Bread and Circuses - The Hunger Games

Well, there's finally a book that got me motivated enough to really write about just after finishing it. Experience shows that if I don't write immediately, I won't write at all, or much much later. So if you want to read something about Ken Follet's Pillars of the Earth, Carlos R. Zafon's The Shadow of the Wind, Vampire Diaries, Hush! Hush! or Salt you have to tell me or just wait until I'm bored enough to write. There will be an off-topic excursion to Oxford, too.

But to come back to the book I've just finished: Suzanne Collins' Hunger Games. Not only is it suspenseful and well written, it has left me angry and feeling miserable, which speaks of its quality. Maybe I'm a little masochistic about reading, but if a book makes me emotional - in whatever given way - I like it. So, what is it about?

In the future, the United States of America don't exist anymore. In its place - or what's left of it - is a state called Panem. Consisting of a wealthy and geographically well positioned Capitol and 13 districts which are divided by their economic task, like agriculture, industry, or - coalmining. The districts are isolated from one another and most of them are not wealthy, most even suffer from hunger, while some - especially the Capitol - live in abundance. It's not a free democracy of course, it's a totalitarian regime - as such state constructs always require.

Well, to be correct, it used to be 13 districts. 47 years ago a revolt against the Capitol was bloodily ended, and District 13 was erased from the face of earth. To remind the remaining 12 of this revolt, and that it's not a good idea to rebel against the capitol, they host yearly Hunger Games. For this, from each district a boy and a girl between 12 and 18 is chosen - so 24 teenagers in all - and put into a huge outdoor arena. The rules are simple: there are none, but the games end when there is only one living person left. And make it entertaining!, since the Hunger Games are broadcast live for the excited audience in the capital, and the compulsory audience in the districts.

Of course the kids don't have elaborate equipment, or even food or water. They have to fight each other for scarce food, water, weapons, medicine or warm clothes. After the first hour there are about 12 of the 24 left, and everyone wants to be the last one standing. Katniss Everdeen, 16, is the girl tribute chosen from District 12, easily the poorest, coal mining, district. Her odds are not too bad, since she's used to hunger and cold, and has a decent way with bow and arrows. If only she could lay her hands on one. What makes it harder though is her remaining sense of humanity, and being in the same arena with a friend who once saved her life and a little girl who reminds her of her little sister doesn't help, either. But it's no use, she has to fight - the public wants to be entertained, and the winner - and his or her family - never has to be starving again.

I won't tell you too much, to not spoil your reading. But I can tell you, the book is definitely worth reading. The first person narrator is credible, humane, without being pathetic. The world created is coherent in itself, the story is suspenseful, and the characters are likeable. But what striked me most, is the unbelievable cruelty and the arbitrary way that society is functioning, yet how coherent, how natural it is perceived in that world.  The show everyone is watching, and having a small talk about at work, in which kids are supposed to kill each other - and when there have been no kills for too long, the show's creators help along with some flooding, fire, drought, cold - or whatever makes resources even sparser and drives the contestants together. The contestants most likeable and most likely to win have sponsors who can send them needed goods, like bread or medicine, into the arena - to make the contestant not die right away and to create more suspense..

Additionally the portrayal of the rich Capitol, which not unlike our modern western countries, provide most things in abundance. In which there's too much food, and people spend their days tending to their style, having cosmetic surgeries to look younger and slimmer, and to think of good entertainment for the masses. At the same time people in the districts, even in the agricultural ones, are working hard and still starving. It would be so easy to share some of the abundance of the Capitol to save some lives. Such incredible lack of empathy..

Which brings me to my anger at our present day society. The crappy reality TV which knows no boundaries, I tell you, it's just a matter of time, until such Hunger Games are not science fiction anymore. It's quite a little step for our peeping tom society, we seem to like to see people crying in despair, watching people in their private moments, watching them suffer, compete, love, going crazy. I don't want and cannot watch those shows, but the ratings for all the American Idols, Big Brothers, Celebrity Rehabs, Survivors, Super Nannies, or whatever bullshit is out there say there are more than enough people who enjoy it. Add some documentaries about war and natural catastrophes, and we're not so far away anymore.

We all, with very few exceptions - and I'm not one of them - are lacking the right dose of empathy.  I love entertainment, I love the movies, but blowing the equivalent of 40 bucks on a movie date should be wrong. I mean, just imagine what 40 bucks can do in some African countries, in Bangladesh, in flooded Pakistan, in Haiti, in .... It could easily feed one child for a whole month. So, why am I still going to the movies? It's not that I don't donate, I do, but if I'd be honest with myself I could give more, I'd just have to cut some of my entertainment. And I'm pretty sure, I'm not alone with that.

What is it? What is it about this need for entertainment, for indulgement in fancy clothes, restaurants and stuff we do not REALLY need? Why is it stronger than our empathy for fellow human lives? Why can't we just do what's right, even if we already know what would be right? I'd be really grateful for some answers or discussion. Because it seriously has me wondering.  Thinking about countries in which starving is nothing exceptional, about Wikileaks' videos of Iraq, and of millions made by the movie industry - for which we pay - makes me think that the Hunger Games are not so scifi at all, at least not on the second glance.

What do you say?

A Movie Like a Dream - RECOMMENDATION

First things first, I've decided to split my blog post on Inception into two. The first will be very short. An unequivocal recommendation to go and see Inception.

If you follow my blog for a while or know my movie critiques from me in person, you'll know that it happens very rarely that I'd recommend a movie very clearly. Well, this is one of those exceptional moments. I've just come back from the theater and my mind is still racing, still processing, still amazed.

Inception is - to me - clearly one of the best films of the decade, if not THE best movie I've seen yet. Even if it's not the very best, it will definitely make the top five. The movie is very intelligent and clever, brilliant. It has everything: suspense (lots of it), action, love, story, conspiracy, surprise, tragic, something to think about, something to please the eye...incredible script, wonderful actors, a genius as director, good photography, nice effects.

I will not post anything about the story here, because I don't wont to spoil something for you. Just trust me - go and see this movie and after you've found out why a spinning top is much more than an old-fashioned  toy, come back and discuss Inception with me (there will be another blog post which handles the story).

Oh Please, Turn Back the S(h)ands of Time...

...and give me the time back I've spent watching Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. Not that I've gone to the movies with any expectations, but there is still room to be surprised.

I've noticed that Jerry Bruckheimer listened very closely to the new "green wave" in Hollywood. Allocation of finite resources, recycling and the highest possible reduction of use of chemistry were concepts he clearly picked up.

The story is quickly told: a handsome young Persian orphan becomes a prince by the grace of the old wise king. When he grows up to have some more muscles, he participates in an attack on a mysterious city and by chance gets hold of a dagger that enables his owner to turn back the hands of time. It used to belong to a pretty princess, who wants it back....but of course not only her mind is set on this powerful item.

The props people did a good job, as did the CGI specialists and stunt men/ Jake Gyllenhall. You can only congratulate him on those abs and body control - I've read he had months of training in parcour, a little eye candy for the ladies. He's jumping, climbing and fighting impressively through the movie, puppy-eyed and with sweaty long hair. Gentlemen, don't be disappointed - it's not enough to take away the breath of your female companions - and there is something for you, too. Gemma Arterton with ultra long hair extensions is some nice view too, even if she's lacking any charisma. As a couple they are totally organic, as in lacking any chemistry.

Did you know that in the Middle Ages builders of churches and palaces loved to use old Roman pillars and other parts of buildings for having elaborate style while at the same time saving costs? Prince of Persia has recalled the frightening appearance of riding Nazgul (as Assassins), dungeon and sand scenes from Indiana Jones, Aladdin - oh, and did I mention views used in the computer game Assassin's Creed II? So much for the recycling.

That resources for a movie are finite, is a normal thing. But usually filmmakers try to keep a good balance between story and visual power. Jerry Bruckheimer's films have never been at an equilibrium, but this time he has outdone himself. Or as my husband put it: they should have used some of the money they gave to the CGI people to a dialogue writer. Just a little? It would have been spent well. The dialogues in this movie are an insult to your ears. Its some bits and pieces put together without any sense for timing or flow, undecided between pathos and comedy.

Maybe it wasn't the writer who needs his hands cut off, a punishment often used in ancient Persia. Maybe it's the editor. The scenes could have been nice as short clips, not as a feature film. The way it is it feels like a heartless sequence of trailer scenes. It's a crime. He certainly would have been found guilty for any punishment...

This movie can be recommended to:

1. any film major students - see how NOT to make a good movie
2. fans of Gemma Arterton or Jake Gyllenhall
3. fans of nice fight and stunt scenes void of any story
4. masochistic personalities
5. people who need the darkness of theaters for dates and who don't really wish to miss a good movie while making out...

I'm really not opposed to some nice and easy-on-the-mind action movies to have a nice evening at the movies. But there should be an outline, a shadow, a trace of a story. I desperately tried and  failed to find some in Prince of Persia.  

The only thing left to me is to remember R. Kelly's words:
"Oh how I wish,
I wish I could turn,
turn back the hands of time...."

Cinema ...without cinema

So, I just finished Eleven Hours by Paullina Simons. And I mean "just" - like just five minutes ago.

Eleven Hours is a novel about an abduction in modern day Texas. It's only some 300 pages long and it's kind of "real time" written. There are two parallel time lines, and it is quite suspenseful. Reading it feels as if you're at the movies, or watching an episode of Without a Trace, it's very graphic, or at least turns very graphic in my head.

It's Paullina Simons, which means there is this incredible way to write that feels like thought fragments. Hard to describe. It isn't a first person novel, but the way she writes is still digging into the minds of the heroes and into the one of the reader. I totally love this "raging mind" style, it's making Paullina's books special to me.

Then again, it's not The Bronze Horseman, which became one of my favorite books this year (actually the whole trilogy) and which I'm certainly going to review in some time. It's not this absolutely breathtaking, life changing, amazing book that you cannot put down and which looks like an old beloved teddy bear with time (like TBH). But as I guess is typical for Paullina, the characters are believable, although a little too nice, not really edgy. The way Paullina writes, it's forgivable though.

Desdemona - Didi - Woods is happily married, homemaker, mom of 2 girls and nine months pregnant with the couple's third child. She lives in Dallas with her family, her husband - Rich - is working for a Christian publisher, where she met him being his assistant.

On a hot July day she gets abducted by a complete stranger, who lost wife and son - and his sanity, too. While she tries to free herself and survive as long as possible, her husband Rich is getting help from the F.B.I. and frantically tries to find her...

Being a huge fan of Paullina Simons' TBH-series I have to admit I began the read expecting an amazing and exceptional book. I didn't get this, but Eleven Hours is still a solid thriller to read on a nice afternoon. It's suspenseful and entertaining, it's fast-paced but it is no masterpiece. What was a little annoying to me personally were the excessive references to religion - they sound a little overdone. But here too, I guess they're forgivable - cause they seem to fit the characters.

To end this uninspired blog entry, I'll just put it in a nutshell: A good read (if you're not pregnant!), but not life changing.

10 + 5 = 2 or..... Higher Mathematics of Love

The film I'm going to write about now you should go and see, if:

1. You are a gorgeous, successful and confident woman, or
2. you're a man with confidence issues (be honest, man), or
3. any other person who is not either a monk or nun, or in a 100 per cent happy and honest relationship.

I'm talking about "She's Out of My League". As the last movie date was such a disaster, my husband demanded a revenge and took me out to see this movie. Honestly, I didn't expect anything. And it's been a nice surprise.


So there's Kirk. Kirk has a life that sucks, since about 25+x years. His family is making the Bundys look like people from the intelligentsia. His bitch of an ex-girlfriend practically lives at his house, where he still lives with his parents (sorry, my mistake). He's working at the TSA, has a stupid boss, drives a crappy car and he looks very average. By judging of his friends, he's "a five, maybe a six".

And there's Molly. Drop-dead gorgeous, nice, smart, successful - and single (of course with a pilot model ex). That is until she meets Kirk and asks him out. And this is where the frenzy starts...

Nobody can understand what a bombshell like Molly wants with a Joe Average like Kirk. Not Kirk's family, not Molly's family, nor her stupid ex who thinks Kirk must be gay because Molly hangs out with him, not Kirk's friends (enjoy the married one with big love for Disney ;) ) and certainly not Kirk himself.

So, with the "help" of friends and family he does everything in his power to sabotage his own luck and you'll understand why so many relationships fail. (SPOILER - mark to read: It is missing self-confidence and following self-fulfilling prophecies ...) See it, then  you'll also find out what you'd get for $25 000, what you need married hetero-sexual friends for, and you'll see a horrible major deformation...

To be serious again: by contrast to the NON-love story "Dear John" this is a really charming romance. The main characters are believable and likable - they are nerds, and their humor is sometimes scratching at boundaries, but never crosses it. The guys are not the usual picture perfect  movie star guys, and they know it - but it never gets really mean.

And this is why you should go and see this movie, have a nice evening, take it in - and understand the true meaning of "It's not you, it's me."

Hello World...or How to Start Learning a New Language

So this is it, I guess. I've finally arrived in the blogosphere. Not that I haven't been here before, but I was just lurking around, reading, wondering, laughing. Now I'll try myself, and as with every new language I say: Hello World! And it seems quite easy - well, at least the writing itself. Can't say yet if it's gonna run bug free ;)

The plan was to write about interesting movies and books. But plans always last only as long as there is no contact with reality. So yesterday's movie was NOT interesting. Been to the movies to see "Dear John", cause I like Amandy Seyfried (cutie pie) and also, Channing Tatum is quite handsome to look at. There is nothing to say against a good cheesy romance now and then. BUT there is something to say against a cheesy romance with no real flavor at all. It was like eating a bun which is supposed to be filled with liquid chocolate but is not. You're biting and biting and nothing exciting happens, leaving you unsatisfied.

Beware - SPOILERS -
The story is about a girl (Savannah) and a boy (John) meeting on vacation, falling in love - but he is with the U.S. Army's special forces and have to go away with them for one year. The main characters are squeaky clean with no edges whatsoever, so they promise to wait for each other and write letters to each other. Shortly before his service ends, 9/11 happens and so John prolongs his time by two more years, in which she leaves him for a much older guy (family friend who's friends with John, too) with an autistic son and John, devastated, burns all her letters and gets himself shot in Afghanistan. When they meet again, years later, she's married to a cancer-stricken nice guy with child, and John with his good moral compass resists her devastated cry (seduction attempt) for love. Good guy that he is, John sells his late father's coin collection and donates the money anonymously to the treatment of Savannah's husband, but, alas, he dies anyway. And so they meet again...

Channing Tatum is eye candy for sure, as is Amanda Seyfried. They have undeniable chemistry, but the dialogues and non-existing suspension are just too bad for trading up this asset. Plus Amanda Seyfried is the perfect on-screen teenager or young adult - but she just isn't believable as an adult woman. Throw in some nice landscape shots, not too bad music, a lesson on coins and some awareness raising on autism for spice...and stir.

Well, it could have been an interesting story. But it wasn't. It was just like plastic candy. Candy, but not even tasty. It just leaves a bad taste in your mouth, and the knowledge that serving in the military just sucks for your private life.