|
|
Post by BingFan on Jul 9, 2023 16:01:46 GMT
Fading Fast, thanks for the outstanding review of a very enjoyable book, The World Of Henry Orient.
As I think I’ve mentioned in a different thread, I liked the movie over multiple viewings during several Christmas seasons (part of the story takes place during the holidays), so last year, I decided to read the book. I was glad that I did. While reading a book associated with a well-liked movie can be risky and lead to disappointment, that definitely wasn’t the case here. I fully agree with your assessment that while the movie is good, the book is better, for the reasons you’ve described.
That said, I think Nora Johnson’s father Nunnally, an established screenwriter, was right when he told her that her first script for the movie was too much like the book and wouldn’t work well as a movie. He apparently rewrote the script himself and turned it into a charming, funny movie. I think we’re all fortunate that he did so, as we’re left with both an enjoyable movie and a very good book, both of which are worth experiencing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Jul 9, 2023 16:59:59 GMT
Fading Fast, thanks for the outstanding review of a very enjoyable book, The World Of Henry Orient.
As I think I’ve mentioned in a different thread, I liked the movie over multiple viewings during several Christmas seasons (part of the story takes place during the holidays), so last year, I decided to read the book. I was glad that I did. While reading a book associated with a well-liked movie can be risky and lead to disappointment, that definitely wasn’t the case here. I fully agree with your assessment that while the movie is good, the book is better, for the reasons you’ve described.
That said, I think Nora Johnson’s father Nunnally, an established screenwriter, was right when he told her that her first script for the movie was too much like the book and wouldn’t work well as a movie. He apparently rewrote the script himself and turned it into a charming, funny movie. I think we’re all fortunate that he did so, as we’re left with both an enjoyable movie and a very good book, both of which are worth experiencing. |
|
|
|
Post by NoShear on Jul 13, 2023 15:46:06 GMT
The Graduate by Charles Webb first published in 1963The movie is better than the book is not something you hear often, but it is true for The Graduate. While the book adds some enlightening character background information, the movie is both funnier (thank you Dustin Hoffman) and better at capturing the zeitgeist of the sixties angst and cultural pivot from "Ivy League" to "hippie" style. (Comments on the movie here: www.thefedoralounge.com/threads/what-was-the-last-movie-you-watched.20830/post-2886202 )Benjamin Braddock is an overachieving Ivy League student who returns to his upper-class west coast home after graduation completely disaffected with life. While his parents and their friends want to celebrate Ben's scholastic accomplishments, including a graduate school scholarship he's won, he's moody and withdrawn to the point of rudeness.In what would become a pretension of those of a particular bent in the later sixties (and on), "rebel" Ben leaves home to live amongst the "regular" people of the world. Yet he returns a few weeks later when he discovers farmers, shop clerks, firefighters and truck drivers aren't the romantic heroes his condescending elitist arrogance led him to believe they were.Now indulging his discontentment from the safe and luxurious confines of his parents' home, he floats around in their pool all day drinking beer and acting glum as his tolerant parents only modestly question him about his future. It's the classic hypocritical rebellion of "I don't like your values or your money," but it's easier to be against those things while still enjoying them.Enter Mrs. Robinson, his parents' married forty-year old close friend who has known Ben his entire life. Like a lioness stalking a kill, she culls him from the herd, comes on to him hard and, after a little hesitancy by Ben, they begin a sexual affair all but devoid of emotion or even conversation. Enter Elaine Robinson, Mrs. Robinson's home-on-break-from-Berkeley daughter and contemporary of Ben. Clueless-to-it-all Mr. Robinson begs Ben to date Elaine, while Mrs. Robinson, in some of the only pillow talk she and Ben share, "forbids" it. After Ben is all but cornered into taking Elaine out, and after his aborted attempt at sabotaging the date, Elaine and he hit it off. Enter the nuclear option. Mrs. Robinson (who is probably psychotic) threatens Ben with exposing the truth of their affair to Elaine if he sees her again. Ben, launching the missiles first, tells Elaine the truth (good God), which leads to her melting down and wanting nothing to do with Ben anymore (the one good decision anyone ever makes in this book, but it is sadly reversed later).She's sent back to college, while Ben pines away for her until he decides to go up to her campus at Berkeley. But first he announces to his parents that he's going to marry her, despite Elaine herself having no knowledge of this plan. Yes, Ben has many issues.Ben rents a room in Berkeley and hangs around the campus until he runs into her. From Elaine, he learns her mother claims Ben raped her, which is untrue, but which, for a time, deeply alienated Elaine form Ben. Ben, single mindedly, insists they should get married, staying on point even when Elaine notes many practical problems to the idea. You want to scream, "run Elaine, run!"After much back-and-forth discussion and hesitation over the next weeks, Ben begins to win her over, until Elaine's father swoops in and takes her away. Ben then goes in search of Elaine, finally finding her at the church where bride Elaine is walking down the aisle in a hastily-arranged marriage to a "nice college boy."(Spoiler alert) Ben disrupts the affair and she and Elaine run off together with a hint of discord or regret or something unsettling between them as the book ends. One doubts that happily ever after is in the cards for these two. In the movie, Ben isn't quite likable, but he seems more confused than selfish. In the book, he is an insufferable snob and hypocrite, who bullies people to get what he wants. His default setting is passive aggressive, which becomes simply aggressive when he meets resistance. One can only hope Elaine sees this before marrying him. Other than that he is quirky and passionately wants to marry her (that's always an ego boost), she seems to understand that he is unhinged from reality. The book version of the story also lacks the atmosphere of the movie. You don't feel the sixties; you don't feel Ben's youthful angst as anything but an indulgence, and you don't even feel the sexual spark between Ben and Mrs. Robinson.The Graduate is an okay and quick read if you want to learn a bit more about the characters than you do in the movie, but it is one of those rare times where the movie is better than the book. Your reviews are intimidatingly good, Fading Fast... Unless I misread, I found no mention of the physical traits of Benjamin Braddock nor Mrs. Robinson. I mention this as the casting of Dustin Hoffman and Anne Bancroft, both of whom are dark featured, gave the adaptation an ambiguity which has been read into the film by some. |
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Jul 13, 2023 16:14:18 GMT
The Graduate by Charles Webb first published in 1963The movie is better than the book is not something you hear often, but it is true for The Graduate. While the book adds some enlightening character background information, the movie is both funnier (thank you Dustin Hoffman) and better at capturing the zeitgeist of the sixties angst and cultural pivot from "Ivy League" to "hippie" style. (Comments on the movie here: www.thefedoralounge.com/threads/what-was-the-last-movie-you-watched.20830/post-2886202 )Benjamin Braddock is an overachieving Ivy League student who returns to his upper-class west coast home after graduation completely disaffected with life. While his parents and their friends want to celebrate Ben's scholastic accomplishments, including a graduate school scholarship he's won, he's moody and withdrawn to the point of rudeness.In what would become a pretension of those of a particular bent in the later sixties (and on), "rebel" Ben leaves home to live amongst the "regular" people of the world. Yet he returns a few weeks later when he discovers farmers, shop clerks, firefighters and truck drivers aren't the romantic heroes his condescending elitist arrogance led him to believe they were.Now indulging his discontentment from the safe and luxurious confines of his parents' home, he floats around in their pool all day drinking beer and acting glum as his tolerant parents only modestly question him about his future. It's the classic hypocritical rebellion of "I don't like your values or your money," but it's easier to be against those things while still enjoying them.Enter Mrs. Robinson, his parents' married forty-year old close friend who has known Ben his entire life. Like a lioness stalking a kill, she culls him from the herd, comes on to him hard and, after a little hesitancy by Ben, they begin a sexual affair all but devoid of emotion or even conversation. Enter Elaine Robinson, Mrs. Robinson's home-on-break-from-Berkeley daughter and contemporary of Ben. Clueless-to-it-all Mr. Robinson begs Ben to date Elaine, while Mrs. Robinson, in some of the only pillow talk she and Ben share, "forbids" it. After Ben is all but cornered into taking Elaine out, and after his aborted attempt at sabotaging the date, Elaine and he hit it off. Enter the nuclear option. Mrs. Robinson (who is probably psychotic) threatens Ben with exposing the truth of their affair to Elaine if he sees her again. Ben, launching the missiles first, tells Elaine the truth (good God), which leads to her melting down and wanting nothing to do with Ben anymore (the one good decision anyone ever makes in this book, but it is sadly reversed later).She's sent back to college, while Ben pines away for her until he decides to go up to her campus at Berkeley. But first he announces to his parents that he's going to marry her, despite Elaine herself having no knowledge of this plan. Yes, Ben has many issues.Ben rents a room in Berkeley and hangs around the campus until he runs into her. From Elaine, he learns her mother claims Ben raped her, which is untrue, but which, for a time, deeply alienated Elaine form Ben. Ben, single mindedly, insists they should get married, staying on point even when Elaine notes many practical problems to the idea. You want to scream, "run Elaine, run!"After much back-and-forth discussion and hesitation over the next weeks, Ben begins to win her over, until Elaine's father swoops in and takes her away. Ben then goes in search of Elaine, finally finding her at the church where bride Elaine is walking down the aisle in a hastily-arranged marriage to a "nice college boy."(Spoiler alert) Ben disrupts the affair and she and Elaine run off together with a hint of discord or regret or something unsettling between them as the book ends. One doubts that happily ever after is in the cards for these two. In the movie, Ben isn't quite likable, but he seems more confused than selfish. In the book, he is an insufferable snob and hypocrite, who bullies people to get what he wants. His default setting is passive aggressive, which becomes simply aggressive when he meets resistance. One can only hope Elaine sees this before marrying him. Other than that he is quirky and passionately wants to marry her (that's always an ego boost), she seems to understand that he is unhinged from reality. The book version of the story also lacks the atmosphere of the movie. You don't feel the sixties; you don't feel Ben's youthful angst as anything but an indulgence, and you don't even feel the sexual spark between Ben and Mrs. Robinson.The Graduate is an okay and quick read if you want to learn a bit more about the characters than you do in the movie, but it is one of those rare times where the movie is better than the book. Your reviews are intimidatingly good, Fading Fast... Unless I misread, I found no mention of the physical traits of Benjamin Braddock nor Mrs. Robinson. I mention this as the casting of Dustin Hoffman and Anne Bancroft, both of whom are dark featured, gave the adaptation an ambiguity which has been read into the film by some. |
|
|
|
Post by NoShear on Jul 13, 2023 16:33:12 GMT
Your reviews are intimidatingly good, Fading Fast... Unless I misread, I found no mention of the physical traits of Benjamin Braddock nor Mrs. Robinson. I mention this as the casting of Dustin Hoffman and Anne Bancroft, both of whom are dark featured, gave the adaptation an ambiguity which has been read into the film by some. You're welcome, Fading Fast, and thank you for your response. marysara1's "Article from 1955 how to be a good housewife." post got me thinking about Ira Levin's Platonian housewife taken to the extreme:  ... and wondering if you have ever baked a review of it... |
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Jul 13, 2023 17:19:25 GMT
Thank you for the kind words. Unfortunately, I don't remember the charaters' descriptions from the novel anymore as that's, now, several books in the past. Nothing stands out in my mind, though, as sort of a "wow" that's very different from the movie. The big difference, as I noted in the review, is that Ben in the book is an arrogant jerk versus Ben in the movie who is more confused than arrogant. You're welcome, Fading Fast, and thank you for your response. marysara1's "Article from 1955 how to be a good housewife." post got me thinking about Ira Levin's Platonian housewife taken to the extreme: ... and wondering if you have ever baked a review of it... |
|
|
|
Post by NoShear on Jul 14, 2023 20:23:23 GMT
You're welcome, Fading Fast, and thank you for your response. marysara1's "Article from 1955 how to be a good housewife." post got me thinking about Ira Levin's Platonian housewife taken to the extreme: ... and wondering if you have ever baked a review of it... Sorry for the delay in responding, Fading Fast... No, I have yet to read the book, but I can easily imagine you offering an interesting socio-historical look at it. |
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Aug 14, 2023 3:09:45 GMT
Daisy Kenyon by Elizabeth Janeway, originally published in 1945
Published in 1945, Daisy Kenyon is engaging time travel to the 1940s free of modern biases. It also belies the squeaky clean "traditional" world of movies from that period as, in print, Daisy is an independent, single, sexually active and successful career woman.
Fans of the movie will recognize the story's love triangle, but the book is set at the start of WWII, not as in the movie, at the end. Also, several plot developments and character motivations in the book were altered, left out or invented for the screen version.
In the book, we meet thirty-two-year-old Daisy who has been having an affair for the past eight years with Dan O'Mara, a successful and married attorney with children. Daisy is no gold-digging mistress, though, as she's paid her own way as a commercial illustrator.
At thirty-two, Daisy is questioning the point of her affair just at the time that an art editor, Peter Lapham, from one of her client magazines takes an interest in her. Fast forward and Daisy is married, while she and Dan part as friends, although he wished they had kept going.
The book takes a long detour into Dan's efforts to get Washington interested in a new plane engine he's championing, but the bureaucracy wears him down. In WWII, that was a more relevant and interesting story than today when we know all about DC's soul-crushing bureaucracy.
There is also a long look at Dan's ugly marriage to Lucille, who hates Dan, in part, because of his affair. That's reasonable, but as shown here, you understand why he needed love outside of his marriage. You don't know enough to judge beyond being glad that theirs is not your marriage.
It's then back to Daisy who has a long summer honeymoon with Peter right before he's drafted into the army. Their time together drags a bit for the reader as we quickly get it, they are in love. Then, with Peter at basic training, Dan tries to reenter Daisy's life.
The long climax (no spoilers coming) involves Dan's attempt to win Daisy back as the guy doesn't quit. There is a very ugly incident involved in that effort that provides a revealing comparison in how the 1940s looked at things versus our modern take.
A lot of Daisy Kenyon takes place either in Daisy's head as introspection or as looooong "what does our relationship mean" conversations that could have used some editing. One guesses that author Janeway was writing, at least partially, from her own life experiences.
Usually the book is better than the movie, but here it's close to a tie. The book provides a better wartime story than the movie and it gives us fuller backgrounds for the characters and their motivations. But it also drags in several spots.
The movie, though, never drags as it focuses on an amped-up love triangle with several taut confrontations between the two men that don't happen in the book. It's a bit too Hollywood, but then the movie only had ninety minutes to tell a nearly three-hundred-page-long story.
Since the book and movie go off in their own directions, you can read the book, watch the movie and get two different Daisy Kenyon experiences. However, while the book is good, if time is a constraint, you can also choose to just watch the movie and read something else.
For comments on the movie, click here: "Daisy Kenyon" |
|
|
|
Post by topbilled on Aug 14, 2023 13:59:49 GMT
Daisy Kenyon by Elizabeth Janeway, originally published in 1945
Published in 1945, Daisy Kenyon is engaging time travel to the 1940s free of modern biases. It also belies the squeaky clean "traditional" world of movies from that period as, in print, Daisy is an independent, single, sexually active and successful career woman.
Fans of the movie will recognize the story's love triangle, but the book is set at the start of WWII, not as in the movie, at the end. Also, several plot developments and character motivations in the book were altered, left out or invented for the screen version.
In the book, we meet thirty-two-year-old Daisy who has been having an affair for the past eight years with Dan O'Mara, a successful and married businessman with children. Daisy is no gold-digging mistress, though, as she's paid her own way as a commercial illustrator.
At thirty-two, Daisy is questioning the point of her affair just at the time that an art editor, Peter Lapham, from one of her client magazines takes an interest in her. Fast forward and Daisy is married, while she and Dan part as friends, although he wished they had kept going.
The book takes a long detour into Dan's efforts to get Washington interested in a new plane engine he's championing, but the bureaucracy wears him down. In WWII, that was a more relevant and interesting story than today when we know all about DC's soul-crushing bureaucracy.
There is also a long look at Dan's ugly marriage to Lucille, who hates Dan, in part, because of his affair. That's reasonable, but as shown here, you understand why he needed love outside of his marriage. You don't know enough to judge beyond being glad that theirs is not your marriage.
It's then back to Daisy who has a long summer honeymoon with Peter right before he's drafted into the army. Their time together drags a bit for the reader as we quickly get it, they are in love. Then, with Peter at basic training, Dan tries to reenter Daisy's life.
The long climax (no spoilers coming) involves Dan's attempt to win Daisy back as the guy doesn't quit. There is a very ugly incident involved in that effort that provides a revealing comparison in how the 1940s looked at things versus our modern take.
A lot of Daisy Kenyon takes place either in Daisy's head as introspection or as looooong "what does our relationship mean" conversations that could have used some editing. One guesses that author Janeway was writing, at least partially, from her own life experiences.
Usually the book is better than the movie, but here it's close to a tie. The book provides a better wartime story than the movie and it gives us fuller backgrounds for the characters and their motivations. But it also drags in several spots.
The movie, though, never drags as it focuses on an amped-up love triangle with several taut confrontations between the two men that don't happen in the book. It's a bit too Hollywood, but then the movie only had ninety minutes to tell a nearly three-hundred-page-long story.
Since the book and movie go off in their own directions, you can read the book, watch the movie and get two different Daisy Kenyon experiences. However, while the book is good, if time is a constraint, you can also choose to just watch the movie and read something else.
For comments on the movie, click here: "Daisy Kenyon"
I think I like the idea that Peter is drafted, since that gives a more plausible reason why he is suddenly physically absent from Daisy's life after the marriage. I did think one of the film's weaker parts was Peter remaining in New England working on a project, while Daisy was in New York getting assignments. I don't think in their honeymoon phase, Peter who was a bit needy, would have just let Daisy spend all that time alone in New York, especially since he would probably know that Dan might start circling again.
As for Dan's career, I prefer the film's version of him being a high-powered attorney who is trying to do something right by agreeing to a political case pro-bono, which rubs salt in the wounds with Lucille and Lucille's father.
Quick question: does Dan call everyone 'honey bunch' in the book...or was that funny repeating dialogue created by the movie's screenwriter? |
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Aug 14, 2023 14:52:21 GMT
Daisy Kenyon by Elizabeth Janeway, originally published in 1945
Published in 1945, Daisy Kenyon is engaging time travel to the 1940s free of modern biases. It also belies the squeaky clean "traditional" world of movies from that period as, in print, Daisy is an independent, single, sexually active and successful career woman.
Fans of the movie will recognize the story's love triangle, but the book is set at the start of WWII, not as in the movie, at the end. Also, several plot developments and character motivations in the book were altered, left out or invented for the screen version.
In the book, we meet thirty-two-year-old Daisy who has been having an affair for the past eight years with Dan O'Mara, a successful and married businessman with children. Daisy is no gold-digging mistress, though, as she's paid her own way as a commercial illustrator.
At thirty-two, Daisy is questioning the point of her affair just at the time that an art editor, Peter Lapham, from one of her client magazines takes an interest in her. Fast forward and Daisy is married, while she and Dan part as friends, although he wished they had kept going.
The book takes a long detour into Dan's efforts to get Washington interested in a new plane engine he's championing, but the bureaucracy wears him down. In WWII, that was a more relevant and interesting story than today when we know all about DC's soul-crushing bureaucracy.
There is also a long look at Dan's ugly marriage to Lucille, who hates Dan, in part, because of his affair. That's reasonable, but as shown here, you understand why he needed love outside of his marriage. You don't know enough to judge beyond being glad that theirs is not your marriage.
It's then back to Daisy who has a long summer honeymoon with Peter right before he's drafted into the army. Their time together drags a bit for the reader as we quickly get it, they are in love. Then, with Peter at basic training, Dan tries to reenter Daisy's life.
The long climax (no spoilers coming) involves Dan's attempt to win Daisy back as the guy doesn't quit. There is a very ugly incident involved in that effort that provides a revealing comparison in how the 1940s looked at things versus our modern take.
A lot of Daisy Kenyon takes place either in Daisy's head as introspection or as looooong "what does our relationship mean" conversations that could have used some editing. One guesses that author Janeway was writing, at least partially, from her own life experiences.
Usually the book is better than the movie, but here it's close to a tie. The book provides a better wartime story than the movie and it gives us fuller backgrounds for the characters and their motivations. But it also drags in several spots.
The movie, though, never drags as it focuses on an amped-up love triangle with several taut confrontations between the two men that don't happen in the book. It's a bit too Hollywood, but then the movie only had ninety minutes to tell a nearly three-hundred-page-long story.
Since the book and movie go off in their own directions, you can read the book, watch the movie and get two different Daisy Kenyon experiences. However, while the book is good, if time is a constraint, you can also choose to just watch the movie and read something else.
For comments on the movie, click here: "Daisy Kenyon"
I think I like the idea that Peter is drafted, since that gives a more plausible reason why he is suddenly physically absent from Daisy's life after the marriage. I did think one of the film's weaker parts was Peter remaining in New England working on a project, while Daisy was in New York getting assignments. I don't think in their honeymoon phase, Peter who was a bit needy, would have just let Daisy spend all that time alone in New York, especially since he would probably know that Dan might start circling again.
As for Dan's career, I prefer the film's version of him being a high-powered attorney who is trying to do something right by agreeing to a political case pro-bono, which rubs salt in the wounds with Lucille and Lucille's father.
Quick question: does Dan call everyone 'honey bunch' in the book...or was that funny repeating dialogue created by the movie's screenwriter?
Peter being drafted made much more sense. The entire story is more plausible in the book, but the movie producers clearly decided, in 1947, that America didn't want to see an early 1940s war story, so they moved the date up to the end of the war. That required a lot of "adjustments" to the plot, some of which didn't work great.
I remember Dan using "honey" a lot in the book, but not sure it was "honey bunch." I'd have to go back and look as some of that stuff becomes white noise to me when I'm reading. |
|
|
|
Post by marysara1 on Aug 14, 2023 17:46:34 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by NoShear on Aug 25, 2023 15:53:01 GMT
You're welcome, Fading Fast, and thank you for your response. marysara1's "Article from 1955 how to be a good housewife." post got me thinking about Ira Levin's Platonian housewife taken to the extreme: ... and wondering if you have ever baked a review of it... I'd meant to post this sometime ago for you, Fading Fast... I'd thought of the following with a combo of your penchant for movie-related novels and a Patricia Neal fashion-related post of yours: My parents had a bunch of SIGNET paperbacks in their 'library', and one of the covers which left its impression was -  ...a suggested read for you should you not have already and/or built a review upon. |
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Aug 25, 2023 16:28:52 GMT
I have not. I haven't even read the book. I saw the original movie decades ago, but that's it. I didn't even watch the remake. Maybe I'll have to rewatch the original and then watch the remake back to back one day. Have you read the book? If so, what did you think about it? I'd meant to post this sometime ago for you, Fading Fast... I'd thought of the following with a combo of your penchant for movie-related novels and a Patricia Neal fashion-related post of yours: My parents had a bunch of SIGNET paperbacks in their 'library', and one of the covers which left its impression was - ...a suggested read for you should you not have already and/or built a review upon.
I greatly appreciate your suggestion. I have an already written review of the movie "The Fountainhead" that I've never posted here, but should and will. To write a review of the book, at this point, I'd have to reread it and, if memory serves, it's quite a long read.
The movie "The Fountainhead," IMO, is just okay and falls short of the book, but stylistically, I love the movie. I think it's just beautiful to look at.
Somewhat related, ten or so years ago, I saw a made-for-TV (I think it was, anyway) movie version of Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" that wasn't bad, but there's no reason to hunt it out.
As to movie-book-review combos, I have a copy of Faulkner's novel "Intruder in the Dust" coming (should arrive today, in fact, if UPS tracking is correct). Once I read that, I'll review it and post it, with a link to my already-up review of the movie. That's my next book-movie review combo coming.
I would like to take you up on your suggestion and reread "The Fountainhead," and do that as a combo with the movie, but man, that book is long. |
|
|
|
Post by NoShear on Aug 25, 2023 16:43:33 GMT
I'd meant to post this sometime ago for you, Fading Fast... I'd thought of the following with a combo of your penchant for movie-related novels and a Patricia Neal fashion-related post of yours: My parents had a bunch of SIGNET paperbacks in their 'library', and one of the covers which left its impression was - ...a suggested read for you should you not have already and/or built a review upon.
I greatly appreciate your suggestion. I have an already written review of the movie "The Fountainhead" that I've never posted here, but should and will. To write a review of the book, at this point, I'd have to reread it and, if memory serves, it's quite a long read.
The movie "The Fountainhead," IMO, is just okay and falls short of the book, but stylistically, I love the movie. I think it's just beautiful to look at.
Somewhat related, ten or so years ago, I saw a made-for-TV (I think it was, anyway) movie version of Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" that wasn't bad, but there's no reason to hunt it out.
As to movie-book-review combos, I have a copy of Faulkner's novel "Intruder in the Dust" coming (should arrive today, in fact, if UPS tracking is correct). Once I read that, I'll review it and post it, with a link to my already-up review of the movie. That's my next book-movie review combo coming.
I would like to take you up on your suggestion and reread "The Fountainhead," and do that as a combo with the movie, but man, that book is long. I have this image of someone interested in reading, say, an Ayn Rand book, finding it to be too long and deciding to wait for the Fading Fast review. |
|
|
|
Post by Fading Fast on Aug 26, 2023 3:13:13 GMT
A Town Like Alice by Nevil Shute, originally published in 1950
Nevil Shute is a storyteller. His novels aren't going to win any literary awards, but they are well-researched tales that engage you from the first page to the last with believable and likable characters who lead interesting lives full of romance, history, travel and challenges.
In A Town Like Alice, Shute, first, takes us to Malaysia (or Malay, as it was known then) in WWII where a young female English expatriate, Jean Paget, is captured by the Japanese.
Not wanting female prisoners, one Japanese commander after another forces the original group of thirty-plus women to go on long marches from one area of the country to another as each commander simply wants to get them out of his hair.
Marching and living under brutal conditions, which include almost no food or medicine, several members of the group get sick and die. Jean, with no experience, becomes their de facto leader as she bargains with the Japanese and locals for the group's survival.
Her plan to save the dwindling members is audacious and smartly executed by this young intrepid woman, which results in these former pampered expats truly learning something about the Malaysian people and its culture.
Along the way, Jean meets a kind Australian man, Joe Harman, who is also a prisoner. Joe helps the women, but pays dearly for his efforts as the Japanese, in response, literally, crucify him and leave him for dead.
Jean, whose deepening friendship with Joe was beginning to border on romance, warned him not to take risks for the women. Still, she feels guilt over his suffering.
After the war, Jean returns to England and takes a job in a small leather manufacturing concern as a secretary. She then learns that she just inherited a substantial amount of money from a distant relative.
While not super rich, she now has the resources to take a trip to Australia to see if Joe Harman survived and to see if their WWII inchoate romance can be reignited. After overcoming a few obstacles, she finds Joe, a manager of a remote cattle ranch, and romance blossoms.
Smart and industrious Jean sees several business opportunities in the underdeveloped one-horse town near Joe's ranch. With capital from her inheritance, she opens up a shoe manufacturing plant using local alligator skins and, yes, an ice cream parlor.
Jean is an outstanding example of an independent woman and role model for her time. Modern period novel writers, who make characters like Jean into cartoons perfectly aligned to today's unforgiving ideology, could learn from authors like Shute.
Back in Shute's book, the climax (no spoilers coming) involves the dangers of living on a remote ranch without any modern means of communication. But the real fun in A Town Like Alice is the journey.
Shute creates characters you like and find interesting, which in this one includes Jean's very kind and smart trust attorney who works to help Jean overcome some hurdles along the way. He also serves as the novel's narrator.
Nevil Shute, an engineer by day, researches the heck out of his stories, so your time with Jean in Malaysia becomes an easy but thoughtful history lesson on the Japanese occupation of Malaysia in WWII.
Back in England, you learn the intricacies of Jean's trust, not as a boring legal story, but as an engaging look at how estate planning can drive life-changing events.
Finally, the last third of the book doubles as an engrossing tutorial on the social, culture and economic conditions of Australia's Outback. Plus you meet a cute-as-all-heck baby Wallaby.
None of it is dry because, in A Town Like Alice, you care about Shute's complex characters as their stories rip through the years and across continents and cultures.
N.B. #1 In a brief note at the end, Shute explains that the story of Jean's experiences in Malaysia was based on the real story of a woman who had spent the war as a prisoner of the Japanese, but in Sumatra not Malaysia.
N.B. #2 I haven't seen it, but there is a 1956 movie based on A Town Like Alice starring Virginia McKenna. I'm up for any movie with Virginia McKenna. There is also a 1981 TV miniseries based on the novel, which I also haven't seen. |
|
