I, Frankenstein

by Lilly Xie

Recently I went to the movies to see Hunger Games: Catching Fire (another movie based on a book), and I saw a trailer that was very…what should I say?…interesting. From the mind of great director Stuart Beattie comes I, Frankenstein.

I, Frankenstein is not a movie adaptation of the novel, nor is it the latest new gadget from apple; instead, it is a modern day “sequel” of sorts to the original story. Remember how the Monster told Watson he had no reason to live after his creator died? Yeah, well apparently Pedro did not kill himself because 200 years later, he is still alive and is living among us in the modern world. He even has a name now; he goes by Adam (hmm interesting name choice). This movie is riddled with references to the Bible, with a villain called Neberius, who is leader of the demons and one of the originally angels that fell from Heaven during Satan’s rebellion against god. It is Adam’s (I still like the name Pedro better) job to save the human race against the battle between the gargoyles and the demons.

 

 

Enjoy the trailer folks.

So that was cool, Right guys? Drama, action, explosions, and flying gargoyles! It looks like Adam even has a love interest. I guess it was a good thing that Victor Frankenstein didn’t create a female monster after all, because based on this trailer, it seems like things are going to go very well for Adam and this blonde chick, who doesn’t think he’s actually a monster.

Honestly I would probably not pay money to see this movie, but maybe some people will! This is obviously commercial fiction, but the fact that this exists raises some pressing questions. Should people attempt to make sequels to classic tales? Do these sequels (often times written for commercial rather than literary purpose) take away from the importance of the classic?

Also another bit of information I found while researching this movie: it’s based off of a graphic novel. In case you didn’t want to think about the answer to the previous question, here’s another question for you guys: do you think graphic novels could be considered literature? (That one was for you, Athena.) 

The Symbolism of Nature

Nature is a common thread of symbolism in both movies and books alike. For instance, the seasons of nature often help to give the reader deeper understanding about the significance of a scene or the meaning behind someone's actions. For instance, winter is often used to represent a time of death or sorrow. Spring, on the other hand, often indicates rebirth, life, or purity. 

   

For example, Frankenstein by Mary Shelly incorporates a lot of references to season in the fifth chapter of the novel. At first, it's easy to miss these quick mentions, but upon deeper inspection, the number of references and the time of the references indicates their significance. Many of the references to nature come at a turning point in the narrator, Frankenstein's, life. When Frankenstein finally recovers from his month-long illness, springtime is just blooming.

“I remember the first time I became capable of observing outward objects with any kind of pleasure, I perceived that the fallen leaves had disappeared, and that the young buds were shooting forth… It was a divine spring, and the season contributed greatly to my convalescence.” In this passage, the narrator’s health and risen spirits are directly linked to the feelings of hope and peace that naturally come with spring.

But symbolism in nature isn't just used in literature… It’s also often uses in movies (of course)! One of the best animated movies of all time, Mulan, also utilizes the seasons to represent turning points in the character’s lives. Mulan has never been like other girls, but when she disappoints her family because of her horrendous meeting with the match-maker, she’s completely distraught. She runs away to find solace underneath the cherry tree in her garden, where her father comes to comfort her. Spring has already arrived, and the cherry tree is completely covered in blossoms. However, Mulan’s father immediately spots a blossom that hasn’t opened yet.

 “Look!” he exclaimed. “This flower is late. But I bet that when it blooms, it will be the most beautiful flower of all.” Little does Mulan know that this flower represents the metamorphosis that she’s about to go through. This moment with her father is an important turning point in her life. She’s about to undertake a journey that will mature her into the woman she truly is—even if she’s later than others.

Freedom Writers and Our Education System

In class this week we watched the movie Freedom Writers, featuring Hilary Swank. This movie illustrates the struggles of kids in Long Beach, California as they are entangled in the gang and drug related activities in their community. Swank’s character tries to teach these kids to the best of her ability, but isn't always able to succeed due to an obviously flawed school system. Although these flaws are readily apparent in the underprivileged school system pictured, the school system at Paul Laurence Dunbar, in Fayette County, and across the nation is far from perfect.

Our schools currently teach to a standard curriculum and base success off of standardized testing scores. Kids are forced to take certain subjects with the illusion of freedom given in the form of electives; however, this system harms the education of all students in its current state, not just the struggling ones. The brightest students are limited by those struggling because the school cannot afford new materials for the accelerated classes, which is in turn due to the low population in these classes. Students who are struggling may be intelligent, but not passionate about the subjects that they were forced to learn. If they were allowed to study subjects closer to their interests, then their success and grades would skyrocket. In addition, students who plan on becoming tradesman should be able to start honing their skill during high school, instead of waiting until they have graduated. The current system prevents the gifted kids from moving on, keeps the bottom bracket where they are, and limits the opportunities presented to those with already decided interests.

Having a basic understanding of most subjects is necessary for success, but too much stress is placed on it. The school system needs to start designing a more malleable and personalized education system, or success rates will continue to be sub-par. As Swank taught the kids, motivation and interest are the two biggest steps in an education. If these kids from high risk backgrounds can receive an education tailored to them, then we in Fayette County should expect no less.

Catherine's Ghost is Coming to Haunt Me

 

Lilly Xie

Yesterday was Halloween, and on that particularly dark and stormy night, I looked out the window to see how badly my street had flooded.  But when I looked out, I couldn’t really see anything because the branches of my tree kept blowing in the wind and blocking my view. The branches were also scratching against the glass and making a terrible, ominous sound. I suddenly recalled one of the first scenes of Wuthering Heights, when Lockwood saw the ghost of Catherine outside his window.  Not even joking, I actually let out a scream and alarmed everyone in my family.  It was pretty terrifying, considering if there was one day of the year that ghosts would be out and about, it would definitely be on Halloween.

But this experience made me realize something that movies have over books. In the last blog post, Christine discussed how books are better for characterization, giving thoughts and feelings and creating a fuller understanding of the characters. Although there are many details that are lost when converting a 200+ page book into a movie, there are also many things gained. One of the things that movies do better than books is exercise the senses of the audience. You can see movies. You can hear movies. You can even sometimes feel movies if you go to one of those “4D” theaters. When I was reading the passage in chapter three about Lockwood seeing Catherine’s ghost, I wasn’t really frightened at all. Nice try, Emily Bronte, but you didn’t scare me. However, if I had been watching the scene in the movie, if I actually heard the sound of tapping tree branches, if I had actually seen the pale, ghostly face of Catherine, I would be huddled up inside my jacket shaking like a leaf in the wind.

Although we try to be all high and mighty thinking that reading books is far superior to watching movies, we must also consider the positive aspects of watching movies too.

 

The Characterization of Movies and Books

There have been many comparisons, including our own blog posts, of movies and how they compare and contrast to books. Often, when a movie adaptation of a book is released, die-hard book fans are sorely disappointed. Why is this? Well, as Lilly: The Critic discussed in an earlier blog post, two- hour movies simply can’t fit in all of the details that a 200+ page book contains.

But more than that, most movies (depending on the narration) can’t “see inside” the character’s head like in movies. I think this is where the biggest divide between movies and books comes in. You aren’t able to see the thoughts of a character (or multiple characters, as is the case in some novels) – and this negatively affects the characterization that is used to develop the characters. In a book, you can “see” the actions that are happening through the author’s descriptions-- but you can also see the thoughts, the behind-the-scene action. In a movie, much of this detail is lost. Yes, you can perfectly visualize the actions because they’re played right in front of you on a screen. But when you lose the character’s thoughts and the extra details that an author often includes (but a director doesn't), you lose an important component of characterization.

                     

Let me preface this next part by saying that I understand that not everyone loves Pride and Prejudice like I do. And it’s okay! I understand. (Okay, I really don’t. How could you not love this gorgeous, beautifully-written work of art? But that’s beside the point.) I absolutely love both the original book and the movie adaptation of this classic, but I have to say, I never fully appreciated the movie version until after reading the novel. When I read the book, I realized just how wonderful the characters in her novel all were. Through both indirect and direct characterization, Austen crafts round, dynamic characters. Lizzie, the protagonist in the novel, is one of my favorite literary characters of all time. While I do love the movie as well, it does pale in some aspects in comparison to the novel, and a couple of years ago, I finally figured out why. Through just watching the movie, I never felt as close to the characters; I never felt like I understood them like I did in the novel. Through her character’s thoughts and extra, seemingly small details, Austen was able to characterize her memorable female protagonists better than any movie ever could. So while I do love movies, sometimes- especially when characterization is considered- there’s just no replacement for a book.

                                                      

Wuthering Heights: More than a just another tragic love story

 
Wuthering Heights is seen even today as one of the classic, tragic love stories of all time. With movies such as Titanic, The Notebook, and other contemporary "greats" in the romantic genera (I personally despise most of them) owing their origins or plot lines to this novel, one would assume that the main attraction is the relationships between the romantically involved characters. The love triangle of Heathcliff, Catherine, and Edgar is indeed responsible for the book's success, but on a much deeper level than a doomed and flawed relationship (otherwise Twilight would be considered critically genius). Wuthering Heights, and by extension Bronte, makes a statement about social class, as seen by Catherine's choice to marry Edgar over Heathcliff.

When Catherine is debating whether to commit to Linton or Heathcliff, she surmises that "if Heathcliff and I married, we should be beggars? whereas if I marry Linton, I can aid Heathcliff to rise and place him out of my brother's power," (p. 99). Catherine chooses to marry the rich man, placating her conscious by claiming it is to help Heathcliff; however, Bronte is really stating the struggles of changing social class and the importance of education in social standing. When Heathcliff is denied an education, Hindley is delegating him to the life of a slave, forced to live beneath his would be peers. Bronte stresses the importance of education in social class before it was really an issue in contemporary society, now seen in financial aid by colleges and a cumulative belief in equal opportunity. One of the greatest movies of all time is Good Will Hunting, a story in which Will Hunting (Matt Damon) is an unmotivated janitor at MIT who is a math genius. This movie also explores the role of education in social class. Without spoilers, Will (begrudgingly) attempts to gain an education in order to make something out of his life and maximize his potential. This is contrasted by Ben Affleck's character, who is destined for a life of construction and other menial labor. Both Wuthering Heights and Good Will Hunting explore the social implications surrounding education, but the film captures the emotional tole that is created on the lower class more clearly, in part due to its less antiquated grammar, but also due to the emotional connection formed between Damon, Affleck, and the audience. I don't know if I am cold-hearted or just intolerant of drama, but I find it impossible to empathize or relate to almost all characters in Wuthering Heights, outside of Nelly and the dogs. Good Will Hunting is yet another example of movies capitalizing on its genera specifics to impact its audience, forcing them to encounter these uncomfortable issues in a way that is enjoyable. My question to you is "How big of a role does education play in social class and which art form captures it better?" I will almost always plead film if it is well done, but Wuthering Heights has stuck around for a reason, and I would like to think it isn't due to dreadful Catherine.

The Death of Books

Lilly Xie

Next week we’re watching Jane Eyre, and I couldn’t be more excited.

First off, I love the Brontë sisters. They were such talented young ladies who devoted their lives to writing beautiful poetry and novels. Charlotte, Emily, and Anne are basically the sisters that I wish I had. Just in case you were wondering, Charlotte wrote Jane Eyre and Emily wrote Wuthering Heights (the novel we are going to read in class). By the way, if you’re ever near the Lexington Green, there’s this awesome place inside of Joseph-Beth called Brontë Bistro, if any of you want to check it out.

But even more than that, I’m excited because we get to watch a movie. I absolutely love watching movies, especially movie adaptations of books that I’ve read. I read Jane Eyre a couple of years ago, and I’ve seen both the 1996 film adaptation and the recent 2011 film adaptation. I loved them all: the book, the movie, and the new movie. Some people hate it when books are made into movies, but I beg to differ. People say the movies ruin the books, but I just think that it’s unfair to compare the book to the movie, because they’re just such difference experiences.

If you want to get really deep into a story and if you have a lot of time to kill, then you should probably read a book. But if you don’t have a lot of time, you can watch a movie. I think both the author of a literary book and the director of a literary movie have some merit. While the authors of books need to make important decisions with characters, mood, tone, diction and syntax, directors of movies need to make those same decisions and more, because they need to take into account actors to play the characters, background music to set the mood, camera angles to best express the scene, and many other cinematic details.

A lot of people complain that movies take away many of the small details that make books great. But think about it, how hard would it be to incorporate every tiny detail into a 2 hour time frame? It’s almost impossible. That’s why directors must make important decisions on what makes it into the movie and what doesn’t. It’s tough to make a movie, just as tough if not tougher than writing a book. And although reading a book is harder than watching a movie, does that really mean you get more out of the book than the movie? A literary movie can make you think, feel, and connect to the world just as well as a literary book can, just in a smaller amount of time. Movies are just a lot more efficient than books are.

In our world today, technology is everywhere. We take up a lot of information so quickly, and it’s almost impossible to get by without multitasking. We already know that paper books are going to become extinct with the advent of eBooks, but is that where the changes will stop? What if books just disappeared completely? People nowadays get bored very easily, and need a lot of action and movement and images to keep their attention. Movies seem more suited for this generation than books do. My question for you is, in this fast paced, ever changing society, will reading books eventually become outdated?   

Flashbacks: Classic and Contemporary

With so many movies already out there- and with thousands more on the way every year- filmmakers often have to try different techniques to distinguish their movies from others. One interesting, although not novel, technique sometimes used is the flashback. Used in both books and movies, flashbacks, or analepses, can create interest, explain the current state of affairs or a character’s motivation, or just add an interesting element to the literature. A flashback is a technique that bridges time to provide imperative information to the reader or viewer. In addition to the many works of literature that utilize flashbacks, numerous famous movies, classic and contemporary, have employed flashbacks as well.

For instance, the renowned movie Casablanca uses flashbacks to illustrate the enchanting time in Paris when Ilsa and Rick first met and fell in love. Without these flashbacks, the viewer would be left without a crucial piece of information- Rick and Ilsa’s past history- to the plot. These analepses are more of the traditional, predictable kind- unlike the flashbacks in The Bourne Identity.

The box office-busting film series The Bourne Identity utilized flashbacks in a more contemporary way. When the audience first meets lead character Jason Bourne, he’s floating in the Mediterranean Sea and wakes up with extreme memory loss. Throughout the film, he struggles to discover who he truly is and- once he learns that he was an assassin- what he’s done.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFhbNOXDNPA

The use of flashbacks in this series helps take the audience on a suspenseful journey with Jason Bourne as he fights to discover his identity. They allow the audience to “remember” events as Jason does in real time, heightening the interest and involvement in the movie.

Regardless of whether the literature is read or watched, time and time again, flashbacks have proved a valuable tool to both writers and directors in bridging time and place to interest their audience while communicating information vital to their story’s plot.

Walter White vs. The Unnamed Grandmother

While reading the short story "A Good Man is Hard to Find," I was struck by the character that the story seems to center around: the grandmother. She is a polarizing figure, with many readers, including myself, finding it hard to empathize and relate to her, while some are drawn to her ideals and old-fashioned lifestyle. The Grandmother reminds me of another polarizing figure in popular culture: Bryan Cranston’s character in the critically acclaimed series Breaking Bad. Although Breaking Bad is a television show and not a movie, its success and appeal are based off of its enigmatic and dark storyline brought to life by the lead character, Walter White, so I feel it applies to this discussion. In “A Good Man is Hard to Find,” the grandmother is focused on her family, has a set of moral values different from the rest of the cast, and above all else, is never self-critical.

                The first and most obvious similarity between the two characters is their commitment to their families. The grandmother tries to avoid the Misfit at all costs in order to protect her family; meanwhile, Walter begins cooking meth in order to provide for his family after he dies. Both characters strive to put family before almost everything, willing to cross paths with dangerous foes along the way in order to do what they believe is best for their kin. The operative word is most, however, because each has a fundamental flaw that alters their set of moral values from the rest of the cast. The grandmother believes being a lady should come before anything else and this foolish façade she puts on ends up harming her family in the end, when she causes a car accident. Walter on the other hand is consumed by greed, ultimately endangering his family for the pursuit of pecuniary benefits. Finally, both Mr. White and the unnamed grandmother are always throwing judgment on others while never reflecting upon their own transgressions and mistakes. They never stop to question their own role in the precarious situations they find their families in and refuse to admit any role in their current plights.

                Two seemingly opposite characters in Walter White and the grandmother are driven by the same characteristics, which make them so dividing in our culture today. While critics may rave over both stories, common viewers may find them hard to appreciate or relate to. Unfortunately for the short story, those readers who are alienated by the messages presented have no other means of understanding the story; by contrast, viewers of Breaking Bad are aided by the actor’s portrayal of the characters, facial expressions, and details in the set design (to name a few factors) that make it a visual medium. [The clip at the end of the video shows Walter's darker side, convincing his wife that he will do anything to protect his family.] Those who cannot bring themselves to like the grandmother may find Walter to be flawed, but more understandable for it, due to the artistic choices present. That is why, at the end of the day, whether film and television are considered literature or not, they bring elements to the table that “classic literature” simply cannot, appealing to a broader audience, and interacting with that audience more deeply, for better or worse.

 

In celebration of the pumpkin spice latte coming back to Starbucks

By Lilly Xie

Today, I walked the grueling journey from the Engineering Quad all the way to the William T. Young Library with a 20 pound backpack on my back and one thing on my mind: PSL.  Now, PSL stands for Pumpkin Spice Latte, the iconic drink of fall at Starbucks. Call me basic, but I love the pumpkin spice latte and I have no shame telling everyone I know about how great it is.

As I waited for my coffee in the ridiculously long line, I started observing the UK students in the café around me. They were all chatting amongst themselves but one particular couple caught my attention. They were sitting at a table for two casually having a conversation and sipping from their Starbucks cups, but it seemed to me that they were probably talking about something a little more serious than the sunny weather, and this sparked my imagination. The scene reminded me vaguely of that one story we read in AP Lit class, “Hills like White Elephants” by Ernest Hemmingway.

I thought earnestly to myself, man, it would be so easy to make a film adaptation of that short story. It would be one of those short, dramatic, and strange films, much like the ones that are shown right before a Pixar movie. Hemmingway already wrote the story in a dramatic/objective POV, so turning it into a short film would be a piece of cake, as easy as pumpkin pie. Reading HLWE was basically like watching a movie except I, the reader, got to make up the actors, setting, and other cinematic details and visualize them in my head. The way that Hemingway wrote the story gave me as a reader a lot more control.

So why stop there? My mind kept wandering (the Starbucks line was really really long) and I thought about how I could make a modern spin-off of “Hills like White Elephants.” Ok, my version would be set in an average Starbucks, much like the one I was in, and the couple would be a pair of teenagers. The dialogue would be mostly the same as the original, except with modern lingo embedded in. Also, instead of ordering liquor they would order Starbucks coffee. Instead of the Anis del Torro tasting like licorice (I got that question wrong on the quiz and I am still bitter), the latte would taste like pumpkin spice. They would still be talking about the “procedure,” which really is an abortion.

I am a strong believer in the lessons that can be learned from literature. The “timeless classics,” although they have great lessons to be learned, sometimes are unable to reach the minds of young people of today because they are simply too outdated. The language is unfamiliar, the customs are antique, and it’s just hard to connect to the story. Also kids these days like watching better than reading. That’s why I love modern spin offs of classics, especially film versions. I think they are the bomb dot com. If I made a modern film adaptation of “Hills like White Elephants”, I think it could definitely connect with the teenagers of today, especially since teen pregnancies are becoming more common (Juno, Teen Mom, 16 and Pregnant) and this could be a way to talk about the issue without directly taking a stance on one side or the other. Thank you Ernest Hemmingway; you are a genius even to this day.

And now, I can finally sit down, blog, and enjoy my coffee.

Commercial vs. Literary Film

It’s commonly discussed that literature can be divided into two main divisions: commercial and literary. Commercial literature is published with the sole purpose of making money. The books are generally easy to read and can appeal to a wide audience. Readers usually expect a sympathetic hero or heroine, a defined plot with suspense, and a happy ending. In addition, the book’s theme commonly affirms conventional views of world. Literary fiction’s purpose is very different: either an artistic or to broaden or deepen the reader’s awareness of life. Literary fiction seeks to bring the reader pleasure combined with understanding. It often attempts to dispel illusions about certain places, things, or people. In fact, literary fiction commonly attempts to challenge or change world views. Since we’ve been arguing that movies are, in fact, literature, it follows that we can argue that there are also two main divisions of movies: commercial and literary. The commercial movies are often movies that are supposed to draw in viewers based on a funny, romantic, or familiar story line; movies made solely to bring in money. A common commercial movie would be the romantic comedies often found in movie theaters (i.e, Nicholas Sparks’ movie Safe Haven). On the other hand, literary movies have a deeper purpose which often includes the dispelling of misconceptions or prejudices. For instance, Schindler’s List and Remember the Titans both have a deeper purpose than entertainment. Each movie seeks to confront and dispel the racist tendencies that lie dormant in society. Schindler's List takes the audience through a dark, riveting tale set in the Holocaust and forces many to confront issues that are often skirted around, leaving the audience uncomfortable yet altogether better off. Remember the Titans isn't quite as harsh, but it still details the racism present at the high school football level, which is just as hard to stomach. This scene is difficult due to the gruesome civil war references, yet it is one of the most inspirational moments in all of sports.

These movies are forcing the viewers to think, which is often a signal for a great movie; however, great movies can be commercial. The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly is considered a classic, yet it doesn't challenge deep, societal issues like the preceding movies. Even some commercial fiction is well regarded, such as the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, which combines wide appeal with critical acclaim. Movies are literature, and they are divided as such, yet it is crucial to recognize that these are not strict definitions; they exist on a spectrum. In addition, some movies are focused on a specific audience or not intended to be great movies at all, but are instead intentionally silly. It is due to this large variation that movies are so appealing: there is a movie for every view, mood, and by extension, person, which is why we love them so dearly.

Movies are Literature

"Luke, I am your father."
"When the going gets tough, the tough get going."
"Life is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you are going to get."
"Toto, I've got a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore."

These quotes are well recognized in contemporary society, more so than "Classic Literature," such as Forrester, Shakespeare, and Homer. As our views of society are constantly changing, so must our definition of what literature truly encompasses. Literature has been previously defined as being textually based with artistic merit, often being considered a classic; however, as technology, people, and even culture change, the definition of literature must be cast aside for a new model to arise. Literature cannot be bound by words on the page. Stylistic choices such as musical score, directorial cuts, dramatic lighting, and countless other cinematic effects add to the experience that accompanies this form of media. True literature adds value to those who read it, broadening their views, challenging their preconceptions of the world, and describing the human condition. Literature is not about the act of reading, but the overall journey through the mind of the author and the events in the story. Real literature should have new ideas that challenge the audience to think and question their standing on one or more issues. Movies such as Pi, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, and Schindler's List are held in such high critical esteem that it would be insanity not to classify them as literature. Shakespeare wrote commercial fiction, designed for  the lower class English citizens who were his crowd. It is ridiculous to think that innovative movies such as The Matrix, Fight Club, and Inception aren't literature considering that even some commercial literature is. Literature at its base (and sometimes best) is based upon the quality work produced, not the form in which it is delivered.