L13FC: Authors Whose Books Become Films

CindyLucky13Banner (1)

Hello, guests and friends! The excellent Michael the Leopard13 from It Rains…You Get Wet and I welcome you to the July 13 discussion about authors whose books frequently are made into films. Exclude plays today and save them for the near future–sorry, William Shakespeare, although your stories have been adapted to film more than any other author, you’re out.

Michael says: 

Film adaptations and their sources represent a fascinating intersection of two longstanding favorite genres that have taken up much of my time. Books and movies. The former habit bequeathed to me by my mother through sheer example — never did I see the woman who bore me without some book nearby. The latter care of her sisters and brother who were always heading to some cinema, I observed (having grown up in their orbit).
Though, as a kid, it really didn’t click how the two had merged. No surprise for this late-Baby Boomer, “Pop Culture” for awhile now has held me in its grasp. Mom or my wife would guffaw at the obviousness of that. Still, the printed material and the moving picture in many ways point back to the other as a comparative exercise amongst fans of either. Especially today. My favorite definition of popular film, by the Florida International University, stated it more clearly:
“Popular film as we know it is essentially the result of applying the conventions of cinematography to the conventions of fiction (short story, novella, novel) and/or drama. The differences between a novel or play and the movie based on it often arise from the demands placed on the material by the conventions imposed by the art form or by the expectations of an audience concerning that art form.”
The sources for many of my favorite film adaptations have come from three of my preferred authors. No surprise, they’d germ starting in my teens, even as I left those years well behind. And easily, they’ve covered horror, thrillers (tech and otherwise), drama, the western, and of late, crime. Stephen King, Michael Crichton, and Elmore Leonard.
"We make up horrors to help us cope with the real ones."
“We make up horrors to help us cope with the real ones.”
Shockingly, or not, Hollywood’s grab for even a smidgeon of their literary magic…or just popularity with the buying public…has produced some of the best and worst for each when put to film. That’d range from Stephen King’s Shawshank Redemption, Carrie, and Stand by Me (aka “The Body”) to the dregs of Dreamcatcher, Bag of Bones, and The Mangler.  
“Absence of proof is not proof of absence.”

Michael Crichton’s have faired similarly, what with the cream of the crop that is Jurassic Park (let’s agree to not speak of any sequel, even Steven Spielberg’s, shall we?), The Andromeda Strain, and the growing appreciation of The Great Train Robbery. Only then to be slapped with the likes of Congo, Sphere, and the mess that is Timeline.

"I try to leave out the parts readers skip."
“I try to leave out the parts readers skip.”
Last, but certainly not least, Elmore Leonard has held the title for some supreme crime and western novels that have successfully made their way to celluloid. I speak of Out of Sight, Jackie Brown (aka “Rum Punch”), and 1957’s 3:10 to Yuma. The less said about the disappointing distillations of Be Cool (the sequel to the sublime Get Shorty), Burt Reynold’s Stick, and drum roll please……3:10 to Yuma (2005); what surely is the most antithetical Elmore Leonard adaptation out there.
Tell us who is your favorite author. Which adaptation did you approve? Which did you find embarrassing? 

Cindy’s thoughts:

"The person, be it gentleman or lady, who has not pleasure in a good novel, must be intolerably stupid."
“The person, be it gentleman or lady, who has not pleasure in a good novel, must be intolerably stupid.”

How is it that the British spinster, Jane Austen, has had the authoritative say about love for almost 220 years, and she is still quite popular today? What’s her secret? One, television has been kind to her. There seems to be a PBS/BBC adaption every decade. With film, her principal novels: Emma, Mansfield Park, Northanger Abbey, Persuasion, Sense and Sensibility, and Pride and Prejudice have been reinvented to please traditionalists (like me) and new twists and angles to engage younger audiences. It is the central theme of the precarious state of females that intrigues me about her stories.  When I read or watch a Jane Austen story, I want to save the heroine from her circumstances. To marry was the primary occupation of mothers. Families tried hard to train their daughters to appear an ideal mate. A women’s looks, charms, and talents were equitable to a male considering the physical countenance of a horse. A kind disposition, good teeth, and firm haunches help the cause, don’t they? Jane Austen was an idealist whose stories centered around sin and virtue. All her heroines struggled and suffered, but eventually, they get their man. Love is not so kind in real life. It’s the hope she instills that holds an audience captive. I do not claim to know the ins-and-outs behind Jane Austen or the authenticity of the film Becoming Jane (2007), in fact, it was a mediocre film, but it shed an insight about Austen that I believe must be true. Unrequited love and bad timing are common companions to many who ache for love. People read her stories and admire the goodness of her heroines and feel good for the happy ending. The best film adaptation is still Pride and Prejudice (2005). The setting, the acting, and the score still can’t be beaten. I preferred Alicia Silverstone in Clueless (1995), over the traditional Emma(1996) with Gwyneth Paltrow. Love and Friendship(2016) was charming. The worst adaptation would be Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (2016). 

(I am this momement at a hookah bar in Turkey. I have no opportunity to finish up with Cormac McCarthy and W. Somerset Maugham. Please forgive me.)

Michael, thank you for running the show! I will comment Friday.

112 thoughts on “L13FC: Authors Whose Books Become Films”

Add yours

  1. Is my calendar out, or am I a day early?

    Good choices from Michael, and nice to see Cindy taking on one of the heroines of English literature. (And countless film and TV adaptations.) I am also staying with England, and also going back in time, though not quite as far as Cindy.

    My choice has to be Charles Dickens. The author that can make old London (and other parts of the UK) come to life on the page, as the reader imagines the dirty streets, the squalid prisons, and the cries of the street vendors. Nobody matches Dickens for descriptions of characters, their appearance, or unusual habits. But this is about films, so here are my selections.

    ‘Great Expectations’. (1946) Directed by David Lean, one of the masters, and with a perfect cast. The whole sweeping saga of the orphan Pip, and his transition to manhood, is perfectly captured on film, in less than two hours.

    ‘Oliver Twist.’ (1948) Lean again, and still on great form. The story of the boy who goes from a workhouse into a den of thieves in one of London’s worst districts, is once more transferred beautifully to film. Robert Newton gives us a terrifying Bill Sykes, and Alec Guinness stars as the definitive Fagin. Marvellous stuff.

    ‘Scrooge.’ (1951) A delightful adaptation of ‘A Christmas Carol’, with the superb Alistair Sim in the title role, supported by a cast of stalwart British character actors. Sim makes the role of Ebenezer Scrooge his own, and surely this version has never been bettered.

    Best wishes to you both, (and enjoy your shisha pipe, Cindy) Pete.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Yes, it seems we’ve started a day earlier than usual, Pete. Nonetheless, we’ll carry on as expected. Yeah, can’t go wrong with the likes of Charles Dickens. He’s had a wonderful set of novels translated to film, too. Those mentioned certainly rank among the greats. I’ve a fondness for ‘A Tales of Two Cities’ myself, the ’35 and the 1989 miniseries, as well a number of the ‘A Christmas Carol’ production. Excellent way to start us off, Pete. Many thanks. 🙂

      Like

      Reply

      1. Hi, Michael! Athens is 10 hours ahead of AZ time. My access to the internet and WIFI was nil on board the cruise ship, so I had to post the event early in Turkey. Better early than late, and I’m really happy you ran the show. Love all the comments! Thank you.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

    3. Hi Pete! Abbreviated time and access to the internet has me disconnected from this event, but, I will say, I sure love the break from all regular routines. I’ll be back to the states on Sunday. Anyway, thanks for starting off the discussion and what a fine choice. Nothing wrong with Scrooge, and I reckon Oliver Twist is probably the most successful adaptation with all the awards it won. I very much enjoyed Ralph Fiennes portraying Dickens in ‘The Invisible Woman'(2014). Have you seen it?

      Like

      Reply

      1. Glad to hear that you have had a good time, Cindy. I haven’t seen Fiennes in that film, but have heard good things about it.
        I have been writing about films on my blog again, as you requested! Safe journey home, and catch up with you soon. Pete.

        Like

        Reply

    2. Yes! I feel bad I was unable to write about him-I simply had no access to internet over here and so I think I’ll do a post about him. I was so impressed with The Road and NO Man for Old Country. There’s a play of his I want to watch and comment about starring Samuel L. Jackson and Tommy Lee Jones. I watched The Counselor and everyone seemed to hate it.

      Like

      Reply

      2. Did you get to watch Ridley Scott’s director’s cut of the film? It improves it. I think I’m in the same opinion as screenwriter Josh Olson on The Counselor:

        Like

        Reply

      3. Well … ‘The Counselor’ – as Film Making it was excellent. It’s just so gross and gut churning that it almost falls into Horror. I couldn’t watch it again – and some of it was so shocking that I regret watching it the first time.

        Like

        Reply

    1. Ha! I tried so hard to watch it with an open mind, but it just didn’t work for me. There was one scene that did–when Jane confronts Darcy and verbally and physically assaults him for breaking her sister’s heart. Mashing two extreme genres was risky, and the principal actors were fine, costumes, but I just couldn’t connect the story lines together.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  5. Persuasion was my favorite Austen movie from the 90’s. I like it because unlike the other recent remakes the cinematography brought out the damp and rather dreary side of England. The actors weren’t quite as pretty or handsome and that appealed to me for some reason. I think Cindy brings up an interesting point about the female plight in life back then–though it seems to me that everyone–male and female looks for a good match (though we may pretend not to care for money, looks, stability, etc.) For the few men in the world who were aristocrats with inherited wealth life may have been easy (I still doubt this as wealth brings its own troubles) but most men slogged through life like women did–often worrying where their next meal would come from, or worrying about crop failure and disease. What I love about Austen is that she doesn’t seem to pick sides in the men vs. women thing. She sees the humor and pathos in us all.

    I have lots of favorite TV adaptations from books (Oldest Living Confederate Widow Tells All) but usually the movie ones disappoint me . I did enjoy the first half of Gone with the Wind, but the second half was silly. As a teenager I waited excitedly for SE Hinton’s books to be made into movies but hated the actors they picked in all the movies (except for Matt Dillon :)). That’s my problem: If I don’t like the actor I can’t like the movie!

    Like

    Reply

    1. Okay, I feeling admit I’m not a big Jane Austen fan…I know, hard to believe…but my blog contributor Rachel and I reviewed the Persuasion novel and the film some of years back. I survived, and even enjoyed the experience, and can see your point about the author not picking sides and that each had to traverse their own gender-based travails.

      “She sees the humor and pathos in us all.”

      Well put, Adrienne (and will use this to finally schedule those Francis Ford Coppola S.E. Hinton adaptations, for once).

      Like

      Reply

      1. The Outsiders really seems dated now. We watched it with our kids. They were bored. The books as I recall them were so much better.

        I like Jane Austen, but I don’t love her in the same way I love my favorite authors. I do like the women’s fashion back then–not so much the men’s.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

          1. To Kill a Mockingbird was a great flick–Gregory Peck–need I say more?

            I tend to prefer TV adaptations of books: Middlemarch on Masterpiece Theater was fantastic, Pride and Prejudice with Colin Firth from the 90’s, Anne of Green Gables (yay for period pieces!).

            Just watched A Little Princess (1995) with my daughter–one of the few children’s movies I can not only sit through but thoroughly enjoy. One of the prettiest films I’ve watched in a long time.

            Oh, yeah, I liked Out of Africa, too.

            Sherman Alexie’s Smoke Signals just came to mind, but I wish they’d made a movie of his great book Reservation Blues (beautiful, sad, amazing novel about modern life on an Indian Reservation).

            Liked by 1 person

    2. I have waited a long time to find someone else who has seen the film of ‘Oldest Living Confederate Widow tells All’! I am now hoping for a film adaptation of ‘Sisters of Shiloh.’
      You have made my day, Adrienne.
      Best wishes, Pete.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

        1. I read the book a long time ago, around 1990 I think. It was never shown in the UK as a mini-series, but came up as a DVD suggestion on Amazon one day. The long running time allowed for a very faithful adaptation indeed.
          Regards, Pete.

          Like

          Reply

          1. Certainly have heard of the source and adaptation, but haven’t seen either. Guess I should fix that given the place it holds with the two of you. Thanks for the recommendation.

            Like

          3. I have a lifelong fascination with the American (and English and Spanish) Civil War, Adrienne. I have read reams about it, and own almost every film ever made on the subject too.
            There is something very tragic about the South indeed.

            Like

          4. My family fought in the Civil and Revolutionary Wars (I re-enacted not quite the same thing, lol). I was doing research for my Civil War novel. It was such an interesting time. I’m always intrigued by how war follows a man after he comes home which is why I made my main character addicted to morphine. (I will admit to being a little disappointed in the casting of Donald Sutherland in Oldest Living since I imagined him much cuter in the book!

            What is your all-time favorite Civil War movie?

            Like

          5. I might have to give that to ‘Gods and Generals’, as it felt very authentic. I also have a great fondness for ‘Ride With The Devil’, which I believe captured the mood and the manners perfectly. Not forgetting ‘Cold Mountain’, which I almost used in this post, as a near-perfect adaptation of a wonderful book.
            Best wishes, Pete.

            Like

          6. You know, I read Cold Mountain so long ago, but lately everyone is saying how great it was. I may have to re-visit it. I think the ending killed me–which maybe explains why I don’t like to think about it. 🙂

            Like

          7. I liked the way that it was written. One chapter about her life at home, the next about his struggles to get back. Even with Jude Law perhaps miscast in the lead, I still loved the film.

            Liked by 1 person

          8. I liked Jude in The Talented Mr. Ripley. I like the idea of him playing a skinny soldier, but I’m not a huge fan of Renee Z. Maybe I’ll watch it though–based on your recommendation so it better be good! 🙂

            Like

          9. Ray Winstone is also miscast as a Southerner, but I thought Renee convinced, based on the character in the book. Philip Seymour Hoffman is rather good too.
            Hope I don’t let you down!

            Liked by 1 person

          11. Renee won Best Supporting Actress and deserved it. Her relationship with her father,Brendan Gleeson was great as usual, was a fine subplot. I love how Ruby saves the farm. The female dynamic between Ada and Ruby was authentic and lovely to watch and read. Two polar opposites that needed each other.

            Like

          12. I thought Frazier’s writing style was beautiful, yet for whatever reason, the characters annoyed me. Sometimes you just can’t pinpoint why. I really like Renee in some things, but then don’t like at all in others–maybe a sign of a great actress.

            Liked by 1 person

          13. I thought Jude did a fine job. He was physically perfect. Nicole acted just fine, but she’s so tall, they looked at odds. However, it was Ruby who made the film. Renee Z. was outstanding. And PSH as the corrupt minister one of his better roles. These two foils were necessary to balance out the prim and proper and shy couple. Don’t forget Natalie Portman’s fine performance. Oh, and I love the goat lady who saves his life. OK. I’ll stop.

            Like

          14. The goat lady (Maddy) is Eileen Atkins, one of the grand ladies of British acting!
            Jude Law was fine indeed, but I might have expected an American actor to play that part. Can’t think of one though!

            Liked by 1 person

    3. I liked Coppola’s The Outsiders very much. All the actors, like Dillon, dreamy and perfect. We are similar in thought regarding Gone with The Wind. The first half is engaging and I fall asleep as the movie progresses. I can never seem to make it past the daughter falling off the horse.

      Like

      Reply

      1. Yes! The daughter falling s where we all lost it in my family. 🙂

        C. Thomas Howell was pretty cute–I’ll give you that, too, but Ralph Macchio I just hated as a teen (when I first watched the movie).

        I think even as a young person I had this thing against pretty boys. LOL. Matt Dillon isn’t pretty exactly–just cool. Same with C. Thomas Howell. Rob Lowe crossed the pretty boy threshold. Yuck. (can you tell I’m channeling the teen-aged me right now?)

        Like

        Reply

          1. Don’t even get me started on PS. I don’t want to speak ill of the dead. LOL. I’ll just say that he seemed like such a nice guy, but I never found him even remotely attractive.

            Like

  6. IF the Writing isn’t good you’ve pretty well got nothing to start with. So … Movies made from books at least have a good chance of being … good. And some are great.
    Just watched Shawshank again last night. It’s a Classic.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Good point, jcalberta. And your example of ‘Shawshank’ will get no argument from me, whatsoever. Makes those instances of great books made into terrible movies so infuriating, doesn’t it? My eldest, who just about loves every movie he’s ever seen, holds one screen translation, Spike Jonze’ ‘Where the Wild Things Are’, in sheer contempt for butchering a childhood reading favorite. YMMV.

      And there are instances of less than stellar writing turned into great movies. I don’t think Peter Benchley’s stands much comparison with those mentioned already in Cindy’s post, but his family soap opera thriller adapted into Spielberg’s ‘Jaws’ is one of the best examples of where the movie was so much better than the book, I think. What do you think?

      Thank you kindly for keeping this discussion going, jcalberta. 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. Yes I’ve seen more than a few authors who were unhappy with what happened to their books on screen. I guess more and more we’ll see authors like Rawlings and George RR Martin who keep control of their work. Lucas did the same – didn’t trust anyone to interpret Star Wars. Funny though, I was watching one of the several interpretations of Peter Pan the other day – and it was pretty good. Disney’s animated Classic is still the one I like the best, but most seem pretty good.
        I would say, in general, that if a movie is made from a book, in theory, the greatest task has already been taken care of – the Writing. ??

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. It would seem so. Famously, Stephen King and Stanley Kubrick over ‘The Shining’ would be another in the “…unhappy with what happened to their books on screen” moments. Interesting to note that a few writers (not necessarily novelists) are striking out as directors to make sure their work sees the closest adaptation to the screen. For instance, Damien Chazelle (Whiplash) and S. Craig Zahler (Bone Tomahawk) have gone that route.

          Like

          Reply

          1. Cormac McCarthy tried with The Counselor with his own screenplay and it didn’t translate well for many critics. I remember reading The Beach by Alex Garland and loving it and the film adaptation had memorable moments but paled in comparison. Then, he goes and writes and directs Ex Machina (don’t know if there was a book) with great success. I look forward to his next offering.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. I would agree with you, JC, that a strong script is very important. The challenge is when beloved classics become visual texts. You can’t beat the imagination and when the film challenges that, it often comes up short. And then if creators of the film version try to vary from a direct replica, non-traditionalists grumble.

          Like

          Reply

      2. With regards to YL into films, I enjoy R. Dahl’s films–BFG, I still have to catch it, but I loved the first Willy Wonka, Matilda, Fantastic Mr. Fox. I love Rudyard Kipling’s Just So Stories. Did you like the recent Jungle Book?

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

      2. I didn’t like King’s work for quite because most of his early writing was Horror or Macabre. Not my cup of whisky. So I was very pleasantly surprised to see him offering more conventional themes – some brilliantly done. I see he’s won a whole number of awards over his career. So BRAVO!

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

  7. Hello everyone, in an odd way most books I’ve read of famous authors I have not seen the film adaptations of and most film adaptations of famous books I have seen – I am yet to read the original book. I have read and seen Carrie which I both rate. For me though I’ve read all the original Jack Ryan novels by Tom Clancy and seen the movies. The difference s between the two play up the usual strengths and weaknesses of both forms. The Hunt For The Red October seemed more epic in the novel with no limit of how many naval vessels could be in the story. In 1989 before CGI this had to be reduced. For the most part though Red October is a faithful adaptation. In Patriot Games and Clear and Present Danger things are changed more so. In film the lead character has to remain front and centre to drive the story with a smaller roster of side characters. For example in the 1989 novel Ryan is not in the motorcade attack in Colombia and it is over quite quickly. In the film it is the jewel action sequence for the lengthy thriller with Ford’s stumbling away from cars exploding being the lynchpin of the film’s marketing. In the film Ford’s Ryan goes to Columbia and enters a drug kingpins compound by holding up his CIA business card. A great punchline that author Clancy would have found unrealistic. In the book Ryan misses his mentor’s James Greer funeral, a possibility in a more true to life film but absolutely not allowed to be repeated in the film. In the film Ford never fires a gun as a neat side fact for a macho action film. In the book Ryan volunteers to man a helicopter side gun while the rescue he has orchestrated is effectively run by better trained personnel. Yet both film and book essentially follow similiar plots. A corrupt President abuses his power and is brought down by Jack Ryan. I admire both works but perhaps enjoy the more efficient visual storytelling of the film. Plus Harrison Ford was at the height of his powers here.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Those are some fine comparisons, Lloyd. I remember my Tom Clancy-techno thriller reading phase…didn’t everybody go through that? (No?). Certainly, ‘The Hunt for Red October’ and ‘Clear and Present Danger’ are the standout film adaptations. Proving how entertaining the military-Intel material could come about through in their screen translations given the shifts in cast (Harrison Ford swapping out Alec Baldwin, save for James Earl Jones as Adm. Greer) and directors (John McTiernan and Phillip Noyce. And I’d agree with you about how well each stuck to the material in spirit and story, mostly — still can’t see William Dafoe and John Clark. Sorry.

      Was always sorry that a ‘Cardinal of the Kremlin’ adaptation never came to fruition, but you can’t have it the way you want Hollywood to go. 😉

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. Funny you should mention Cardinal’ Michael as that was the first Clancy book I read, I think around ’94 or ’95. It’s been a long time but it’s still my favourite. The Russian spy in it I think strikes a chord and the Afghan freedom fighter of all things. I would’ve have liked to see that movie. Yes I certainly went through a technothriller phase with Clancy, Dan Brown a couple from Craig Thomas. I found Clancy the best and not for technical knowledge but his characters. There was something about Ryan and Clark that was appealing. I call my wife babe because Jack Ryan did that with Cathy. Ever read Red Storm Rising? Man that would be an adaptation.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        1. Good to hear that about ‘Cardinal’, Lloyd, and I agree that Clancy had great characters readers really enjoyed following. Yes, I did read ‘Red Storm Rising’ when it came out. It did seem to bring the now venerable Cold War WWIII fictional genre new scenarios. Certainly one of the best of the ’80s and followed General Sir John Hackett preceding works ‘The Third World War’ and its follow-ups to popular height. Both of ‘Cardinal’ and ‘RSR’ had the potential for being stunning adaptations. Too bad neither did.

          Does your wife know where you got that pet name?

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

  10. Awesome post Cindy & Michael! Sorry I missed this, but better late than never right? 😉 Crichton and King’s books certainly are popular for cinematic adaptations. I love Jurassic Park the most from Crichton of course, too bad Timeline wasn’t as good as the concept is fantastic.

    As for Austen, well I LOVE her work! “Love is not so kind in real life. It’s the hope she instills that holds an audience captive.” Yes I believe she gave her heroes/heroines happy endings because she didn’t get one in real life, she never married though she was in love with Tom Lefroy.

    “The worst adaptation would be Pride and Prejudice and Zombies” Well, hate to disagree w/ you but I doubt it’s the worst. There are SOOO many Austen adaptations, well loose adaptations I’d say that didn’t capture the spirit of her work nearly as well as PPZ did. Yes it’s a spoof of P&P but I think it’s an homage as well as the romance and Lizzy & Darcy’s relationship is well-preserved despite the zombies. I will defend that movie as an Austen fan, not as a Sam Riley’s Darcy fan 😉

    Like

    Reply

    1. Awesome that you joined in, Ruth! 🙂 You’ll get no argument from me about Crichton. And having seen P&P&Z over the weekend (something I forgot to tell you when I commented in your post of today) I had real fun with it. More than expected — maybe all of Ms. Auten’s works should have such adaptation so I can finally begin my assimilation into English period life. 😉

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

        1. Not so much a zombie lover than sometimes getting a kick of tossing a horror aspect into the proceedings. Maybe that’s why I could deal with the tonally bent aspects of ‘The Counselor’. 😉

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

      2. You saw PPZ and enjoyed it? Yay!! Ahah, well that’s what Sam Riley said, that what’s missing from the original P&P is a bit of ultra violence of the undead 😛 I thought the zombies somehow fits nicely into the Regency era, and yet the romance remains intact! What did you think of Riley’s Darcy? Isn’t he awesome?? I never liked Mr Darcy of the previous versions but this zombie slaying version had me smitten! 😀

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

    2. I love your defense for PPZ; we will have to agree to disagree 😉 If it makes you feel any better, I thought Sam Riley’s Darcy was just fine. It’s the zombie inclusion that left me scratching my head.

      Like

      Reply

      1. Y’know, when I first heard about it I thought it was sacrilege too! But then I watched it and thought they honored the P&P story very well, in fact, somehow it made me like the characters more, esp. Darcy as the zombies gave him a reason for his brooding mood, ahah. I love how he’d still steal glances at Lizzie as he’s slaying zombies, he may be a badass zombie slayer in the outset, but inside he’s all mush when it comes to Lizzie. I love Lily James’ Lizzie too, they’re so cute together. Sorry I could go on about PPZ!! 🙂

        Like

        Reply

        1. LOL. You’re a riot. I appreciated the traditional story line very much. Then, the zombies came out and the girls pulling out their knives out of their garters, and I thought it incongruous and jarring. Oh, well. So what, right? I’m glad you enjoyed it.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          1. Ahah well that is the point of a mashup… the crazy juxtaposition of the polite society of Regency era w/ the zombie-slaying action is what makes it amusing 🙂 Ok I’ll shut up about it, I don’t mean to hijack your post w/ my defense of PPZ he..he.. I beg your pardon, m’dear!

            Like

  11. I’m afraid I’ve only read Persuasion and that was many years ago so don’t feel fit to compare the novels to Jane Austen adaptations. Everything you mentioned though Cindy is a common theme throughout her works. These are books well known for romance and sometimes soapy plots but to me Austen was a very subversive author in a patriarchal time. I remember the heroine reacting well in a crisis in Persuasion and I think she points out the unfairness of options for women of that time, the hypocrisies of society’s morals and features characters who want to do more than be married off. For me Sense and Sensibility and the BBC adaptation of Pride and Prejudice but I’m afraid there’s many I’m yet to see.

    Like

    Reply
  12. Pingback: L13FC: A Year in Review – Cindy Bruchman

I ♥ comments.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

A WordPress.com Website.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: