guide on how to stalk someone. I want to be clear. This post is how to study and people-watch humans you don't know all that well for the purposes of writing fictional characters, without getting stalking accusations slapped against you. I do not advocate following someone around like a film PI (because, frankly, it isn't even accurate legally) or popping up everywhere they go, due to the fact that if they notice you are doing this they will get a little upset (which can be anything from a stern conversation to legal stalking charges). The blog below is not about gaining their personal information or hacking someone.
Photo by a writer of history
First, we are going to go over the legal definition of stalking. No joke. As much as I'd love to observe someone under an invisibility cloak, it is not legal. Also, it is better to befriend than to stalk if you want to get to know them well. Voluntary information is given in friendship, plus more opportunities for legal and comfortable observation. Friendship is magical, especially if you need writing inspiration.
According to Merriam-webster
"Legal Definition of stalking
: the act or crime of willfully and repeatedly following or harassing another person in circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to fear injury or death especially because of express or implied threats
broadly : a crime of engaging in a course of conduct directed at a person that serves no legitimate purpose and seriously alarms, annoys, or intimidates that person
NOTE: Stalking is often considered to be aggravated when the conduct involved also violates a restraining order protecting the victim."
The information we want
Given the above definition, I would like to make sure you know what I look for when I base a character off of someone. I am not looking for personal information to steal identities. Do not take personal phone numbers, addresses, or anything of the like when looking around.
I observe personality, which is the characteristics of who someone is. It is how they act, think, react, and live. This is something you have to observe and take notice of as they get comfortable. It comes out in their words, what they value, the traits they value, and how they react to anything. Personality is how they are wired. Time is needed to get this information and you shouldn't just befriend someone and drop them like they were only a means to an end. True friendship creates many character bases in many stories, so try to keep those going. This also includes intro and extroversion.
Description can be anything from how they walk, to how they talk, to what color their hair or eyes are. This doesn't require friendship, so if you are only describing them and nothing else you need not become besties - just don't gawk or record them without their permission. Please don't violate the stalking laws above to get this descriptive information. The best way is to sit in a public place with a book, laptop, or music in your ear and drink coffee. Become as normal and invisible as possible and blend in with the crowd. Know the social rules or you will fail at blending. Then take notes as subtle-like as you can. Coffee shops are great places to do this. Take notes in your head, if you can.
The ideal place to people watch Photo by Pinas Social
Values, defined here as what they put as their highest priority and care about deeply, are shown through what they react to. For instance, if they jump in on a debate on a political agenda, but don't even speak about the next topic that is a clear sign of what they care about. It is either that, or they don't believe the crowd they are in understands or will try to. As for priority, take note of what they put their time into. Time spent and money will reveal what is higher on their mental hierarchy (and sometimes we shift those, so notice that, too). It isn't all that hard to see if you try and truly pay attention.
The only other thing I look for is tendencies, as in unique quirks that only they seem to have. I have a tendency to talk to reason out loud when comfortable and alone, as an example. Along with this, we have habits. Whether they were started from experiences, conditioning, childhood, or superstitions is to be noted if possible. A lot of the time we may never know why they have that quirk until we become close with others or see their home life. Lifestyle comes into the discussion at this point and social norms are put into this category. Take special note of habits and social faux pas (or mistakes) because any social mistakes are signs of an unfamiliar social rule that contradicts a lifestyle habit. Along with this, you may notice what they are uncomfortable with. If they get uncomfortable with you, specifically, back off of them for a long time (or forever, if they are truly, deeply annoyed).
How to use social media without creeping
The above information can be found on social media if they post often. However, pretend that you are a private detective that wants to leave no trace at a crime scene. I have made this mistake once and it got taken badly. It is easy to say "oh, cool post" and share (because that is easy), but do that a bunch of times in a row and you are going to be noticed. Don't react to anything, especially if you think they won't take it well, if you decide to find information off of a public profile. If possible, get them to accept a friend request. In that case, they will have authorized you to look. "Public" is important because that means they told everyone on the internet the same information you are seeing on the page, which means they can't say much of anything legally, should they misunderstand you. Don't annoy anyone if you can help it.
That warning being said, I continue. What someone finds important they share, post on, write statuses about, and chat about. The groups they participate in are signs of values. You see a lot of another human's life by going so far back into their posts that you run out. Pictures reveal who they hang out with and find valuable. Another warning I'll speak of is that anyone can be what they want to online. Don't depend on this for everything. Please be discreet.
Observation
Actions speak louder than words. People watchers everywhere know this to be true. The discreet watching of a subject comes with some need for guidance if you are new. You are going to face the same pitfalls of a PI (private investigator) if you don't befriend the character base. I, again, advocate that you do so. That aside, I will give more advice.
Public places are easier to manage if you want to do this stealthily. Coffee shops are full of people who linger and no one is too suspicious. Grab a hot beverage or snack, take a laptop, and chill. My best advice here is to act like a local or be one. Blend. In the case of other public places, it is the same concept. If you can look natural taking notes do so. The safest way is to jot it down later on. Stick to one place and don't follow them anywhere, or you are going to get in trouble.
Photo By United States Cybersecurity Magazine
Need help blending in? I found some advice online you might heed. For starters, act like you are supposed to be there and you are in the middle of something important. Do what everyone else is doing, if you need to linger. If you need to keep an eye on stuff it helps to strike up a conversation with the nicest and friendliest human in the area, while also paying attention to your subject. Wear what you see around you, preferably a common color like gray. To observe someone without them realizing it you can put headphones on or stare at your phone. Literally, so easy to do because all of millennial society (minus the introverted ones) do this for hours.
It is rude to eavesdrop, and yet, I do so almost naturally by acting busy and not gossiping the information out. Some days you should play dumb. People tend to get a little upset when you know more than they told you. I remember quite a bit about everyone I'm close to. I have played dumb often. Columbo, the detective, does so during the investigations he conducts and gets more out of someone by using this method. Take his hint. Don't panic people. Don't broadcast what you know. If you do intend to eavesdrop appear busy and preoccupied.
Assuming you are just observing, here are some things to remember. As a general rule, keep your distance unless you are friends. Don't make eye contact or give them any reason to look over at you. Be invisible. Mind your clothing and try to look clean and appropriate to your environment. If you stop observing to make a friend try to be casual and natural, not pushy. Don't make your subject want to run or leave.
Logical Deduction Science
This is where you become Sherlock. Try to channel your inner Sherlock Holmes as you take in every aspect of the subject you are getting to know. You don't have to ask many questions when you use this type of science, which makes this the safest way to base a character off of someone you know. You are a writer and can fill in the blanks. Be aware that you won't learn it all.
Let me give you an example. A man in his 20s is sitting in a coffee shop typing, pausing to drink his coffee, and sighing deeply. He has a bag that is worn and full of history books. His hair is messy. His attire is casual. The laptop has an Akron University label slapped on the cover, along with two Supernatural and Doctor Who stickers with it. He has been sitting there for a few hours. Another man comes in, someone his age, and joins him. They ask how his term paper is coming and he groans. They nod sympathetically. They say that they understand because they gave up on it fifteen minutes ago. They order their coffee and glance at the notebook of notes beside him. He has now opened a history book. They leave and come back with their own laptop, decorated with another Akron University sticker and a Batman sticker. They casually lean back and scroll through something you can't see. After half an hour of that, the pair leave together.
What do you know about your subject? He likes Doctor Who and Supernatural, and might like Sherlock (because the fanbase of both feed into the Sherlock fanbase). He is in a history class. He is having a lot of trouble with his term paper. He is an overachiever (noted due to the fact he didn't give up on the term paper), unlike his friend who is probably scrolling on a form of social media (the only place you scroll on a laptop). His friend is into DC comics, or at least batman, and might be a roommate. Both go to Akron University. Your subject has been stressed all day because his hair is messed up and he probably ran his fingers through it. Additionally, that professor getting the paper is likely hard to please. I got all that through looking and none of it through asking. Common sense will get you far.
What if I annoy my subject?
A note on gender is necessary here. Men, you should be extra careful if your subject is a woman. Women, like me, don't react well to men who come across as off. If you messed up and came across as creepy and not as a nice dude writing a novel (if you are a nice dude - I assume you are if you want to avoid looking creepy) you should immediately disappear from that person's life or apologize and hope that you can befriend them someday (not today, another day). Two choices. Pick one and live with it. If they say you are a creep and run, you back off with no parting words or intention to study further. This society sometimes makes women feel unsafe. My best advice here is that you make a new friend from the start (which works much better).
If they talk to you personally about it in a logical, reasonable way you can easily explain that you are writing a novel and they were chosen as a character base, but if they desire to be left alone you will do so. This is if you run into a friendly human. The fact that they are willing to discuss this with you is a good sign and means you might work it out eventually (if not now). Don't despair. They are probably more forgiving than others. All the same, back off until your friendship is repaired.
Now, we bring up the illogical humans that get their feathers ruffled and don't forget. You make a mistake with this breed of human and they may do things behind your back. This is why you should heed the warning I posted at the top of the blog. This person will not just passively forgive you right away (believe me - I've been here before), but ask their forgiveness and explain anyway. Then back away from them declaring that you will leave them alone. And make no attempt to contact or talk to them unless they initiate first. Don't create any evidence that you were studying their personality. The less physical evidence you create, the better, because if they declare that you stalked them and there is no evidence to be found they can only slander (which still hurts, but is not as bad as it could be). Again, this is a human who may hold a grudge for a long period of time. Be careful and tread on eggshells.
I'll end this on a note I've been repeating all this blog. Befriend the subject of your studies and you will go far. Friends are far more forgiving than strangers. Friends will not spook as easily and you have easy access to being where they are - all without a conspicuous trenchcoat and hat (which you shouldn't even use nowadays). Go easy on yourself and make a new friend today. It will take the risks down to a bare minimum, where you can breathe a little easier. Plus, you get so much more from the subject when they trust you.
If you came to a musical to have a cheery tune play through your brain you should beware of these. Though they are excellent choices of entertainment, they don't leave you happy. Some of them make points about society, some are just weird, but they do not leave you with fuzzy feelings. Join me in exploring the world of musicals.
Photo by 25 YL
A musical, for the purpose of our blog here, is determined to be in both film and live theatre form. Basically, if there are consistent songs throughout the acting scenes and script you have a musical. The dancing and singing have to be essential, according to the dictionary, so that is our standard here.
While there are plenty of upbeat, light musicals out there, you clicked this blog link to talk about the ones you don't watch for sheer comedy. If you want the light humor and show tune quality in another blog comment below, but without further adieu, we start with Les Miserables.
Photo by Les Miserables
Les Miserables translates to "the miserable ones" and the book is no cheerier (in fact, it is much sadder at the end because it is drawn out). I'd recommend the book if you have a lot of time, but if you can barely read a short 20 chapter novel you should probably skip it due to the sheer length of the book (which was released in smaller chunks, but is huge put together). Victor Hugo wrote it and is not everyone's jam, so I get it. It is good if you have the attention span, so I suggest it - and I know because I took months to read it.
Anyway, the plot is that Jean Valjean gets out of prison in the 19th Century after serving 19 years for stealing bread for his family to eat. He then breaks parole in order to start a new life because a priest saved his soul by giving him mercy. He does a lot of good in the community and then has to run because of his violation of the law, which eventually puts him at the barricades through various detailed events that get a bit complicated. There are several plotlines to follow that all end up connected. The musical makes them easy to understand. It is all singing (talented singing), in case you were wondering, so if you are not into constant singing you were warned. It will leave you in tears.
Photo by Rocky Horror Wiki Fandom
Rocky Horror Picture Show is a cult classic, a musical that makes you wonder who drugged your popcorn - when you know no one did. It doesn't have a real clear plotline once everyone starts sleeping with each other and the only clear plot is the beginning, where Janet and Brad are newly engaged and get a flat tire. The couple go for help in a mansion that is full of sexually active aliens, one of which is a psychopath that plays with people like toys and is killed at the end for the sake of humanity.
In case you didn't know how to attend the show, I have advice. You can dress up, bring props (they sell them in survival kits there, most likely), and you are welcome to dance to the time warp when it comes up. You can shout up at actors, however, watch the people who know what they are doing before you do that. It is an oddity of a show. First time seeing it? You may have to be embarrassed with a lipstick V for virgin and sit at the front. Be prepared for that.
Cabaret, set during the start of the German occupation, is a show that truly shows you how the Nazi ideals choked out the good in society and killed relationships. The main character is a homosexual and is telling the story through a cabaret show style. At the end, they sing the same beginning song in a darker manner and use the same words to portray a different tone. Your narrator dies at the end scene when they bow and the lights go out - and the kicker is that they are wearing striped pajamas! It is a kick in the gut and you almost expect to hear a gunshot.
Photo By Stage Chat
During this whole musical there is a romance going on that involves a man and cabaret dancer, which is complicated by his confusion of sexual nature. Also, a Jewish man almost marries a woman, only to have the German Nazi influence ruin everything and leave the pair unable to marry. All the characters end up miserable and the main narrator is clearly killed in a concentration camp.
West Side Story is a gang and street-violence retelling of "Romeo and Juliet" by William Shakespeare. It is not exact, I don't think, and isn't intended to be exact. If you have never read the play I just mentioned it is about two people from rival families falling in love and killing themselves on accident and on purpose (depending on the character you are looking at). In this case, Maria is the sister of the gang leader of the Sharks (Porta Rican gang) and Tony is part of the Jets, the previously established gang unsure how to handle the foreign gang. Only Tony dies in this one, but Maria nearly kills herself and shoots several others in the process.
The way they show the gang violence is kind of mesmerizing due to the dance style and choreography. It is not all words in songs and is instead dance for most of the time. The beginning scene is quite telling without the need for the words, much like a silent film, but not silent. It is almost all body language and cinematography saying the Jets are not into the Sharks in the area. Watch it to the end to see how cool the dance style looks. It has an excellent way of telling a story without words, but still having words involved when necessary. Below is the opening scene, in case you want an example of this storytelling technique.
A gentleman's guide to love and murder is the tale of Monty Navarro, who learns at his mother's death that she was disowned for marrying poor, and that they were in poverty with no help from her rich family. He finds out he is up for a title, but they all hate him. As revenge and for his own gain he kills his way from the 8th Earl to being the 2nd Earl. It is not a commonly known one. He is attracted to two women and is trying to figure out what to do about it. He is then accused of murdering the one, the only relative, that he never murdered and actually liked.
Photo by Boulder Weekly
This one I have never fully seen because I can't find it on a recorded anything and can only listen to the soundtrack on youtube. Which is a bummer because it is such a funny show. I put it here because of its odd, murderous nature that might make some shy away from it. I loved the songs and I know that it is not the most normal entertainment in the world. Try it out, if you can find it shown. If you've seen it comment about your experience. I know it is long and takes some attention span.
Dear Evan Hansen is the story of a troubled youth who tried to kill himself over the summer in secret and gets a therapy note stolen from him. The kid with the note is found and it looks like a suicide note, so Evan gets contacted about it and lies about a friendship because he doesn't know what to do and doesn't want to tell them their son was a bully. He ends up dating the dead boy's sister. Everything spirals out of control and it is a tear-jerker.
Photo by Seanger Theatre
What makes it so emotional is the way that we see his anxiety tear him apart, as well as seeing part of why he was like that. We see the struggles of his single mother because her husband left. All of it is hard to look at, especially when the lie falls apart and chaos breaks forth into a confession that he tried to kill himself and he had lied to the family for months. I saw it live. I cried. It was an amazing show that his now as expensive as Hamilton (if you look for live shows).
Next To Normal is a show exploring bipolar disorder, suicide, electric shock therapy, and dealing with the death of a child. It is not the light and airy show and is here because of the mental health struggles it reveals. Diana Goodman has bipolar disorder and her first child died, but she sees him around the house. This causes problems with her living daughter. If you watch carefully, no one else acknowledges her figment and talks to him and the table is only set for one child and her date - not two children. The husband dealt with the loss by taking away every picture of the dead child, and after the electroshock therapy he doesn't return them and continues in denial. I'll let you watch the show and watch the complications that happen, but I will warn you that it is a bittersweet ending.
Photo By Broadwayworld.com
You see readers, this is more realistic than you would think. It isn't a sunny, bright show because the battle for mental health in disorders like Diana's is not sunny. It isn't fun to deal with the death of a child and in the case of the husband we see that he too is faced with this figment and has trouble even saying his name. By this time Diana is facing the child's death, recovering and is moving out due to her recovery. It is hard to watch, even more so than the previous show I described. Be mentally prepared to see a reality you are not used to. It is titled like it is due to the nature of Diana's life and how she can't have normal, but she can have next to normal.
As an avid reader who feels books almost have souls, I want to cry when I see gutted old books that might have been vintage set up as decor, or art that rips book pages from old, classic, antique books. I want to sob for every Nancy Drew book that anyone has ever destroyed for the sake of art. Books, to me at least, are more valuable than gold. That being said, if you are going to or have to destroy a book find a novel that is trash on paper or worth nothing (so, not antique or vintage). Today we explore what books are worth money and what books are not.
Photo Courtesy of My Wall Decor Ideas An example of abused books
Again, I implore you as a human being not to destroy these precious gifts that authors have given us and doom them to being useless decor. I know not everyone has room in their house to collect bookshelves of novels. There is a solution that will put some cash in your pocket or save you space - sell it or donate it. It is either that or you can pass the book on to the next reader in your family, friendship circle, or workplace.
I, personally, only keep books I enjoy or collect on my bookshelves (of which I don't have enough). I am an addict when it comes to books and have to occasionally make sure I'm going to read all my books every so many years. To those who collect valuable editions and rare books, an antique shop shelf is an excellent place to look. If you are going to start, you need a guide. I can only help you so far, but here is a basic guide to what is worth buying and what you should leave for those that want to make decor cheap.
Rare Books
Rare books are hard to find because of earlier print dates, limited edition, historical interest, or rare binding or character. These are the last thing you want to make decor or gut. I will take these precious paper children from you willing to save them and so will bookshops in your area. You can sell them at a high price online if you wanted to.
First editions, for starters, are worth a lot, and the older the book the more money you can get (especially 1900s). If it is published with 500 or fewer copies you may have an opportunity. Autographed books or books signed by someone famous are great, too. If anyone famous owned anything you can sell it for some spending or saving cash, as a general rule. If it was made by a specific printing technique that is no longer used you are holding something rare. Depending on the condition, you can adjust your prices. Mint condition (perfect with no wear) is money. Signed binding is another thing to look for.
Releases of special covers of books get attention. Some people want pretty, leather-bound books and pay well for them. Reprints with more decorated covers and more illustrations are sought out, as well. Specific typography is the same concept. If you have a cover of a book that is unique and hard to find (even if the content is the same as the cheap paperback of the same title) you should not harm it, especially if it is in mint condition. Fore-edged painting, painting done by hand on the edges of a page of a closed book is something to look for.
I will warn you that some books have more demand than others and this requires research to find out. A first edition alone does mean rare. Also, identifying first editions is not as easy as you think. One way to check is to check the date it was copyrighted and the date it was printed. Does it match? If so, yes, it is the first edition. There are a few other ways, but you are going to have to go deeper and get a manual on first editions, due to the non-uniform nature of publishing companies.
Why Do Reprints and Originals Vary?
Photo by Los Angeles Times
You would not think that reprinting would change content, but I'm going to use Nancy Drews as an example here. Some books are re-edited when they are released again. The originals actually have slightly different content sometimes (this may be true of other books, but do your research). The covers of Nancy Drew dime novels (because they cost only a small amount) give away the time they were released. The ones released now are revised, every one of them. The guide at the link below will give you more details, but you see my point. Some collectors say the revised are not as good as the original, but most of the books sold in major book stores are the shiny revised. Take a trip through antique stores and look for the originals, if you are trying to collect them all. The same thing goes for the Hardy Boys collection.
http://www.series-books.com/nancydrew/text.html (The link is specific, in case you need that.)
http://hardyboys.us/hbos.htm ( This is the Hardy Boys reprints that details the specifics.)
The Series That People Want Most
Nancy Drew and Hardy Boys are two series that are in demand from collectors. The book collectors out there tend to band together and show off their collection on bookshelves. Most likely, they also play Nancy Drew games, but that is beside the point.
We also have, on this collectible list, "Birds of America" by James Audubon. It was auctioned for 6.6 million dollars. Good luck getting it.
Photo By 13th Dimension
Some may know how much DC and Marvel mean to the world right now. Their comic books are extremely valuable when in good condition and the people who collect will do so avidly. They, too, will show off their bookshelf to others.
Edgar Allen Poe, it seems, is in demand. He is a gifted, dark poet that has been let into public education textbooks. This is thousands of dollars in auctions. Good luck finding much of this stuff for a student price.
Next, we have Charles Darwin's "The Origin of Species". Expensive book, but if you want it I suppose the richest bidder will find it. It usually comes up at auctions every year or so. Again, you'd better be rich if you want this one.
Harry Potter is a classic series and is collected quite often. The first editions of this series cost some money, but are not as bad as the above book. 150,000 dollars for this is not unheard of (given it is the first edition). This is not an old book. It is not any less valuable because it isn't old.
Least Valuable Books
Photo By The Guardian
Personally, I'm going to give my opinion and you can disagree, but the book series that I think you should gut is "Fifty Shades of Grey", every one of them. I have two reasons. One is that the content is pornographic in a dark nature and represents an unhealthy relationship that shouldn't be graphically shown to anyone. Reason two is that the content, even if it weren't graphic, is so badly written that it should never have been published at all.
To see some of the many reasons why this book was royal crap on a plate read this link: https://www.workthegreymatter.com/50-novel-writing-mistakes-fifty-shades-grey-part-1/
Our role of dishonor continues with "Mein Kampf" written by Adolf Hitler. I don't have to tell you why.
After this opinions may go this way and that, so it is up to you after this, but if you can get money for it don't gut it. The money is useful for several things, but a gutted book is worth nothing.
The cult classics are never going out of style, whether they hit the box office well or flopped. Some of them were experiments, graphic novels and books, or just the result of a British or American TV show spinoff. What cult classics have you seen?
Photo By Forbes
What qualifies as a cult classic? Good question. The standard is that a film must have a devoted cult following, which means a devoted fan group in different wording. It can't be a short-lived infatuation. These films don't go away and fade out of memory in a few years. They are remembered years later and have sequels in some cases.
Some films are remembered for being bad, so much so that we are laughing at the film in theatres when it isn't a comedy (like The Room). Others are classics for being good and timeless. Princess Bride, just one example, is known as a fantastic film everywhere and is unlikely to be remade or enjoyed as a remake. There are a few of these movies that are known for their unique features. Rocky Horror Picture Show is a blaring example of this, to the point that it is one of the only theatre shows that people might yell at the stage. Without further adieu, we go forward into the land of cult classics.
Scott Pilgrim Vs The World
Photo By Next Gen Base
This one bombed at the box office, but yet, I have a copy at home in my collection. It became a cult classic later and is actually quite close to the graphic novel when it comes to accuracy, to the point of verbatim images and movie lines, give or take a few shots and scenes. It is a gamer classic, especially if you know what games they are referencing. It has Nintendo game music within the soundtrack and a game connected with it. You can play this movie in the form of a game.
The plot, in case you know nothing about this geeky classic, is that Scott Pilgrim meets a girl and has to defeat her seven evil exes in video-game-related battles that most nerdy and geeky fans will fangirl over. It is based tightly on a six-book graphic novel set (of which I have all of them). It didn't hit the box office well because it is for a special audience. When it comes to video game imitation only Wreck-It Ralph 1 and 2 can compete. The specialized audience that it was made for flocked to it and continues to watch it long past its release to theatres.
Sharknado
This one is rather brainless in nature, but that is kind of why some people watched it and funded it
Photo By Amazon
enough to make sequels. I do not understand how it made money. Somehow this plot, which people ate up with a spoon, of sharks and tornadoes has six sequels. The first one was not a comedy. The rest of them were given a facade of seriousness so that the nature of comedy could still be there. It was clear to the people filming this weird stuff that their serious film was taken as comedic and did well in the genre.
The plot, if there even is one, is that Los Angeles is flooded with shark-infested waters and mayhem ensues. Reading the plot alone is comedy. It is like a badly written film of Jaws, only they made it so ridiculous that "a boating accident" can't even be blamed. I have no words for this series. I'm pretty dang sure that people watch it to make fun of it and because they don't want to think. 18 reviews were made on rotten tomatoes - and they said it was fun, brainless, and should probably be watched while drunk (paraphrasing several reviews, not exact wording). I'm sure it would make sense if you stopped using your brain and consumed a few bottles of wine and a keg of beer. All the same, I don't understand why they made it.
Here is the plot. Have fun laughing! : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharknado
Jaws
Photo By Film Affinity
Speaking of sharks, here is a film that is supposed to be horror, but is suspense instead. Compared to what horror films about sharks we have now I'd say it is good. It always will be. It just isn't as scary as it used to be considered. I love this film. Classics don't die.
The plot is simple and makes sense (unlike the other shark movie I just referenced). Police Chief Martin Brody recognizes a shark attack, but is denied authority to close the beaches. Some more shark attacks come up on the fourth of July. This leads to an agreement to hire someone to hunt the shark. The sequels focus on the Brody family and how shark attacks seem to follow them. There are only three sequels. This one is worth the time to see.
The Room
This film showed in the theatre, but I can tell you that it was not because it was quality. The world made
Photo by VICE
fun of this movie, from dialogue to acting to plot. I've seen it. It was not intended to be a comedy, and yet, it gets laughs when it is shown. The director wrote it, starred in it, and produced it. It has around nine sex scenes (all of which are not good).
The plot, though incoherent and awful, is that Johnny is living the American dream and his wife is cheating on him. It is supposed to have a sad ending. I, personally, was too busy laughing at the bad acting. If that is any clue to the overall film you can just guess how much camera film they wasted. There is a film about the making of The Room called The Disaster Artist.
Rocky Horror Picture Show
Photo By Mental Floss
There are two versions (and I hear both are good). The basic plotline is that a newly engaged couple, on their way to announce this to a friend, get a flat tire and end up at a mansion of sexually active aliens (an understatement, if you've seen this movie). At this point, the plot gets weirder and odder until you have a suspicion that someone drugged your Cheetos, popcorn, or soda. It all boils down to a psychopath who plays with people like they are toys and acts like an adult child when they don't comply.
If you notice that gay pride signs are all through this one, you may also notice a lot of inuendoes. There is no cussing in this movie, but they don't need it after you count all the endless sex jokes. This is a broadway show, then a movie later. It was never a failure in the broadway sense, but did flop originally in the movie theatre. Actually, audiences watched this movie to yell at the screen, dress up in costumes, bring props, and trash the theatre viewing room. Some people watch this movie daily in theatres late at night.
Be aware that if you are seeing it for the first time, broadway or movie theatre, you might have a lipstick V (for virgin) put on your forehead and be seated at the front of the theatre. You might be embarrassed in front of others. If you wish to save someone sitting with you from this embarrassment because they are not of the temperament to stand it don't tell anyone it is their first time. Don't let them say it, either. It may even be a better idea to rent the movie and watch it at home (where no one can do anything to you). It depends on your friend that you brought. Or you.
The Princess Bride
Photo By Know Your Meme
I think we all know that this movie can never be redone because it is perfect as is. In case you don't know the plot, I'll give you the gist of it. Buttercup and Wesley have a romance until Wesley is thought to be killed by the dread pirate Roberts. Buttercup then marries a prince (but never professes to love him) and Wesley turns out to be alive. From there chaos ensues. I'm not going to give you every little detail. I want you to watch this one and enjoy the fairytale that it is.
Monty Python and the Holy Grail
Photo By Blu-Ray Authority
This one is not everyone's cup of tea. It is British humor. If you like that you will love this movie. It doesn't take a brain and can be a great rest from writing a paper for your college classes. It is the search for the Holy Grail by King Arther and his knights of the round table. Monty Python is known for being rather silly. That is what makes this gem what it is. I encourage you to watch this one, too, and laugh for a while as the English make fun of themselves. It is absurd humor that doesn't have to make sense. An overly serious mind will stare at this and go "What?".
Blues Brothers
I liked this one. You see, it is a musical in movie form and sucks you into the plot (and forgetting
Photo By Eye For Film
everything on your to-do list). Pull this out when you don't have a long list of things that need doing because you will find you have nothing done after you begin watching. That is precisely why it is good. It keeps your attention.
The plot is that The Blues Brothers reunite the band to save an orphanage in their city that raised them. It is all jazz music and gospel music that pops up at nearly every scene. It is rated well, according to google (nearly all ratings are five stars), so I'd say it is doing well.
Pulp Fiction
Photo By IMDB
The film has its own genre, practically, due to the nature of the film. It involves gangs, money, drugs, a gangster's wife overdosing and being revived, a boxer, armed bandits, and a fixer. It gets complicated and has an updated Noir feel to it (Neo-Noir). It is directed by Quentin Tarantino. If you know that director you know his quirks. He is rather violent in nature with his plots. It was received well by audiences and critics.
Star Trek
Fun fact, the actors thought they were making dumpster trash. Now people dress like Klingons to go cosplaying. It seems it was not garbage after all. The budget for the original was not high, unsurprisingly, so you can tell when they did get more money for the production of it and the budget rose. It has not died and probably won't die out in our entertainment because of the large fandom that is supporting it - young and old alike.
If you don't know the basic plot, it is set in the future when humans and aliens are existing together and explore galaxies together through starships. It is often compared with Star Wars, which is not the same plot. We have the original series starting 1966-69, The Next Generation from 1987-94, Deep Space Nine from 1993-99, Voyager from 1995 -2001, Enterprise from 2001-2005, Discovery starting in 2017, and Picard starting in 2020. I would not be surprised if I missed a series, so let me know if I did.
