BioBooksAwardsComing NextContactBlogFun StuffHome

Posts Tagged ‘movies’

Pop Culture and Fiction

Thursday, August 12th, 2010

I’ve been thinking this week about pop culture and how it’s used in fiction. I will admit that I absolutely loathe brand name dropping (especially designer name dropping) when I read a book. Every time I see a heroine in Bruno Magli shoes, I cringe a little. There are other shoe brands besides this one.

And here is where I confess that I did, indeed, mention a brand of shoes for a secondary character in one of my books. But she wore Amalfi pumps and the only reason I named a brand at all was because the rhythm of the sentence screamed out for one.

Pop culture references, though, go beyond designer names. Characters don’t exist in a vacuum–or at least they shouldn’t. If someone is writing a contemporary story, these people need to use computers, cell phones, and watch television and movies. They should text their friends, listen to their iPods, and know about major forces in the society. For example, is there any adult (or kid for that matter) in the United States who hasn’t seen at least one episode of The Brady Bunch? Or maybe seen one of the movies?

So when I write I have characters who are Cubs fans, who drive Ford Explorers or Aston Martins, characters who have seen the blockbuster movies, and who own computers, cell phones, and send text messages. Not only does it define the character, but it also makes them more real.

This was something that came up while I was writing In the Midnight Hour. I had references in there to Bewitched because the heroine is a magic-wielding troubleshooter and the hero is a human who’s just been introduced to such a person existing in the world. If he didn’t know Bewitched, there’d be something wrong with him. But one of my friends called my attention to Charmed and felt that the hero and heroine would be familiar with that show, too. She was right.

Ryne, my heroine, would be interested in the human portrayal of magic users–for a good laugh if for no other reason. It’s also fair to assume with the show going into reruns before it went off the air, that Deke, the hero had seen it, too. And that he would base his knowledge of magic on Hollywood representations because he knows nothing else.

IMO, there’s always a need to balance the pop culture references. Too many and it’s annoying. Too trendy and it dates your book. And this is especially hard with music. Groups come and go so fast now.

When I needed music for In the Darkest Night, I knew Kel wouldn’t listen to the Beatles or the Rolling Stones. He was 29, not 59 and he’s listening to current music (not that I might not have a hero or heroine in the future who’s really into classic rock, but Kel wasn’t). I went with Korn because they’d been around for a little while and took a stab that Seether would still be around in five years. I hope I gambled right with those choices. :-)

I still remember picking up an old Silhouette Desire. I remember the story being awesome, although I can’t remember the author or the title. But as I was reading, I hit a description of what the heroine was wearing–a velour top and a wrap-around skirt. That jerked me out of the story quickly because it was so dated.

This stuck with me for years and it’s part of the reason why I go with very classic styles for my characters. My heroes and heroines generally wear jeans and T-shirts, sweatshirts, polo shirts or I’ll just say she was wearing a black skirt. My big foray into more specific clothing was In Twilight’s Shadow. I tried to give enough for the reader to picture the dresses Maia wore, but not so specific that it dated the book. I hope I succeeded, but since I’m not a fashion maven, I don’t know.

So yeah, balance. It’s not always an easy line to walk, but I think it’s one authors have to tread or their characters become less real. I’m not going to reference a TV show like My Own Worst Enemy in any of my books (even though it was a totally awesome show that more people should have watched so that it didn’t get cancelled), but shows that ran for a while, or that have lived forever on TV Land? Yeah, those get mentioned.

Review: The Cat From Outer Space

Monday, December 28th, 2009

I mentioned before Thanksgiving that my family watches movies on the holidays and that I was going with Disney classics since those are about the only films we can all watch together. I like action and adventure and my parents don’t. On Thanksgiving, we watched The Boatniks and that was a huge hit, so I decided to try The Cat From Outer Space, another live-action Disney movie. It’s from 1978 and stars Ken Berry as Frank and Sandy Duncan as Liz.

Warning, there will be spoilers!

The basic premise is that a spaceship lands on Earth in need of repairs and the pilot is a cat who can communicate telepathically and has a collar that allows his thoughts to transform into actions. The military shows up and takes the spaceship away, and the general goes to a think tank full of scientists to figure out how the ship is powered. The cat hears Frank’s theory, and while everyone else laughs him off, our feline ET knows that Frank is the one to help him repair his ship and go home.

Not only does Frank have to outwit the military, but the think tank is employing a bean counter who is secretly working for a megalomaniac named Olympus. If you just scratched you head and went, huh, you’re not alone. This plot line served no real purpose in the movie.

Anyway, the cat needs about $120,000 in gold to replace a filament on his ship and Frank enlists the help of another scientist to help them gamble their way to the money. They get the gold and the army shows up to arrest them. The cat freezes them, they escape and head to the army base so our ET can leave. Olympus kidnaps Liz (Sandy Duncan), Frank’s love interest and fellow scientist, and the friend who helped him make bets.

Instead of leaving, ET kitty decides to stay and rescue Liz (friend was released to let Frank know Liz was held hostage) even though it means he’s stuck on Earth forever because he’ll miss the rendezvous with the mother ship.

This movie was bad. Maybe if you’re a little kid you can enjoy it, but I found this ridiculous and disjointed. Olympus wasn’t necessary, but his sole role appears to have been to kidnap Liz. Liz was unnecessary because she kept showing up, interrupting Frank trying to help the cat return to outer space.

The military in this movie had the worst security ever. And our feline hero, who might miss his chance to go home if he messes up, is constantly losing focus whenever Liz’s cat is in the room.

It was an excruciatingly long 1:45. In fact, it felt much, much longer than that. What really put the topper on bad for me, though, is the dramatic “climax.” I put it in quotes for a reason.

Olympus takes off in his helicopter with his two henchmen, his spy, Liz, and her cat. Frank and our ET feline take off in a beat up old junker plane that the cat is keeping in the air by thought alone. Super spy (read sarcasm here) in the helicopter tries to shoot a flare at the plane and instead disables the helicopter. The boss and the two henchmen have parachutes and bail out–super spy grabs Olympus’ straps and free falls with him. That leaves Liz and her cat in the disabled helicopter.

The ET cat maneuvers the plane close to the helicopter and Frank rescues the cat. Now he tells Liz to take his hand and he’ll help her get on the plane. And Liz won’t do it. She’s dinking around forever. I finally yelled at the TV set, “Either let Frank help your or go back in the helicopter and land the damn thing!” As she continues dithering, I added, “You’re too stupid to live.”

And I think that summed up the entire movie for me–stupid. I love Disney pictures. Normally. I can even tolerate a great deal of cheese, but this was way too much for me. My recommendation–give The Cat From Outer Space a pass.

My rating: 1.5 stars (It got bonus points because the general was Colonel Potter from MASH and the friend of Frank’s who gambled was Colonel Blake from MASH.)

Dear Hollywood

Monday, December 14th, 2009

I read a news item a few weeks ago that the movie studios want to delay the releases of their new movies to Netflix, Red Box, and other rental outfits because they aren’t selling enough new movies to consumers. This is my response.

Dear Hollywood Executives,

The problem with people purchasing movies isn’t that we can rent them the day they’re released. In my considered opinion, the reason you aren’t selling more movies to consumers is that there are so few of them that are worth watching more than once. (And even once can be an iffy thing.) Why would I bother to spend $20 or more for a movie I might watch a single time?

If you would like to sell more DVDs, you need to release movies that consumers want to watch more than once. Movies they love so much they need to own them. You’re not doing that right now.

Take me for example. I love movies, I love stories, and I would be happy to own copies of films I loved. In fact, I just did this. I watched the new Star Trek movie last weekend and loved it so much that I bought my own copy the same day I put the Netflix envelope in the mail. But these movies are few and far between.

Let’s talk about Pirates of the Caribbean. The first movie was awesome and totally rocked. I bought a copy and watched it many times. I was eagerly looking forward to the second. And then I watched it. To say this was a huge disappointment would be understating it. Everything that was fun and wonderful about the original (with the exception of the very sexy Mr. Johnny Depp and Mr. Orlando Bloom) was missing from the second film. It became all special effects that overwhelmed the characters and should we talk about number three? I found that one the worst of the trio with characterization sacrificed to a boring plot and special effects that were a huge yawner. Why would I want to buy Pirates 2 or 3?

Or how about The Terminator, one of my favorite movies of all time? That one I own and I watch parts of it over and over. Even T2 was good, although it lacked the magic of the first. But I’ve never watched T3, and while I have T:Salvation in my queue at Netflix, I’m in no rush to see it. Frankly, I just don’t care.

That’s the problem with most of the movies you are releasing, Hollywood Executives–I don’t care. I don’t care enough to drive to the movie theater to watch them, and in the last two years, I can count on one hand the number of movies I’ve seen that I felt driven to own with plenty of fingers left over. And if I hadn’t seen them on Netflix and loved them, I wouldn’t have bought them because I’ve been burned too many times by lackluster films that rely on a franchise (Rocky 32) or some tie in (Batman, Transformers) to attract an audience.

Or ooh, how about all the remakes. You’re going to remake Ice Castles? Red Dawn? Seriously? These weren’t great movies the first time around, do you believe that they’ll be better rehashed?

Dear Hollywood Executives, you want to sell more movies? Why don’t you make movies that are so awesome that we, the consumer, can’t imagine not owning our own copies. Yes, some of this is subjective–there are people who bought Waterworld–but some of it is not. Storytelling is more than special effects and a franchise name. The stories/movies that stay with us are original, well-written, and make us feel something for the characters and their journey. I’m not going to buy a movie just because Johnny Depp is in it or because it’s Terminator Millennium. I purchase the movies that grabbed me and entertained me. So yes, I bought the latest Star Trek and the original Terminator among others, but these types of movies are few and far between.

Let your writers loose. Let them be creative. Don’t rely on star power or a franchise like Rambo or tie-ins to comic books or toys to carry a film. They might be enough to get someone to watch a movie once, but these things alone are not enough to get most people to actually buy a movie. Yes, I want to see Johnny Depp, but I want to see him in an awesome movie, one without plot holes, one that keeps me entertained for the two hours it’s playing, one that I can’t imagine not watching a second time. To get that, you need writers. You need writers that aren’t writing the same old thing because that’s all you’re buying and producing.

Please give me something worth buying and I promise you, I will purchase more DVDs.

Review: Star Trek (The Latest Movie)

Sunday, December 6th, 2009

This weekend I watched the latest Star Trek movie starring Chris Pine as James T. Kirk and Zachary Quinto as Spock. This movie is a prequel to the original television series and was released in May 2009, so I’ll try to avoid spoilers.

The movie opens with an attack that didn’t make sense to me at first, not until I realized it was a kind of prologue. The movie really gets started when Jim Kirk gets into a fight with some Star Fleet personnel in a bar. Captain Pike stops it and convinces Kirk to join Star Fleet. He does–of course–and we follow his adventures as he meets Uhura, Bones McCoy, Spock, Chekov, Sulu, and Scotty. There’s a bad Romulan out there fighting Star Fleet and Kirk finds himself thrust into command through a set of circumstances no one could have foreseen.

I loved this movie! I honestly didn’t expect to since I’ve found most of the Star Trek stuff kind of boring since the film where they rescued the whales. Was that Star Trek #4? But this was totally awesome!

It started off with a bang and never lost momentum anywhere. I found the movie fresh and fun and the portrayals fit, something that surprised me because the characters of Kirk and Spock are so set by Leonard Nimoy and William Shatner. The movie was high energy and fun and it seemed as if the cast was having fun, too.

I seriously only have one nit with the entire movie and that’s the time travel aspect that changes everything. I think this was a cheat because the writers didn’t want to deal with the parameters they’d been given in the series, but by sending a Romulan back in time who changes things before Kirk is born, now they can do whatever they want with Star Trek without worrying about breaking canon with the series. This does bug me, there’s no reason why this film couldn’t have honored the pasts/setups done in the series, but whatever.

Everything else about the movie was awesome and I’m going to buy a copy so I can watch it again and again when the mood strikes.

My rating: 5 Stars (And two enthusiastic thumbs up!)

The Great Holiday Movie Struggle

Thursday, November 26th, 2009

One of my family’s traditions is to watch movies at Thanksgiving and Christmas. You’d think this would be a simple thing to do, but you’d be wrong. Finding a movie we can agree on is a struggle and my holidays are just my parents and me.

We start out with one big strike–my folks don’t enjoy action/adventure movies and these happen to be my favorite. I don’t like “heartwarming” stories about animals, particularly if there’s a chance the animal will die or suffer some other hardship. These are my mom’s favorite movies. I’m not sure what my dad prefers because he’ll go along wit anything, but my guess would be comedy, particularly older comedies where he won’t feel uncomfortable about the language or situations.

Last year was a big fail. I tried a Jane Austen movie. I don’t remember the name of it, but it starred Emma Thompson and Kate Winslet. Both my parents slept through it. I wished I could be lucky enough to drop unconscious. Talk about boring with a capital B.

The year before that we tried a Dean Martin celebrity roast. No one fell asleep, but the humor was very dated and some of it was like OMG, did someone really say that?

I could go back for years with similar stories. We just can’t find something that we all are interested in watching that is actually good. So with this in mind, on Sunday I picked out this year’s Thanksgiving Day movie. I figured the family section on Netflix was a good choice and from there selected comedies. Most of the movies were from the 60s and 70s which really says something about how many good family films are coming out of Hollywood now, but I digress.

I clicked through page after page of live-action Disney movies, many of which I’d already seen. I finally decided on The Boatniks even though I’ve seen that one, too, and I think my folks have as well. It’s Disney, I remember it being funny, and my mom and dad should get a kick out of it. I hope. I’ll find out later.

Happy American Thanksgiving!

Review: Saving Grace (the Movie)

Monday, November 23rd, 2009

This weekend, I watched a movie called Saving Grace. It’s a British film starring Barbara Blethyn as Grace and Craig Ferguson as Matthew. It was released in 2000.

WARNING: There will be spoilers.

When Grace is widowed, she discovers her two-timing husband has mortgaged everything to the hilt, including her home. She has no skills to use on the job market except gardening, but that won’t bring in enough money fast enough to prevent foreclosure. Faced with losing everything, Grace teams up with Matthew to help him grow marijuana in her greenhouse. She plans to use the money to save her home, he wants to earn money so he can marry his girlfriend.

Though they don’t know it, the entire small town they live in (it’s set in Great Britain) is aware of what they’re doing, including the constable. Matthew’s girlfriend is pregnant, but doesn’t tell him and she’s afraid he’s going to wind up in prison for drugs. When Grace discovers this, she decides to go to London to sell the pot herself. It’s her dead husband’s mistress who has the connection to a drug dealer who knows a major player, a man high enough up the food chain who could afford to buy all their crop.

Matthew and his friend show up in the middle of the transaction, nearly blowing everything, but just when we think everything is okay and Grace and her friends have left, the big dealer orders his henchmen to follow them.

I’d heard good things about this movie which is why I put it in my Netflix queue. I thought it was okay enough to watch till the end, but I wasn’t blown away. Until the ending, but that wasn’t in a good way. More on that later.

My first complaint about the movie was I had difficulty understanding what everyone was saying. Some of the accents were pretty thick. I’d like to blame it on the fact that the washer and dryer were both going while I was watching, but that might not be totally to blame. I think in America we’re used to a very specific kind of British accent and when we hear other ones, we have a hard time. Or at least I do. I heard a Cockney accent when I was in Europe and I literally didn’t understand more than a couple of words the man said.

Second complaint is the pace of the movie. Yes, we need to understand how desperate Grace’s situation is and see her try all other alternatives to solve it before resorting to growing pot, but it seemed to take a long time for things to really start happening. I did keep watching, but that was more to do with the fact I was doing other stuff at the same time than with the movie itself.

My biggest complaint, however, was the ending. It came so far out of left field, it was truly bizarre. After Grace accidentally starts the pot on fire, it seems as if things are beyond salvation for her. We see a scene of a yard full of high people dancing around or lying around or whatever. The next thing you know, Grace has written a “fictional” book called The Joint Venture and is up for a book of the year award in New York City. She’s also married to the big drug boss who has apparently reformed.

First of all, we see no clue that Grace has even had a small dream about writing, let alone put in the time it would take to become good at it. That was my first, huh?

Secondly, Grace is at a big gala in NYC that is being televised live in Britain. Everyone in her hometown is watching and it’s night in England, too! That was my second, huh? There’s a time difference. Even if everyone in her town wanted to stay up and watch it, would British television really be airing the book awards in the middle of the night? Or how about would British television be airing book awards at all? Heaven knows they don’t show them in America.

Third, the drug lord reformed. Huh? Because he fell in love with Grace? Or had he wanted to go straight before he met her and just didn’t have enough willpower to do it? They don’t outright say he reformed, but it sure came across that way. Apparently, after being on the bestseller list for a year, Grace is making enough to support him lavishly.

There were some bright spots in the mostly dull movie. The funniest part was Grace with a tube of marijuana trying to find someone to sell it to. She’s dressed in a white pantsuit with a white hat and is anything but unobtrusive.

I also liked how she handled the big drug lord when she met him. She wasn’t exactly cool under pressure, but she wasn’t cowed either. Quite a feat for a woman who rarely travels to London.

Overall the movie was okay, but not great.

My rating: 2.5 stars

1776

Monday, October 26th, 2009

Last night, I watched 1776 a musical with William Daniels, Howard Da Silva, and Ken Howard. It’s actually one of my favorites, but that wasn’t what I planned on watching on an October weekend. Unfortunately, what I did plan to see left me bored, and after studying my DVD collection, this was the title that I felt like watching.

A strange thing occurred to me as I watched it. I suddenly remembered all the times I’d been asked: If you could meet anyone living or dead, who would it be? It’s a question that I’ve never had an answer for because I’m not into celebrity and I couldn’t think of anything else. Last night it dawned on me that I wish I could have gone back and talked to the founding fathers–John Adams, Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, John Hancock, and the others.

Wouldn’t it be cool to travel back in time and sit in a corner to watch the Continental Congress debate independency? To find out first hand what they envisioned, what they were thinking?

I understand that the real men are unlikely to resemble the way they were portrayed in the musical, but I still think it would hugely interesting. Jefferson was in his early 30s. Adams his early 40s. And they were part of one hell of a creation.

And when I went to bed after it was over, I dreamed about aliens invading Earth and blowing things up ala Independence Day, another favorite movie. :-) I don’t know how my subconscious transposed a sweet musical with an ET invasion, but hey, at least it wasn’t dull.

Hancock

Monday, March 30th, 2009

This weekend’s movie was Hancock starring Will Smith, Jason Bateman, and Charlize Theron. I’m going to try not to give any spoilers, but I can’t promise something won’t accidentally slip in, so if you plan to see this movie and don’t want anything given away, stop reading here.

Will Smith stars as Hancock, an alcoholic superhero who’s lost public esteem. He saves the day, but he causes so much damage to property, that no one is sure they want him to come to the rescue. To make things even worse, he’s surly to people, lowering their opinions of him even farther. And then he rescues Public Relations guru Ray Embry (Jason Bateman) from the path of an oncoming train. Ray invites Hancock home for dinner, introduces him to his wife and son, and offers to put together a PR campaign to redeem his image. Hancock doesn’t agree immediately, but comes around.

I’m going to leave the plot description there because it would ruin the movie if I went any farther.

To start, I love Will Smith and Jason Bateman. I didn’t recognize Jason Bateman and only realized it was him when the final credits rolled, but oh, well. I’d heard good things about the movie and that’s why I put it in my Netflix queue, but everyone called it a comedy. It wasn’t. Not exactly.

And this was my big problem with the movie. The first half is a comedy, then somewhere along the way, it makes a hard turn into drama. The premise is pure comedy, the setup with the first mission after a group of bad guys is comedy, and the idea of a PR guy trying to redeem the image of a drunken superhero is comedy. If the movie had remained a comedy, it would have worked.

The second half was interesting, too, but it was a drama. Hancock learns things about his past that he didn’t know and the audience learns as well. There’s action and a final push by a group of bad guys to get him. If the movie had been set up and executed throughout as a drama, it would have worked.

But piecing together these two styles into one movie did not work for me. The film felt unfocused, as if the writer wasn’t sure which direction he wanted to go. Or as if two different writers split the duties, one writing the first half, the other the second. The lack of cohesiveness wasn’t only startling, it also prevented the script from exploring either idea fully and that left me feeling cheated as a viewer. If they’d focused on the comedy and the redemption of Hancock, that would have been satisfying. It also would have been satisfying to have the movie unfold as a drama where Hancock learns the truth about himself. As it was, both ideas felt half done and I can’t help but wonder what they could have done if they’d focused on one direction.

The first half was fun, the second half was interesting, but the two parts didn’t fit together.

My rating: 3 stars

Terminator Salvation

Monday, December 29th, 2008

I guess I live under a rock because I didn’t know that they were making another Terminator movie until last night. I was online and looked up to see the movie poster for Terminator Salvation. I clicked on it and found a trailer for the film! It looks good, too!

The story takes place in the future with John Connor (Christian Bale) leading the humans in their war against the machines, but apparently the future has changed from what his mother told him it would be. That’s about all I know about the movie, but now I’m anxious to see it.

Christian Bale looked like a good choice to play John Connor, but I’ll admit to some trepidation with Anton Yelchin in the role of the young Kyle Reese. He doesn’t look at all right for the part and he most definitely does not look tough enough to be the Kyle who saved Sarah in the original Terminator movie. I hope I’m wrong because I love, love, love Kyle and if this kid is wrong for the part, he could ruin the movie for me.

Just in case you’d like to see the trailer yourself, I’m embedding it below.

Sense and Sensibility

Monday, December 1st, 2008

This Thanksgiving, I watched Sense and Sensibility starring Emma Thompson, Kate Winslet, Huge Grant, and Alan Rickman. This move is from 1995, so I’m not going to worry about spoilers. I figure anyone who wants to see it, has by now. :-)

Mr. Dashwood dies, and by the inheritance laws, everything goes to his first-born son, leaving his second wife and three daughters penniless. He gets his son to promise to take care of the family, but his conniving and witch of a wife manages to talk him down to doing nothing for them. While they’re trying to find somewhere that they can afford to live, the witch’s eldest brother (Hugh Grant) arrives and it turns out he’s not only kind, but he’d like to be a minister. He develops an affection for Elinor (Emma Thompson) which the witch detests and she arranges to have her brother recalled to London.

The widowed Mrs. Dashwood announces that a cousin has offered them a cottage on his property and she and the girls move to a new part of the country. And along with the cousin, they meet his mother-in-law? (I can’t remember) and she turns out to be a matchmaker. She tries to set up Marianne (Kate Winslet) with Colonel Brandon (Alan Rickman).

Marianne, though, finds herself taken by the dashing Willoughby who turns out to be a libertine who dumps her to marry for money. One of his past affairs got him in trouble and he needs the money of an heiress. Marianne is heartbroken at first, but over time realizes that Brandon is more worthy of her love and her feelings for him change.

In the meantime, some Lucy person tells Elinor that she’s been secretly engaged to the wannabe minister, which breaks Elinor’s heart, although she’s too circumspect to show it. When Lucy informs the witch of the engagement, Hugh Grant’s character loses his fortune to his youngest brother (although I’m not sure how since inheritance law should apply across the board, yes?) and this Lucy chick marries the younger brother who’s now rich. That leaves the minister free to marry Elinor.

The movie closes with the double wedding of the two sisters–Marianne and Brandon and Elinor and the minister. Willoughby is on the hillside, watching and knowing that the woman he loves is lost to him for all time and he’s stuck in his loveless marriage. The End.

First off, let me say that my parents have become leery whenever I bring a movie over for Thanksgiving. I have a terrible track record for having duds on this holiday. Unfortunately, this year wasn’t any better.

My folks managed to sleep through most of the movie. When they did wake up, I got all kinds of questions. I had to tell my dad three times that Emma Thompson wasn’t Kate Winslet’s mother. I saw why he was confused, though. Emma Thompson was too old for the role she played.

The plot seemed convoluted and it left far too many questions unanswered. Who was this Lucy chick and was she really secretly engaged to Hugh Grant’s character for five years? Or was she in cahoots with the witch? How’d Lucy end up with the younger brother and why was the younger brother interested in her? How did the younger brother get handed the family fortune? And if the family disowned the older brother for being engaged to Lucy, why didn’t they then take the fortune away from the youngest brother when he married her?

Maybe if I’d read the Jane Austen book that this movie is based on, I would have had a better understanding of what was going on, but I hadn’t read it. I wasn’t lost, but the movie just seemed to skim over things that I wanted answers for. Of course, squeezing a novel into a 2 hour movie isn’t easy, but it would have been better to leave some stuff out rather than have unanswered questions. At least IMO.

I also kept thinking where is Marianne’s chaperon? Isn’t her mother or someone worried she’ll ruin herself? That was a huge deal back then, at least that’s the take I get on it. Yet she’s running hither and yon with Willoughby who’s a libertine. Huh?

Anyway, overall I found the movie a bit dull and I didn’t find the romances believable. Elinor takes a couple of walks with the wannabe minister and they’re both in love. Marianne being infatuated with Willoughby was a little easier to understand because she was so into her emotions and he did rescue her and all, but you just knew there was something off about the man. How she switched her affections to Col. Brandon is never shown, we just see her attitude has changed as the colonel reads to her and then boom, they’re getting married. I wanted more.

My rating: 2 stars out of 5