Movie Time: 44 Pages

Sometimes I watch something that is not a comparison for Movie Monday, but I want to share my thoughts about it, so Movie Time!

44 Pages

Release Date: March 6, 2018

Watched: on Netflix, August 3

Website  

Rating:

Review: 
44 Pages is a documentary that I had no idea existed. It is all about Highlights magazine - you know the kids one that is always in doctors and dentist's offices. I would have given my left arm for a subscription when I was a kid, but it wasn't something that I ever had. I loved seeing them in doctors offices and I loved doing the puzzles - especially when you found one that wasn't already all circled and written on. I never wanted to write in them so that the next kid could play too and I used it as a weird memory exercise, could I remember the ones I already found?...

But back to why we are here, Highlight really does hold a place in so many children's lives and I was so excited to watch this movie about them. I learned so much, for example: 

• They are still family owned.
• They get about 3,000+ letters a year and reply back to all of the children that write them!
• They are geared for ages 6-12, and have other magazines for younger audiences.e
• The reason they are in doctors and dentist offices is because they almost had to close down and it was a clever idea one of the sons had.

  It is just amazing to me how well they have done over the years and how much impact they have on the kids that read their magazine. The people that work there seem genuinely happy. The movie shows their process and it looks like a lot of work and thought go into these 44 pages and it is amazing the dedication they have to it. 

I had such a wonderful time learning about the magazine that I really adored as a kid and I hope they are around for a long time.

Movie Monday: The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky

Movie Monday is a new feature at Cover2CoverBlog where I talk about Book-Movie Adaptations. If you have any recommendations let me know in the comments. 

This feature may contain SPOILERS to both the books AND the movies so read carefully.

Today's comparison is... 

The Perks of Being a Wallflower

 

THE BOOK The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky Publisher: MTV Books and Pocket Books Publication Date:  1999

THE MOVIE The Perks of Being a Wallflower Staring: Logan Lerman, Emma Watson, and Ezra Miller Release Date: 2012

Another Warning: SPOILERS & TRIGGERS AHEAD

The Perks of Being a Wallflower for me was one of those books that really had everything I needed to hear when I read it - that was when I was in high school.
I saw the movie eventually but really didn't want to initially - I felt like it would ruin the feelings the book gave me. Eventually my curiosity won and I saw it.

A few key things to note though - the author directed the movie, so it should be a pretty close representation, right? Yes, it was but I had very different feelings about them...

The movie was good, but it just didn't give me the feels the way the book did. There was something dismal and melancholy about the book that just sat with me and has over the years. I remember the book being depressing but that was what I needed at the time - I was angsty, so was the book. It was nice.

The movie on the other hand had a more comedic feel to it. It was fanciful - if that makes sense a lot of the emotional moments are left out of the movie and even song choices have changed making the movie more light feeling.

Here are a few instances of changes:

• The Book is written as letters, whereas the Movie is more of a narrative - obviously they had to adapt to a different media, this was fine for me. But you learn more about Charlie on paper than on screen.
•  In the beginning of the book you learn that a friend of Charlie's has committed suicide. It is right there out in the open. In the movie it takes a while before you learn that tidbit of info.
• The tunnel scene in the book uses the song Landslide by Fleetwood Mac whereas the movie used We Can Be Heroes by Bowie - this changed the mood of this scene a good amount. Like I mentioned, it's more light.
• There is a beautiful poem that Charlie gives Patrick for Christmas in the book, in the movie - nope.
• I think the biggest change was how Charlie remembers his abuse and abuser. In the book, he and Sam are getting very close to having sex and he has a mental breakdown right before. In the movie, it is downplayed a bit, he realizes before anything too serious happens with Sam. Although, either way he ends up in the mental hospital.

The movie has its 'perks' (LOL) though, it is lighter and more audience ready. It was quirky and funny, and the characters and casting were amazing. I just really had the feels for the book.

Have you read Perks? What did you think of the book? Did you enjoy the movie? Let me know in the comments.

   

Movie Monday: Water for Elephants

Movie Monday is a new feature at Cover2CoverBlog where I talk about Book-Movie Adaptations. If you have any recommendations let me know in the comments. 

This feature may contain SPOILERS to both the books AND the movies so read carefully.

Today's comparison is... 

Water for Elephants

 

THE BOOK Water for Elephants by Sara Gruen Publisher: Algonquin Books Publication Date:  2006

THE MOVIE Water for Elephants Staring: Reese Witherspoon and Robert Pattinson Release Date: 2011

Another Warning: SPOILERS AHEAD
Disclaimer: Both the Book and the Movie have animal deaths :(

 

I read this book a long time ago and absolutely loved it. It was dramatic and emotional and the characters were vivid and deep and overall it was just a wonderful read. When I saw the movie long after it hit theaters, honestly, I was not all that impressed. So here is why... (caution - spoilers)

In the book I loved the characters and the way the plot played out - it had flashbacks and revelations and these added to the overall theme.We  are introduced to the main character, Jacob as an old man in a nursing home. In the movie we do meet an old man but not in the same context. 

From there the plot continues into the circus and Jacob's story. In the book the circus is run by Uncle Al, a spiteful, angry, terrifying man. However in the movie, August runs the show and so we only really get one villain - that is fine, but Uncle Al and August together really did a number on Jacob and the story. I found this change to be acceptable but Uncle Al in the book was a presence.

Also in the movie Marlena is orphaned and taken in by the circus, obviously out of survival this is important, however in the books she made the choice to go to the circus by running away with August - making their relationship a very different one in the book. All that abuse in the book came out of her choice to run away, not because she was orphaned. Her character, I found, is drastically different in the movie because of this. 

A few other differences include: the reasoning and the plot surrounding some of the animal deaths were altered to better fit the tale woven by the book/movie respectively. And while we are talking about death, the movie also had August try to kill Marlena, whereas the book did not.

Overall the movie was a good one if you aren't comparing it to the book, but I LOVED the book. I laughed, I cried, I wanted to punch August in the face all the time. The movie characters just felt flat to me. I wanted the depth the book gave and in that aspect the movie did not deliver.

Have you read Water for Elephants? What did you think of the book? Did you enjoy the movie? Let me know in the comments.

   

Movie Monday: Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

Movie Monday is a new feature at Cover2CoverBlog where I talk about Book-Movie Adaptations. If you have any recommendations let me know in the comments. 

This feature may contain SPOILERS to both the books AND the movies so read carefully.

Today's comparison is...

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

 

THE BOOK Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban by J.K. Rowling Publisher: Scholastic Publication Date: 1999

THE MOVIE Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban Directed by Alfonso Cuaron/ Warner Bros Release Date: 2004

Another Warning: SPOILERS AHEAD

 

I re-watched this movie the other day and I have one HUGE pet-peeve about it that I wanted to share.

First of all, I loved these books - all of them. I love Sirius Black and his presence from here on out in the series was spectacular for so many reasons. I also really enjoyed the Harry Potter movies and I loved when Cuaron came on board to direct Prisoner of Azkaban. He made it darker and the series was getting darker and after this is when the movies even started becoming PG-13... a good move for lovers of the series, I think.

 Anywho, aside from the fact that this movie kind of skirts over Sirius Black's importance in the series, my biggest pet-peeve of this film adaptation is that they never explain the significance of the Marauder's Map and who came up with it.

If you have only seen the movies - here is the backstory.  Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot, and Prongs are the nicknames of Lupin, Pettigrew, Black, and James Potter who created the map. The nicknames were given because of Animagus forms and in Lupin's case, his werewolf form.

My issue with the movie not explaining this information is that the map shows everyone- regardless of shifting abilities and if you knew that Peter Pettigrew had the Animagus form of a rat (Wormtail) you would know why this is SO important. Pettigrew shows up on the map to Harry.

The movie completely disregards all of this beautifully written book information and chalks it up to Black recognizing Wormtail. I can understand why you would need to cut some things out, but the map is SO cool... I think it should have been included.

End rant...

Movie Monday: The Princess Diaries

Movie Monday is a new feature at Cover2CoverBlog where I talk about Book-Movie Adaptations. If you have any recommendations let me know in the comments. 

This feature may contain SPOILERS to both the books AND the movies so read carefully.

Today's comparison is... 

The Princess Diaries

 

THE BOOK The Princess Diaries by Meg Cabot Publisher: Harper Trophy Publication Date:  2000

THE MOVIE Disney's The Princess Diaries Staring: Julie Andrews and Anne Hathaway  Release Date: 2001

Another Warning: SPOILERS AHEAD

 

While reading this book, I really wanted to have a quick discussion about the book -movie differences and thus this became Movie Monday... hope you enjoy.

I watched The Princess Diaries movie long before I read the book, actually it was just recently that I picked up the series to read. Much to my surprise the movie was vastly different from the book in huge ways! I really enjoyed the movie adaptation, but now that I have read the book I like that SO much more - so here is why.

Sadly, the reasoning is not just "duh, because it was a book first", while that is completely legit (in my 'reader' opinion) I think that Disney made the movie more family friendly and distorted the story a bit in doing so.

Let's talk about that movie first. Mia is a teen, she learns she is a princess and has to take over the thrown of Genovia. Her grandmother is there to help her take on this craziness and she does it with ease and is semi-supportive of Mia freaking out. Let's also note that Mia learns this from a note from her father that is given to her on her 16th birthday... father is not in the picture.

Now the book is a lot different than the movie - biggest differences being 1. the dad isn't dead in the book and makes for some very interesting conversations and scenarios with Mia and her mother, and 2. grandma is a bit of a b**** in the books (excuse my language). These things made the book have so much more character development. You really hated the grandmother with/ through Mia and the mother - father interactions were priceless and really lend themselves to learning more about how Mia was raised and the young woman she has become. 

The movie is funny and entertaining but there is no real 'villain' and the plot, while very similar to the book, it is almost more simplistic and very Cinderella-story -esq. Whereas in the book there is the grandmother to loathe and there is a lot more push-back by Mia and I think that made her a stronger character - she tries to stay herself while also becoming a princess versus just becoming a princess.

And that is that, I enjoyed the book, the movie was an ok adaptation but a very different one. Have you read these books? Did you enjoy the movie? Let me know in the comments.

   

The Mortal Instruments: Should you go see it?

Image Source

Hello Lovelies! 

Are you still wondering whether or not it is worth going to the theater to see The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones? 

Well read this and see how you feel. 

If you have not read the books you CAN read the below review, I believe I have left out the spoilers.

Last night I went to see The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones with my younger sister. I have read 4 of the Mortal Instruments books and she has yet to pick them, so I figured it would be interesting to have her take on the movie and mine, seeing that they would be very different.




So you have read them, what will you think?
Having read the books, I think the main plot points are all there but there was a lot of explanations left out that are needed to understand a lot of the content. For example, I don't think they ever address what a Stele is or a the Seraph Blades and their importance and how they work. Hodge's character is just as strange as in the books but his back story isn't told at all -- he is just said to "not get out much" or something along those lines.

I think they did a great job with casting but felt that in my head Luke was buffer.... just a thought. Overall I found it to be pretty good but was not overly impressed. The sets where wonderful and captivating but they overtook a lot of the content I feel.

Mmmmmm Jace.... Image Source

So you have read them yet but want to see it, how will that go?

Cecilia, who hasn't read the books, thought it was great and loved the story but thought it was confusing with the whole Instruments explanation (or lack there of): Why are they important? What are they? (Were a few of her questions.) She was curious about why people were acting certain ways because of the lack of back story and wanted to know what the "glowy stick" was when they were etching runes into themselves and what the deal was with Shadowhunters and Werewolves versus demons. What are the Accords? 
 
Given all that, we are going to the bookstore today to buy a copy for her to read, I can only hope the movie hasn't completely tainted it for her, that would suck.

So there you have it: As a book lover, I would suggest reading it first if you haven't and if you have read it, it is still up to you. It was a god showing but it was a really long book (hardcover is 485 pages) and to pack all that into 130 minutes would be a challenge for any book/movie adaptation. 

Here is the Trailer if you have been living under a rock and haven't seen it:

Would you like book reviews?

 Here is a link to short reviews for books 1-3 in the Mortal Instruments series.