Feeds:
Posts
Comments

This is a novelisation of the 1993 film Philadelphia, which won Tom Hanks his first Academy Award. It’s important to note that the book is based on the film script rather than the film being adapted from the book, because when the book comes first there are usually at least some changes in the film. In this case however, the novel is quite literally a scene by scene story of the film, with the same dialogue throughout.

For anyone who isn’t aware, Philadelphia tells the story of a talented and successful lawyer named Andrew Beckett. He is gay and has full blown AIDS, which he has so far managed to keep to himself, his partner and family and his close friends. However, when the partners at the huge corporate law firm that he works at find out about his illness he is fired. Although they claim that it is due to the mediocre standard of his work, he is convinced that it is because of his illness and/or sexuality, and he decides to sue them. But finding a lawyer who will act for him in court proves difficult and he ends up hiring homophobic personal injury lawyer Joe Miller. Joe does not want to take the case because of his own prejudices, but his prevailing sense of fairness compels him to do so and now the two of them have to prepare for the biggest legal battle either of them have ever faced.

It’s virtually impossible to review the book without also reviewing the film, and while I have always considered both Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington to be superb in their respective roles in the film (Hanks is Andrew Beckett and Washington is Joe Miller), there are better films about HIV/AIDS crisis, and there are definitely better books about the subject.

Because the book is just a recap of the film, there is very little characterisation, because that all came through on screen. Consequently, all of the characters are basically cardboard cut-outs – Andrew is a brilliant and intelligent opera lover, Joe is a charismatic but prejudiced family man, Andrew’s partner Miguel is a hot-headed Spaniard. (Miguel’s character suffers the most from not being more fleshed out – I would have liked to have seen more about how he coped with his lover’s illness, in an emotional sense.)

The prose is certainly undemanding, despite the subject matter and I read the book very quickly. However, while it is perfectly functional, it never really does more than scratch the surface of the situation.

\

This novel tells the story of two young women, trying to come to terms with their pasts. Georgetown Easy moved to small-town England with her mother and aunt when she was just a young girl, but she really wants to find the father she never knew. Her search takes on a physical and metaphorical journey.

Meanwhile Helena Jones knows her past, but wants to leave it where it belongs and escape the self-imposed confines of her life. Always at loggerheads with her layabout brother Troy, Helena has been the sensible twin for as long as she can remember, and now she is ready for change.

About 65% of the novel is narrated by Georgetown, and the remainder is mainly narrated by Helena. with a page short parts narrated by a young lady named Aurelie who blasts her way into the lives of the many characters, and leaves all of them changed.

There’s a lot to like about this book. Georgetown’s scenes and conversations with her mother and aunt are very believable and peppered with humour. I really liked her character and heart. Helena was less interesting to me, and without the difficult relationship between herself and Troy, she would not have been a particularly memorable character.

But that’s not to say I didn’t enjoy the novel because I did, although I think it started to lose it’s way somewhat towards teh end. The titel comes from the name of a blues bar where the characters often met and I must admit the scenes set there did make me wish there was somewhere like that near to where I lived!

Overall, an assured debut – I would probably read more by Kat Pomfret.

1 Mile to You (2017)

Okay, full disclaimer: I watched this film because Tim Roth is in it. Partly also because it’s about running and I love running, but mainly the Tim Roth thing. So to make it clear for any fellow Rothians – he’s not in it much at all!! Anyway onto the film itself…

Kevin Schuler (Graham Rogers) is an athlete in a high school team, coached by Coach Jared (Roth). Kevin’s girlfriend Ellie is also in the team and is Coach Jared’s daughter. When Ellie and several of Kevin’s team mates are killed in a roac accident, he turns to running to help him cope with his loss. He starts at a new school with the unconventional Coach K (Billy Crudup) who helps with Kevin’s running training.

Kevin finds himself trapped by memories of the past byt hoping to forge a new future and is torn between his life before the crash and his life after it.

If I’m honest, I was slightly disappointed by this film. Not just because Tim Roth’s involvement ended after about 15 minutes, but because I unfortunately don’t have much patience with teenage angst. While I totally understand that losing your girlfriend and best mates in a crash is far more than just normal teenage problems, Kevin was never really that likeable to me. I did like Coach K though and thought this was a great performance from Crudup. Overall, a perfectly passable way to pass an evening, but not the great running movie I had been expecting.

There can’t be too many books about a time-travelling serial killer, who murders women in different decades of the 20th century, but here’s one of them. Part sci-fi, part horror, part crime fiction, the books tells the story of Harper Curtis, a monster of a man who discovers a house which allows him to move through time. He goes to see his future murder victims (his shining girls) when they are children, and then comes back when they are adults and murders them. Kirby is one of his victims who actually survives his attack and determines to track down the man who almost killed her.

A week after finishing this book and I am still not sure what to make of it. I sort of enjoyed it, but in parts it was slow and seemed repetitive. I liked Kirby’s character although I did think she was slightly cliched. Harper was irredeemable, horrible, and had not one tiny bit of anything remotely good about him. As bizarre as the idea is, it’s quite appealing in some ways, and I think if the book had been about 100 pages shorter, I would have enjoyed it more. It’s not really the kind of book I ordinarily got for though, so I may not be the best person to ask for an opinion.

A word of warning if you are thinking of reading this – some of the murder scenes are particularly gruesome and there is a scene of animal cruelty, which had I known about beforehand would probably have put me off reading it altogether.

Roger Dodger (2002)

Another evening, another Campbell Scott movie. In Roger Dodger he plays against type as Roger, a sleazy, womanising ad agency executive in NYC; the film opens with a short scene in a bar after which Roger is unceremoniously dumped by his girlfriend Joyce (Isabella Rossellini), who is also his boss. Shortly afterwards his awkward 16 year old nephew Nick turns up in the Big Apple looking for advice from his uncle on how to attract the ladies. What follows is a journey through a NY night out, where Roger introduces Nick to various women and imparts his own brand of wisdom on how to attract and treat ladies. Roger has no respect for women, or indeed for practically anyone. He proudly admits that his job is to make people feel bad about themselves so that they will buy into whatever he is advertising. He is basically an extremely charismatic bastard. He would be easy to hate, but there’s the thing – there are moments, just a few but enough, that you do feel sorry for him. He may not admit it to himself or to anyone else, but we can see that he IS hurt by Joyce finishing their relationship. Campbell Scott is fantastic in this movie because in the hands of a lesser actor, Roger would just be a very one-dimensional character, but there’s clearly more to him somewhere. Kudos also to Jesse Eisenberg, who embodies the nervous, slightly misfit teenager.

It’s a very talky film – lots of lots of dialogue and not an awful lot of action. Roger and Nick drift from scene to scene encountering different women but it’s really all about the words. If action is your thing then this might not be for you, but if you like dialogue-heavy films, then you may enjoy this. I also love films that take place over one night or over one short period of time, and this dilm does exactly that.

Saint Ralph (2004)

I’d been meaning to watch this film for ages and when I finally got around to it I was not disappointed!

Saint Ralph aka The Miracle of Saint Ralph stars Adam Butcher as the titular character, a 14 year old boy at Catholic school in the 1950s, who has a mother desperately ill in hospital. When a nurse tells him that it will be a miracle if his mom recovers he decides that he will create the miracle that is needed by running and winning the Boston Marathon. One of his teachers, Father Hibbert (Campbell Scott, one of my faves) offers to train him against the wishes of the strict headmaster Father Fitzpatrick (Gordon Pinsent).

Considered to have absolutely no hope when he begins training, Ralph is determined to complete his mission and the local town starts to see his as an embodiment of their hopes and desires and everyone who initially laughed at the idea starts to support him. He also provides a new lease of life to Father Hibbert, who gave up some of his own athletic dreams when he joined the priesthood.

This is such a sweet film, with lots of humorous moments – although it isn’t really a comedy, and lots of poignant moments. All of the main cast are excellent, including Jennifer Tilly as the nurst who looks after Ralph’s mom, and by extension, Ralph himself. Campbell Scott is perfect as the slightly rebellious priest, and I defy anyone to watch this and not end the film with a smile on their face.

I have always enjoyed Ben Elton’s books, so I’m not sure quite why it took me so long to get around to reading this one. But I’m glad I finally did. Scotland Yard Detetice Inspector Ed Newson investigates the brutal murder of an equally brutal man who was killed in a most unusual manner. With the aid of his Detective Sergeant Natasha, who Ed is secretly in love with, he starts to connect the dots between this murder and others that have happened – and which continue to happen. Essentially someone is going round murdering bullies and is using the same methods that the bullies themselves used on their victims.

This novel was written in 2004, and the now defunct website Friends Reunited features as a prominent part of the story. Ed himself joins the site as a way of connecting with his old classmates which leads to him meeting a number of them again – some reunions being very welcome (the school beauty Christine) and others not so much.

I did work out who the killer was before the reveal, but I jumped about between a few of the characters beforehand, so although it was guessable, I wouldn’t say it was so obvious that it would mar enjoyment of the story.

It’s not out and out comedy, and there is a serious issue within the story about how bullying in youth can lead to severe problems later in life – but you can always rely on Ben Elton to make you smile and some of the dialogue exchanges between Ed and Natasha were very funny.

Just a warning to anyone who doesn’t like gore or sex – some of the murders are particularly unpleasant, and there is one fairly lengthy sex scene which is eye-poppingly excruciating, revolting and hilarious all at once.

Overall, if you have read and enjoyed Ben Elton before, I would imagine you would definitely enjoy this book. If you haven’t read anything by him before, why not give it a try?

The Love Letter (1998)

This is a sweet little movie from the late 1990s, elevated by two lovely central performances from Campbell Scott (always under-appreciated) and Jennifer Jason Leigh.

Scott plays Scott Corrigan, a computer games designer, engaged to be married to Debra (Daphne Ashbrook). When he buys an antique writing desk and discovers a old letter written by a lady named Lizzie Whitcomb during the American Civil War, he jokingly writes a reply. He is stunned to receive a another letter back from Lizzie and realises that the desk must be some kind of portal between their lives, despite being separated by more than 100 years.

Scott tries to find out more about Lizzie and grows increasingly preoccupied with her, while Lizzie has her own issues to contend with, as her parents wish to marry her off to a man for whom she has no feelings. She is more attracted to the man who is somehow sending her letters from the future.

It is clear that Scott and Lizzie are meant to be together, but how can they ever be? Will either of them ever find happiness in their own times?

Now lets be honest – if realism is what you’re after, then you’re not going to find it in this movie. The premise itself is, on paper, ridiculous. However, if you are happy to just go along with it, there’s actually a lot to like here. As mentioned before, the two main actors both do a great job, and it’s a very sweet and inoffensive film. It reminded me quite a lot of the 2006 film The Lake House, which I have always loved, although The Love Letter is a made for TV film and obviously on a fairly low budget. But it’s charming, so if you like romance and don’t mind a bit of time travel, why not give this a try?

London 1831. Hester White is the daughter of educated and reasonably wealthy parents, both sadly deceased. She is taken in by their gardener and his wife, but their lack of good fortune causes them to end up living in the slums of London. At this time, people are going missing all round London and rumours abound as to whst might be happening. When Hester is injured in an accident she ends up living in teh stately home of brother and sister Calder and Rebekah Brock, who believe her to be an uneducated young woman from the dregs of society. Calder tasks Rebekah wiht the job of educating Hester and while Rebekah is initially resistant to the idea, eventually she and Hester become very close.

However, when they start to uncover the truth about the people going missing, they both find themselves in great danger and have to use all of their wits and cunning to stay safe – and alive.

I had high high hopes for this book, and at first I thought I was going to love it. However, just as the story should have really got going – when Hester went to live with the Brocks – it seemed to start to drag somewhat. I could never get invested in Hester and Rebekah’s relationship because Rebekah didn’t seem very well developed; I did however find the mystery part more interesting, but the ending was drawn out a little too much for me. That said, some of the writing was very eloquent and I didn’t feel at any point as though I didn’t want to read on. If you like gothic mysteries you might like this book but – for my money – there are better novels in the genre.

This was an audiobook narrated by Fenella Woolgar. It’s less than seven hours long and I listened to it over the course of about a week while out on my daily run. I did try listening to this book a few years ago but had to give up because I just found it so bleak and frankly boring; but tastes change and I thought I would give it another go.

The narrator is a woman called Marta, who certainly comes under the category of unreliable narrator. Set in an unnamed (but feels Scandinavian) country, Marta is married to the much older Hector and they have a grown son called Kylan. She is on medication – or supposed to be, but as we learn early on, she is not taking it despite Hector physically giving her her pills each day.

When Marta starts to have hallucinations about a young girl which develop into memories? or imaginings? (we are never quite sure), she starts to doubt her marriage to Hector. She tells Kylan, but he, like the reader, is never sure what to believe. Is Marta finally remembering buried past events now that her medication is not blurring her recall, or has her stopping medication caused her to think things that aren’t true?

In any event, I’m sorry to say that I did not enjoy this book and almost gave up on it a second time. It was relentlessly bleak and unfortunately I found myself bored by it. The first two thirds of the book seemed to consist of Marta wondering around in her own little world, describing the most mundane things. This may well have been deliberate, to illustrate the mundane life which Marta led, but I just couldn’t get bothered about it. Hector and his mother are incredibly overbearing and have obviously dominated Marta throughout her marriage. (The title of the novel comes from a book that his mother gave to Marta when they got married and it’s full of sexist and complete out of date advice about how a woman should please her husband.)

In the last third of the book, things actually started happening and it did pick up a bit. However, for me it was too little, too late. Ultimately I found Marta to be a more frustrating character than a sympathetic one, and the only characters who really seemed halfway nice people were Kylan and his girlfriend Katya (my advice to Katya – remove yourself from this family immediately!)

Expertly narrated, which is one thing going for it. Fairly short, which I was relieved about. Many people have clearly read and enjoyed this according to the many online reviews I have read. I was not one of them though, and I don’t think I’ll be seeking out anything else by this author.