A to Z: Stories

I can barely begin to tell you how relieved i was that I didn't have to write a blog yesterday. The boyfriend usually does his blogs beforehand and I leave them to the day, and then to the last minute, and yesterday I was pretty exhausted. I was in need of a good break. So I did some reading and some thinking.

As you may know my sister and I are writing a book, were still working our way through the second draft, but I'm stuck. I have writers block. I was hoping this challenge would help and inspire me, but no such luck so far.

But instead I decided I would read more, and look at how other writers have done it and use that to help improve my own writing. I also thought about doing some short stories about different topics (say, fairy tales or Arthurian tales or something), and though I've had a few ideas, there's nothing concrete at the moment.

So today instead of sharing with you something new that I've written, I'll share with you something older.
It's a short story based on the tale of 'The boy who cried Wolf'. It's short, but I think if I copied and pasted it on here it would take up a lot more of this blog than I would like, so here's a link:

The Wolf-Boy.

Please give it a read and tell me what you think. You would be doing me a huge favour.
Or even better, give me some suggestions for other short stories you'd like to see me write.

A to Z: Rumpelstiltskin

I always felt sorry for Rumpelstiltskin. He's always portrayed as the bad guy. It's always the miller's daughter/queen that people are supposed to root for, but if it weren't for Rumpelstiltskin, she wouldn't have even been alive to be Queen or have a kid. So really she owes him her life.
To make this a little more fair, I've compiled the facts. They might be slightly biased though.

Facts:
- A father's terrible actions would have killed his daughter if Rumpelstiltskin hadn't come along. The father is really to blame for all of this mess. He is a very bad man.
- He asked her for the daughters first born, which was a little steep, but he had spun gold twice for her, and you don't get something for nothing. She said yes. She committed.
Now here I think that a good reason for Rumpelstiltskin wanting the child was because he wanted a child of his own but could not have one, or maybe he lost his own child. Or maybe he really is evil and wanted to turn it into a demon, or eat it or something.
- Rumpelstiltskin took pity on her and gave her a chance to thwart him by her guessing his name. He gave her an unlimited amount of guesses, so it was very fair. She was going back on her promise.
- She sends a messenger to go out and find all the names he can, and he spies on Rumpelstiltskin. I call this cheating.
- Rumpelstiltskin was angry and tore himself in two when his real name was guessed. A name is a precious thing, and so it makes sense that he was angry. Maybe he was upset too, as he didn't have a kid to bring up.

He's just misunderstood really.

What do you think?

A to Z: Mythology

Iris the rainbow goddess, from google.

I've always loved mythology. Any kind of myths and legends, folklore and fairy tales - I devour them all.
When I was little it was always Greek mythology. I knew all about the gods and goddesses, the gorgons and cyclopes, heroes and nymphs. Nowadays, not much has changed, only it's grown to include Roman mythology, and some Norse and Egyptian, and a few more.

One of the best books I've ever read that included mythology was Neil Gaiman's 'American Gods'. Not only was it a very good introduction to Norse mythology, but it was also very interesting, and occasionally funny. Do read it if you get a chance.

Another series of books is Rick Riordan's Percy Jackson series, and the Heroes of Olympus series. He's also done an Egyptian Mythology series that I've yet to read.But though they're a series for children, they're actually very good. They include many many mythological stories and characters from Greek mythology (and some roman), so actually you learn quite a lot from it too. If you already know a lot of mythology, like me, you can see all of the stories intertwining and appreciate the subtleties if his stories. Maybe read these too?

Hercules (the Disney film) has to get a mention here because it's one of my favourite films. It doesn't deal with any of his trials apart from the Hydra and a scene where they all flash by in a good old song and dance (Zero to Hero, good song). However, it's funny and endearing and I like all the references.

Probably my favourite person/god in all mythology is Iris, the Greek goddess of rainbows, also a messenger goddess.

I do have to say, the Roman God Bacchus (or Dionysus in Greek Mythology) was represented amazingly well in Disney's Fantasia. He was the philandering drunk guy riding the donkey in the wine and thunder scene. Zeus obviously wasn't very happy with him.

'Bofiloksms' - Why Books and Films don't mix.

Adapting books into films. You'd think that the film makers would have learned their lesson by now. Where has this seemingly endless fascination with adaptations come from?

Sure they'd realise by now that most of them are pretty much doomed to failure.

Especially if the book is a good one.

We'll take, for example Children's books.

Always irreversibly ruined by the film industry.

I give you here as examples Rick Riordan's Percy Jackson Series, Darren Shan's Cirque Du Freak Series and Christopher Paolini's Inheritance Cycle (Including Eragon) series. Of course, these adaptations are now virtually unheard of. A. Because they're a bit pants in comparison to the books and B. because they haven't even made a second film adaptation for any of these series.

Inkheart Book Cover.

Some are in fact horrifically massacred. A favourite of mine is the Inkworld Series by Cornelia Funke. It's set in a beautifully crafted world which absorbs the reader right into it, quite literally. The characters are lovable and interesting, with their bad sides on show for everyone to see. But the film version just takes the book and does a number 2 on it.

Brendan Fraser and Helen Mirren are fine in their own way, but they are definitely not at their best. The story completely lacks the ethereal beauty and description of the books and turns a novel into generic children's film. As I'm sure you can tell, I was not best pleased.

Saying this, some adaptations have been hugely successful. This includes J.K Rowling's Harry Potter, Stephanie Meyer's Twilight, J.R Tolkien's Lord of the Rings and C.S Lewis' The Chronicles of Narnia Franchises. Though some of these books are deemed of bad quality and little inspiration, the film have nevertheless been adored by millions of people around the world. Harry Potter and Twilight are always seen to be competing for both bad press and the headlines, fans seemingly both overjoyed and outraged at the differences between the books and the films of each.

Whereas the Chronicles of Narnia are a light read and watch, and in my opinion have the warmth, simplicity and charm you expect from an older styled book, reminiscent of Enid Blyton and Beatrix Potter.

Lord of the Rings, however was made into an adventure epic that seemed to overshadow the book, but missed out some of the more intricate and perhaps necessary plot points.

Some film adaptations have had me screaming at them. OK, quite a few. The Time Machine, for example, had me raging at it's incapability to be even remotely based on the interesting H.G Wells novella. Once you've plodded your way through the obscure wording and far-reaching concepts you really want the film to be slightly like it. The film, instead, was a study on a man trying to bring back his loved one, but ending up going into the future and trying to help a future race.
Yes, this is vaguely the storyline of the book, except the future race are very, very different and there is no loved one. He travels simply for the knowledge and excitement.

Also an interesting, rather than good adaptation of the same kind is The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde. I was put off of the film automatically because it seemed to me to be trying to make the story too action-y. And the ending was a far cry from the events of the book, but still a good one. Ben Barnes would not have been my choice for Dorian either, his character lacks the subtlety that I would have liked. Not a film I would see again.

The three Alice's. 1.Book
2. Original Disney Cartoon
3. Tim Burton Disney film

Perhaps one of the best adaptations I have seen would be Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland. It captures the devilish and oddball side of the story that the older Disney version lacks. Although not sticking to the original stories, it doesn't need to. It's a new story about Alice, and a good one at that. (Also see Lewis Carrols Alice's Adventures in Wonderland)

One area I haven't covered yet, mainly because it's so trashily awful, is the comic book genre. Spiderman, Superman, Watchmen, Catwoman, X-Men, Fantastic Four, Batman, Iron Man.. you name it, it's been ruined.
The film versions of comics are always going to be a little crap with a general mixing of story lines. Mainly because the story lines of comics changes so much. But when they get something really wrong, it makes comic geeks out there furious. And the hugely successful Spiderman franchise is an example of this. It doesn't follow story lines and the characters are out of place and sometimes just plain wrong.
Most of these comic based films completely miss out on their fan base because they don't use the better story lines, the characters are one-sided and are more child-oriented than their comic counterparts.

And perhaps some other good ones are more of the older style books. Such as Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility and Pride and Prejudice, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and Bram Stoker's Dracula, depending on which versions you choose. But generally these book make good films because of their originality. The way that they can be adapted in a variety of ways that still makes sense.

If you watch these adapted films alone, they're OK, sure. But when you read the book your estimation of them just crashes down around your feet. It's very rare to find a film that matches up to the book, let alone is better than it, although for me Narnia comes close.

Although most films seem to bare no resemblance to their book counterparts, here the Guardian lists some films that apparently do:  Guardian's Top 50 good adaptations - This includes Alice in Wonderland, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Sin City, Dangerous Liaisons and The Remains of the Day.

On the other hand here is A list of 20 Good Books made into awful Movies. This includes Bicentennial Man, Stardust (a favourite book, and a horrifically child-oriented film), The Shining, Breakfast at Tiffany's (Although there is some debate about that one, some say it's brilliant, and some say it's awful), The Black Cauldron and a Mention of other classics such as The Hunchback of Notre Dame and Mary Poppins.

 So there you have it. Books and films just don't mix. You know it. I know it.
So a notice to film studios everywhere: Just don't do it. And if you do, make sure it's a rubbish book that you can make better.

-----------------------------------------------------------

This blog was written with inspiration from http://empire500.blogspot.com/ - A blog reviewing films from Empire Magazines 500 5 Star Rated films of all time. Thank you :).

-----------------------------------------------------------
And for those who read this only to see if there was a picture of twilight.. I'll give in to your needs. Only this picture will be a nice, natural picture. Shirts on:

There you go. I hope you're happy.

 OK, I lied completely, but he does have a very chiseled body.

 (All images from a google search)

Fairy Tales: They used to be pretty Grimm.

Upon watching The Brothers Grimm (Which is a must by the way, it is rather brilliant, and takes pieces of inspiration from everywhere) I decided to write about Fairy Tales.

Fairy tales are odd things really. They were folk tales made up to scare people, cause superstition and to provide some sort of twisted form of moral reasoning.

So what moral exactly did they provide? For a start, lets dwell on the infamous Snow White. All I'm getting here is that you shouldn't trust kindly old women, because they just might turn out to be your evil stepmother hell-bent on killing you.
And Little Red Riding Hood? Carry an axe around with you, just in case.

Not really the kind of thing you want to teach children is it? (Although perhaps being on the defensive isn't such a bad idea. There are wolves and witches out there you know.)

Really, the traditional morals are usually something along the lines of: 'love conquers all', 'be wary', 'don't talk to strangers', 'good always triumphs over evil, 'the grass is always greener on the other side'(Billy Goats Gruff guys) and such. But to be honest I think they're mostly explaining why you shouldn't be as plain idiotic as the heroes/heroines in these stories.

Now, as I've said, the heroes and heroines in the stories are pretty stupid. But that's pretty much nothing compared to the antagonists. Clumsy 'bloodthirsty' giants, trolls under bridges, witches living in gingerbread houses, evil beauty queens, frankly ridiculous bears and wolves and not to mention the scariest of all: an ugly little all singing, all dancing man who makes people guess his name. Oh, the horror.
Although saying this, folk tales have had some very good villains. Vampires (NOT the sparkly kind), Werewolves (Not the dog kind), Dragons and truly awesome Sorcerers are some good examples.

But fairytale land wasn't always this way. All the cutesy-ness can pretty much come down to one infinitely famous company. (And others who try making it more.. child-friendly). Of course I'm talking about Disney.
As much as the Disney movies are old classics, in my opinion the more scary and, yes, gory older versions are better. It exposes more in the characters. Cinderellas sisters were so selfish and wanted the Prince so much that they would cut off their own heel and toe just to fit into a shoe? That says something.
Lets not forget how much the real Little Mermaid had to give up. Every step she took out of the ocean was like knives being stabbed into her feet. Not only that but she didn't get the Prince in the end. She died. Ouch.
See what I mean? The morals are more... pertinent.

If you are like me, and much prefer these kinds of stories, or fairy tales rewritten, then I have a few books for you:

1. Anything by Gregory Maguire.
-Try Mirror, Mirror (For Snow White).(Click Here for a Review.)
-Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister (For Cinderella).(Click Here for a Review.)
-Or for something different, and not actually a fairytale Try Wicked (For The Wizard of Oz, also made into a theatre production). (Click Here for a Review.)
2. Neil Gaimans' Stardust (Also made into a film) is also a reworking, but of the whole fairytale genre. I rather love this book.(Click Here for a Review.)
3. Lets not forget that Shrek has a whole rather funny ensemble of fairy tale and storybook creatures.

One thing I must mention, is the utter awfulness of the Princes in these stories. They're charming, heroic and supposedly gorgeous. Can you imagine how vain they must be? And probably with very little capacity for staying still and listening. Although the adventures may be exciting, I have a feeling the conversation wouldn't be.

To end, I'll give you a moral of this here blog:
If you want a fairy tale with substance, do it yourself. (And don't trust odd little men who offer you favours.)