![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I liked this week's episode better than last week's. I thought that they did a good job of switching focus to Vicent Kartheiser's character
( Read more... )
Aug. 10th, 2007
Southern Vampire
Aug. 10th, 2007 10:13 amFrom TVGuide:
HBO has sunk its teeth into an order for the True Blood series, Six Feet Under creator Alan Ball's new drama based on Charlaine Harris' Southern Vampire novels. Set in a world where vamps can live off Japanese-produced synthetic blood, the TV adaptation stars Brit Stephen Moyer (Quills) as a vampire who falls for a waitress (Anna Paquin) who can read people's minds. Though a premiere plan has yet to be detailed, production starts this fall.
My Comments:
I hope that HBO does a good job of it, though I have to say, I was never particularly enthralled with the books.
HBO has sunk its teeth into an order for the True Blood series, Six Feet Under creator Alan Ball's new drama based on Charlaine Harris' Southern Vampire novels. Set in a world where vamps can live off Japanese-produced synthetic blood, the TV adaptation stars Brit Stephen Moyer (Quills) as a vampire who falls for a waitress (Anna Paquin) who can read people's minds. Though a premiere plan has yet to be detailed, production starts this fall.
My Comments:
I hope that HBO does a good job of it, though I have to say, I was never particularly enthralled with the books.
Southern Vampire
Aug. 10th, 2007 10:13 amFrom TVGuide:
HBO has sunk its teeth into an order for the True Blood series, Six Feet Under creator Alan Ball's new drama based on Charlaine Harris' Southern Vampire novels. Set in a world where vamps can live off Japanese-produced synthetic blood, the TV adaptation stars Brit Stephen Moyer (Quills) as a vampire who falls for a waitress (Anna Paquin) who can read people's minds. Though a premiere plan has yet to be detailed, production starts this fall.
My Comments:
I hope that HBO does a good job of it, though I have to say, I was never particularly enthralled with the books.
HBO has sunk its teeth into an order for the True Blood series, Six Feet Under creator Alan Ball's new drama based on Charlaine Harris' Southern Vampire novels. Set in a world where vamps can live off Japanese-produced synthetic blood, the TV adaptation stars Brit Stephen Moyer (Quills) as a vampire who falls for a waitress (Anna Paquin) who can read people's minds. Though a premiere plan has yet to be detailed, production starts this fall.
My Comments:
I hope that HBO does a good job of it, though I have to say, I was never particularly enthralled with the books.
Southern Vampire
Aug. 10th, 2007 10:13 amFrom TVGuide:
HBO has sunk its teeth into an order for the True Blood series, Six Feet Under creator Alan Ball's new drama based on Charlaine Harris' Southern Vampire novels. Set in a world where vamps can live off Japanese-produced synthetic blood, the TV adaptation stars Brit Stephen Moyer (Quills) as a vampire who falls for a waitress (Anna Paquin) who can read people's minds. Though a premiere plan has yet to be detailed, production starts this fall.
My Comments:
I hope that HBO does a good job of it, though I have to say, I was never particularly enthralled with the books.
HBO has sunk its teeth into an order for the True Blood series, Six Feet Under creator Alan Ball's new drama based on Charlaine Harris' Southern Vampire novels. Set in a world where vamps can live off Japanese-produced synthetic blood, the TV adaptation stars Brit Stephen Moyer (Quills) as a vampire who falls for a waitress (Anna Paquin) who can read people's minds. Though a premiere plan has yet to be detailed, production starts this fall.
My Comments:
I hope that HBO does a good job of it, though I have to say, I was never particularly enthralled with the books.
(Sorry for spamming today)
Anyway, the movie Stardust is out and here's the CNN review
Selected Quote:
Adapted from Neil Gaiman's novel by Jane Goldman and director Matthew Vaughn, "Stardust" gets off to a false start with a prologue told in such broad strokes it comes off as crude and supercilious, even with no less a personage than Sir Ian McKellen narrating. But this richly plotted, thumpingly scored story settles into a groove as soon as Yvaine enters the picture and the chase is on.
My Commentary:
Frankly, I could say much the same for the novel. At least as far as it being a false start. The novel telling it in broad strokes, however, isn't the problem. The book actually told it in far too much detail. In fact, I fully anticipated that much of the very, very, very long beginning of the novel would be cut and/or expedited in the film. It seemed to take forever to get to the point where Tristran actually found the star and discovered it was a girl. And the action doesn't actually begin until Tristan meets Yvaine.
I haven't seen the movie, but I have read the novel which, quite frankly, began quite slowly and with a great deal of backstory about Tristan's birth. And as a criticism of the book, I realize that it took me a long time to read it, but my memory of the beginning of the book was that the woman who raised Tristan as her son wasn't inordinately fond of him, yet the impression at the end of the book seemed to be almost the polar opposite.
I did like the romance inasmuch as it was not love at first -- or even second -- sight. Gaiman allowed for the reader to root for the two of them to get together well before the thought ever entered either Tristan's or Yvaine's minds. By the time they do realize that they've fallen in love it's a reaction of "Well, of course they have!" I actually am partial to that sort of strategy of written romance.
All in all, a nice book but not Gaiman's best. I don't know whether I'll make it to the movie, but I wouldn't mind seeing a film adaptation of it.
Anyway, the movie Stardust is out and here's the CNN review
Selected Quote:
Adapted from Neil Gaiman's novel by Jane Goldman and director Matthew Vaughn, "Stardust" gets off to a false start with a prologue told in such broad strokes it comes off as crude and supercilious, even with no less a personage than Sir Ian McKellen narrating. But this richly plotted, thumpingly scored story settles into a groove as soon as Yvaine enters the picture and the chase is on.
My Commentary:
Frankly, I could say much the same for the novel. At least as far as it being a false start. The novel telling it in broad strokes, however, isn't the problem. The book actually told it in far too much detail. In fact, I fully anticipated that much of the very, very, very long beginning of the novel would be cut and/or expedited in the film. It seemed to take forever to get to the point where Tristran actually found the star and discovered it was a girl. And the action doesn't actually begin until Tristan meets Yvaine.
I haven't seen the movie, but I have read the novel which, quite frankly, began quite slowly and with a great deal of backstory about Tristan's birth. And as a criticism of the book, I realize that it took me a long time to read it, but my memory of the beginning of the book was that the woman who raised Tristan as her son wasn't inordinately fond of him, yet the impression at the end of the book seemed to be almost the polar opposite.
I did like the romance inasmuch as it was not love at first -- or even second -- sight. Gaiman allowed for the reader to root for the two of them to get together well before the thought ever entered either Tristan's or Yvaine's minds. By the time they do realize that they've fallen in love it's a reaction of "Well, of course they have!" I actually am partial to that sort of strategy of written romance.
All in all, a nice book but not Gaiman's best. I don't know whether I'll make it to the movie, but I wouldn't mind seeing a film adaptation of it.
(Sorry for spamming today)
Anyway, the movie Stardust is out and here's the CNN review
Selected Quote:
Adapted from Neil Gaiman's novel by Jane Goldman and director Matthew Vaughn, "Stardust" gets off to a false start with a prologue told in such broad strokes it comes off as crude and supercilious, even with no less a personage than Sir Ian McKellen narrating. But this richly plotted, thumpingly scored story settles into a groove as soon as Yvaine enters the picture and the chase is on.
My Commentary:
Frankly, I could say much the same for the novel. At least as far as it being a false start. The novel telling it in broad strokes, however, isn't the problem. The book actually told it in far too much detail. In fact, I fully anticipated that much of the very, very, very long beginning of the novel would be cut and/or expedited in the film. It seemed to take forever to get to the point where Tristran actually found the star and discovered it was a girl. And the action doesn't actually begin until Tristan meets Yvaine.
I haven't seen the movie, but I have read the novel which, quite frankly, began quite slowly and with a great deal of backstory about Tristan's birth. And as a criticism of the book, I realize that it took me a long time to read it, but my memory of the beginning of the book was that the woman who raised Tristan as her son wasn't inordinately fond of him, yet the impression at the end of the book seemed to be almost the polar opposite.
I did like the romance inasmuch as it was not love at first -- or even second -- sight. Gaiman allowed for the reader to root for the two of them to get together well before the thought ever entered either Tristan's or Yvaine's minds. By the time they do realize that they've fallen in love it's a reaction of "Well, of course they have!" I actually am partial to that sort of strategy of written romance.
All in all, a nice book but not Gaiman's best. I don't know whether I'll make it to the movie, but I wouldn't mind seeing a film adaptation of it.
Anyway, the movie Stardust is out and here's the CNN review
Selected Quote:
Adapted from Neil Gaiman's novel by Jane Goldman and director Matthew Vaughn, "Stardust" gets off to a false start with a prologue told in such broad strokes it comes off as crude and supercilious, even with no less a personage than Sir Ian McKellen narrating. But this richly plotted, thumpingly scored story settles into a groove as soon as Yvaine enters the picture and the chase is on.
My Commentary:
Frankly, I could say much the same for the novel. At least as far as it being a false start. The novel telling it in broad strokes, however, isn't the problem. The book actually told it in far too much detail. In fact, I fully anticipated that much of the very, very, very long beginning of the novel would be cut and/or expedited in the film. It seemed to take forever to get to the point where Tristran actually found the star and discovered it was a girl. And the action doesn't actually begin until Tristan meets Yvaine.
I haven't seen the movie, but I have read the novel which, quite frankly, began quite slowly and with a great deal of backstory about Tristan's birth. And as a criticism of the book, I realize that it took me a long time to read it, but my memory of the beginning of the book was that the woman who raised Tristan as her son wasn't inordinately fond of him, yet the impression at the end of the book seemed to be almost the polar opposite.
I did like the romance inasmuch as it was not love at first -- or even second -- sight. Gaiman allowed for the reader to root for the two of them to get together well before the thought ever entered either Tristan's or Yvaine's minds. By the time they do realize that they've fallen in love it's a reaction of "Well, of course they have!" I actually am partial to that sort of strategy of written romance.
All in all, a nice book but not Gaiman's best. I don't know whether I'll make it to the movie, but I wouldn't mind seeing a film adaptation of it.
(Sorry for spamming today)
Anyway, the movie Stardust is out and here's the CNN review
Selected Quote:
Adapted from Neil Gaiman's novel by Jane Goldman and director Matthew Vaughn, "Stardust" gets off to a false start with a prologue told in such broad strokes it comes off as crude and supercilious, even with no less a personage than Sir Ian McKellen narrating. But this richly plotted, thumpingly scored story settles into a groove as soon as Yvaine enters the picture and the chase is on.
My Commentary:
Frankly, I could say much the same for the novel. At least as far as it being a false start. The novel telling it in broad strokes, however, isn't the problem. The book actually told it in far too much detail. In fact, I fully anticipated that much of the very, very, very long beginning of the novel would be cut and/or expedited in the film. It seemed to take forever to get to the point where Tristran actually found the star and discovered it was a girl. And the action doesn't actually begin until Tristan meets Yvaine.
I haven't seen the movie, but I have read the novel which, quite frankly, began quite slowly and with a great deal of backstory about Tristan's birth. And as a criticism of the book, I realize that it took me a long time to read it, but my memory of the beginning of the book was that the woman who raised Tristan as her son wasn't inordinately fond of him, yet the impression at the end of the book seemed to be almost the polar opposite.
I did like the romance inasmuch as it was not love at first -- or even second -- sight. Gaiman allowed for the reader to root for the two of them to get together well before the thought ever entered either Tristan's or Yvaine's minds. By the time they do realize that they've fallen in love it's a reaction of "Well, of course they have!" I actually am partial to that sort of strategy of written romance.
All in all, a nice book but not Gaiman's best. I don't know whether I'll make it to the movie, but I wouldn't mind seeing a film adaptation of it.
Anyway, the movie Stardust is out and here's the CNN review
Selected Quote:
Adapted from Neil Gaiman's novel by Jane Goldman and director Matthew Vaughn, "Stardust" gets off to a false start with a prologue told in such broad strokes it comes off as crude and supercilious, even with no less a personage than Sir Ian McKellen narrating. But this richly plotted, thumpingly scored story settles into a groove as soon as Yvaine enters the picture and the chase is on.
My Commentary:
Frankly, I could say much the same for the novel. At least as far as it being a false start. The novel telling it in broad strokes, however, isn't the problem. The book actually told it in far too much detail. In fact, I fully anticipated that much of the very, very, very long beginning of the novel would be cut and/or expedited in the film. It seemed to take forever to get to the point where Tristran actually found the star and discovered it was a girl. And the action doesn't actually begin until Tristan meets Yvaine.
I haven't seen the movie, but I have read the novel which, quite frankly, began quite slowly and with a great deal of backstory about Tristan's birth. And as a criticism of the book, I realize that it took me a long time to read it, but my memory of the beginning of the book was that the woman who raised Tristan as her son wasn't inordinately fond of him, yet the impression at the end of the book seemed to be almost the polar opposite.
I did like the romance inasmuch as it was not love at first -- or even second -- sight. Gaiman allowed for the reader to root for the two of them to get together well before the thought ever entered either Tristan's or Yvaine's minds. By the time they do realize that they've fallen in love it's a reaction of "Well, of course they have!" I actually am partial to that sort of strategy of written romance.
All in all, a nice book but not Gaiman's best. I don't know whether I'll make it to the movie, but I wouldn't mind seeing a film adaptation of it.