Book's Crumbs

I liked the book (-->REVIEW HERE), it was a page turner, engaging, full of suspense and mystery. The perfect summer read. So I can imagine that Fans of the book weren't probably happy about the changes made in the adaptations from book to the big screen. Whatever was shifting the destination from the gloomy London to New York, or cutting out Rachel's drunky sex scene, which I was eagerly expecting, the movie did a selection of what to bring on the screen and as it usually happens things got left out.

Yet having wait quite a long time after the book to watch the movie, I found myself enjoying it. It was able, nevertheless the changes, to bring back to the surface all the feelings that I had while reading it. What did definitely catch my eye was the outstanding performance of Emily Blunt, she was able to portrait perfectly Rachel, the drunky heroine of the book.

I've got to say that in the book I pictured Rachel as ugly, Emily Blunt can't get anything near the definition of "ugly" but the way she wears the character is perfect. Just some cracked lips, watery/red eyes and the unhealthy color skin were able to give the exact appearance of an alcoholist. Of course nothing would have worked if it wasn't for her amazing acting skill. 

She is the solo lead of this drama, while the other female characters, Megan Hipwell (Haley Bennett) and Anna Watson (Rebecca Ferguson), don't leave a bigger impression than they do in the book. Haley Bennett female heroine in The Magnificent 7 (2016), is suited for her role has the intriguing Megan, but her character doesn't' come across as strongly as in the book.

What the move is lacking is the ugliness and humanity that did emerged from the characters in the book. They had perversion, obsession and fears; they felt real and well characterize on a psychological level. In the transposition to the big screen, the deepness of the characters was a bit lost, but they still managed to do a good job.

It's a really contemporary movie so the photography and the costumes are great for the suburb metropolitan background. I did appreciate how they tried to display Rachel's memories and drunken sight, blurry and moved, it did really gave the right idea.

If I had to choose between the book and the movie: I will say that the book is able to give a full and complete experience while the movie does this only in part. Still a good movie, you should definitely check it out.

BOOK WINS!

Movie trailer:

Costumes and scenery are beautiful and perfect for each part. I have a small grumble on Ariel graphics and appearance that are part of the old generation in term of special effect.

In contrast with the opinion of the mass I liked this movie and I think it is worth to see and useful to reread the play from another perspective. Since this plays are made to be performed on a stage or as in this case on a screen, THE MOVIE WINS.

Movie Trailer:

Before reading the book I saw the movie trailer and I thought: " Wow this is gonna be a kick ass movie!". Well it wasn't exactly as I had immagine.

I read and quite liked the 2013's novel by Rick Yancey (REVIEW HERE) that did put a good emotional spine to another dystopian tale of teenager facing the world end.

Cassie Sullivan (Chloe Grace Moretz), our heroine, is a high school student that from the book came out has a mature and determinate women, that doesn't need some dude to define her. It's this strong character that push me to read the second book in Yancey's trilogy, 2014's The Infinite Sea, of which we are unlikely to see any movie adaptation since the failure of the first one at the box office, but whispers do run around on the web. Who knows!?

Despite the strong presence of Kick-Ass star Chloe Grace Moretz as Cassie, the movie is more concentrat on the cliche of the love triangle that made big phenoms of Divergent and Twilight. I really don't get the reason to put more light on this aspect while the book keeps its focus on the survival and the emotional conflicts of our protagonists. The director of the movie turned this story in a languid teenage love one, quite unrealistic in a apocalyptic background. Not to talk about Alex Roe as Evan Walker that apart from a cute face doesn't offer much. Other than the Moretz's performance also Liev Schreiber as Commander Vosh made a good impression on me.

As in every  world's disaster movie bridges (we will ever see a movie where the Tower Bridge is no falling?), planes, skyscrapers are destroyed,  with the computerish graphics letting you down. 

I stand by the idea that the book was better and the movie in itself would have totally be a failure without Chloe Moretz as a lead, but her alone wasn't enough to sell another dystopian washout.

I was waiting impatiently for this movie to come out, first because I read the first book of the Trilogy by Ransom Rigg and second because I'm a huge fan of Tim Burton. I was slightly desapointed by the book for its overly simplify writing style and plot, it had good premises but it wasn't able to use their full potential, leaving the book on a childish level as I wrote in my review. What I was expecting from the movie was to see Tim Burton putting all the creepiness together and giving the story a more adult-like form. The movie is based on the best-selling Trilogy by Ransom Rigg, what I did not expected from it was to be based on the first and going behind it, making the story whole for one installment, so watching it might have spoiled the next books for me. Thanks Tim! 

The story tell us about Jake (Asa Butterfield) who discovers clues to a mystery that spans different worlds and times, he finds a magical place known as Miss Peregrine's home for Peculiar Children. But the mystery deepens as he gets to know the residents and learns about  their special powers and the enemies they are against. Ultimately, Jake discovers that only his own special "peculiarity" can save his new friends.

The movie tries to be quite faithful to the book apart from some character changes as Emma and Olive powers are reversed in  the movie, it's also thanks to this that the scene in the submarine is a spectacular one. 

I get why he couldn't stop just at the first book, since there is not so much action to begin with. And so the movie moved slowly in the first part, concentrating all the action end and rushing most of it. The costumes, the special effects and graphic are beautiful and do keep the typical style of Tim Burton.

I'm not sure whether or not I will watch this movie again since it was nothing special. It turn out ok, as the book, but the Tim Burton factor makes this movie win over the book.

MOVIE WINS!!!

Books Review: 

http://bookscrumbles.blogspot.it/2016/07/miss-peregrine-home-for-peculiar.html

Movie trailer:

James McAvoy and Daniel Radcliffe star in this twist of the legendary tale, and it's mostly thanks to their performance that we are able to push through the whole movie.

Radical scientist Victor Frankenstein (McAvoy) and his brilliant protégé Igor Strausman (Radcliffe), rescued from a miserable life as the circus' hunchback, they both share a noble vision of aiding humanity through their groundbreaking research into the secrets of life. But Victor's experiment go too far, and he ends creating something wicked that put at risk everyone's life. Only Igor seems to be able to bring his friend back from the brink of madness and save him from the monster he has created.

Ok, it was better than I, Frankenstein (2014) at least they avoided the vampire, but still they transformed Mary Shelley's emotional and profound story, into a bad comic book deprived of intelligence and soul. We still see, as in every movie, the secret process that brought the "monster" to life, when the not knowing made the novel mysterious and put light on the dangerous knowledge that must not be revealed.

The graphic and customs are still really good and spectacular in some points but what is lacking in this movie is a good story line. The whole movie is pushed forward by the good performance of Radcliffe na McAvoy and that's the only positive impression I'm left with.

Clearly if I had to choose between reading the book of watching the movie I will go for the book straight and if I had to choose a Frankenstein movie adaptation Mel Brooks will still be my favorite, at least you get a good laugh out of it!

John Krakauer's Into the Wild , which I read with a fascinated dread, was one of the best reading of this summer. Chris McCandless's wanderlust, desire to live by the nature's laws and his rebellion against the system, have been for me inspiring and mind opening. 

Chris renouncing his old identity, he rename himself Alexander Supertramp, in conformity of his new way of life. Tramping around, seeing the world, meeting new people, with time made him feel strong and more comfortable with himself and his ability, so much that it took it to extreme.

His story was beautiful and full of meaning, on itself alone would have been able to make a wonderful movie, but the stunning photography, the amazing performance and the unique directing style made this movie one of the best I ever seen. I loved it as much as the book!

So my final vote for BOOK VS MOVIE is: EVEN!!

I loved the novel by Jojo Moyes so much, it made me cry lakes and I wasn't expecting anything less from the movie!

It was realised on the 3rd of june in the USA but we had to wait until the 1st of September to watch it in the italian's theater.

With as our main characters the beautiful Emilia Clarke, mostly famous for showing quite a lot of her in the tv series Game Of Throne, and the amazing and brilliant Sam Claflin, who appeared in some of my favorite major productions, such as: Hunger Games, Love, Rosie, The Riot Club, and the mini tv series The Pillars Of The Earth, this movie with a great soundtrack (Not today by Imagine Dragons) had everything to be stellar.

The romantic drama adaptation of Jojo's Moyes Me Before You is directed by Thea Sharrock, who took a rather simple direction for the filming. The whole film has pretty standard techniques, not showing any particular kind of new takes, instead the transitions between one scene and another are quite harsh, apart from the last one where we have a fluid transition from Will's last scene to Lou in Paris. The use of the drooping leaf was poetic and romantic, really beautiful, it reminded me of the flying feather in Forrest Gump.
Regarding the plot the movie stayed pretty faithful to the book, there weren't any big changes, apart from having to cut a lot of scenes, for the obvious reason that is impossible to fit a whole book in a movie, so I'm going to be kind and forgive them. Also the characterization of our two characters was kept the same as in the book. Lou with her over-positive attitude about life, was portrayed quite well by Emilia Clarke, even though I think she exaggerated with the facial expressions, making Julia Roberts smile be put into shadows over her 360 degrees smile. I loved all her quirky clothes and beautiful accessory; Jill Taylor, the costumist, clearly did her homeworks, making Lou as colorful and unique as I did imagine her while reading the book. It also seems that the actress herself was able to pick up the accessories, earrings and stuff for her outfit making the character even more hers.


Sam Claflin acting was right on spot, I'm not just say this becouse I have a soft spot for the actor (who wouldn't?!), but having his act restricted, for this role, to his facial expressions and voice, he did a brilliant job, proving again that he can fit any role given.
There is not so much space for the second characters in the movie, although I would like to enlight Janet Mcteer for playing the role of Will's mother fantastically, only to uphold all her career's awards.

It's overall an ok movie who didn't leave up to the book, pushing in the end for a sloppy and overseen romantic comedy. where there was instead a lot to make it unique and different as it comes out of the book. I was still deeply moved by the movie, but I think It was becouse I'm really attached to the story, I mean I was already crying when I first saw the trailer, so it was an easy win.

I would definitely pick the book has the winner over the movie, there is no competition!

What do you think? Which did you like best, movie or book?

Want a chance to win the sequel to Me Before You, After You by Jojo Moyes? Enter HERE the free giveaway, closing on 25th September.

ITALIANO:

Ho amato moltissimo il romanzo di Jojo Moyes, mi ha fatto piangere fiumi interi perciò non mi aspettavo nulla di meno dal film!

E' uscito nelle sale statunitensi il 3 giugno, ma abbiamo dovuto aspettare fino al 1 settembre qui in Italia.
Con come protagonisti Emilia Clarke, famosa soprattutto per aver mostrato quasi tutto di lei nell'acclamata serie tv Trono di Spade, e il brillante Sam Claflin, che è apparso in alcuni dei miei franchising cinematografici preferiti, quali: Hunger Games, Love,Rosie, Posh e ancora nella mini serie I Pilastri della Terra, questo film insieme ad una fantastica colonna sonora, degli Imagine Dragons, si presentava stellare.

L'adattamento cinematografico del romantico libro di Jojo Moyes è diretto da Thea Sharrock, che ha scelto una direzione piuttosto sempliciotta per le riprese. L e tecniche sviluppate nel fim sono banali, non mostrano nulla di nuovo, e oltretutto le transazioni tra una scena e l'altra risultano rigide, a parte per l'ultimo cambio di scena, dove si passa dalla scena finale di Will a Lou a Parigi in maniera fluida e naturale, grazie all'ingegnoso uso di una foglia cadente, dando così un tocco poetico al film, molto bello. Mi ha ricordato in parte la piuma che vola del film Forrest Gump.

Per quanto riguarda il contenuto, il film rimane fedele al libro, non ho notato grandi cambiamenti, oltre alle scene tagliate, per l'ovvia ragione che è impossibile far stare un intero libro in un ora e mezza di film, quindi possiamo chiudere un occhio e perdonarli. Anche la caratterizzazione dei personaggi è stata mantenuta. Lou con il suo eterno sguardo positivo alla vita, è stata interpretata molto bene da Emilia Clarke, anche se penso che abbia un tantino esagerato con l'espressioni facciali. E' riuscita a mettere in ombra il sorriso di Julia Roberts sfoderando una dentatura di 360 gradi. Ho aprezzato tutti i suoi eclettici vestiti ed accessori; Jill Taylor, la costumista, ha fatto un ottimo lavoro, rendendo il guardaroba di Lou eccentrico e colorato come me lo ero immaginato. Sembra oltretutto che l'attrice sia stata libera di scegliere gli accessori da abbinare ai suoi abiti, personalizando ancora di più il suo personaggio.
Il ruolo di Will calzava a penello a Sam Claflin, e non lo dico solo per il mio debole per l'attore, ma dovendo restringere la sua recitazione a voce e espressioni facciali ha fatto un ottimo lavoro, dimostrando di essere molto versatile.
Non viene dato molto spazio hai personaggi secondari nel film, ma mi sento di evidenziare la performance di Janet Mcteer, nel ruolo della mamma di Will, ritratta magnificamente, dimostra di meritarsi tutti i premi alla carriera ricevuti.

In generale è un film ok che non ha retto il confronto con il libro, riuscendo solo ad essere una commedia romantica alquanto sciatta e che ricade negli schemi tipici, l'addove c'erano tutti i presupposti per puntare a qualcosa di unico e diverso, come nel libro. Nonostante tutto mi sono commossa e ho di nuovo pianto come una lagna, ma c'è da mettere in conto che sono particolarmente legata alla storia e che ho la lacrima facile, voglio dire stavo gia piangendo la prima volta che ho visto il trailer.

Posso sicuramente proclamare oltre ogni ragionevole dubbio il libro, come vincitore di questo scontro Libro vs Film.

Cosa ne pensi? Ti è piaciuto più il film o il libro?

Vuoi avere la possibilità di ricevere una copia gratuita di After You, il seguito di Me Before You di Jojo Moyes? Partecipa al Giveaway del blog cliccando QUI.

TRAILER

When you liked a lot a book it's always risky to watch the movie, but I have to say that Wild the movie directed by Jean Marc-Vallée did not disappoint me, even if I can't say I'm completely satisfied with it.

The movie is based on the memoir by Cheryl Strayed Wild: From Lost to Found on the Pacific Crest Trail, as in the book we are presented with Cheryl hiking the PCT four years after the loss of her mother, still grieving. 

The book displayed all the raw emotions that she felt during her trial, but seeing them on the screen played by Reese Witherspoon was even better. Reese is perfect for the role, she did an amazing job portraying Cheryl with wit, talent and honesty. 

The movie is worth the spectacular, colorful view of the PCT we get, I'm not a cinema expert but I think they did a great job with the photography. 

-Mojave Desert-

There is a lot of montage, as in the book the present time, the "action" on the trail -walking, thinking, pitching the tent and packing it up- is interrupted by looping reminiscence of her life before. The way the flashback are presented makes it hard to understand most of them wholly from someone who didn't read the book. I did find it artistic and beautiful but I doubt it would be easy to read them for someone new to Cheryl's story.

For almost the whole movie we are stuck with Cheryl, we don't get to see much of the others characters. I know it would have been impossible to include the whole book in the movie but it felt like a shame that there wasn't that much space for her old relationship and the new one that she acquired during her journey.

I would recommend the movie to everyone, if you have read the book I think you will understand it and appreciate more. 

So who did win between the movie and the book?

The book, it explains more clearly her relationships and it was able to move me more than the picture.

3.5/5 STARS

Here is the movie trailer: