I'll go through my computer if I have anything that I typed about that time. I'll write from the top of my memory now.

I didn't take as much pictures in Prague as I did in Norway. I don't know why, but I feel like my mom judges me when I take silly pictures. So I am more refrained when I'm with her. It also didn't help that I got my period at that time. Miserable time, seriously. We did a lot of walking as most of the Prague tours are walking tours. It makes it easier for you to observe the architecture, the difference and the beauty of it all.

We went on the free Prague tour, where it is financed by the tips we give to the guides. I thought it was worth it; the guides were enthusiastic and energetic, and knew their stuff. Quite amazing that they do it voluntarily. Especially considering how hot Prague was. OMG it was like Malaysia, with less humidity and no fan. Torture!! Nonetheless, it was amazing.

My mom's main reason for choosing Prague was the Bohemian Crystals. Haha. My mom loves all these silly things. Alright, I love sillier things. Still, don't we all love some kind of silly things? We got quite a few... finished our cash... then... on the way back to get our things to go to the airport... We saw... a beautiful blue crystal stand. Something she always wanted since she saw her friend got it--those days when it was still Czechoslovakia and is a communist country. Then it was much cheaper, it seems. Still, it was beautiful. And I was being my typical "if you like it, why don't you just get it?" self. Haha. Okay, I adjust this according to the income people have. If you don't have much, I'll say, "you don't need that; buy it later. It'll be there." Hehe.

She manage to established that her marginal utility would definitely be positive (economist talk here), so she got out her credit card and got it without a second thought. Nyeh nyeh. And we hand carried it to East Midlands and back to Malaysia. We hand carried the blue crystals (she bought two more) and shipped the white crystals. I can't remember how many in total she got. We didn't get those thin hand painted ones, but the thick ones with the cuts; where the cuts make the pattern. I prefer those. Somehow the painted ones look cheap to me. *shrugs*

Got back, feeling super tired, we just slept through. My cousin was supposed to come over the weekend. Oh, we went to Prague from the 1st to the 4th of July, night of Friday. We arrived at my (former) place after midnight anyway. When she called at about noon, she was already in Sheffield to see her friend, where we headed in the end at night. She came and my mom thought that she would be staying with us; she wanted to cook rendang and make karipap for my cousin since she's a busy busy woman; she;s a maxillofacial surgeon. My mom wanted to go to an outlet store to buy leather shoes--my mom always prefers buying leather shoes outside of Malaysia. She says it's cheaper. Who am I to judge? I don't know since I buy chaplang ones. Haha. The nearest was in Mansfield, which is on the way to Sheffield from my place. As she came quite late already, we thought it would be unlikely to be able to catch the place, so why not just go all the way to Sheffield and make the things there?

Spent the whole night cooking and making the karipaps. Used wine bottles instead of rolling pin as I forgot to bring mine. Some Muslim might call our karipaps non-halal because of that, but screw you. We didn't put a drop of wine in anything. Oh well. *shrugs*

I love her friend's place. Well, my friend as well, to be honest. I met her when I went down to London the first time in my first year. Actually no, I met her when she and my cousin went up for one of my cousin's many exams and drop by my place on my second day of term in my first year. Anyway, yeah, her place is lovely. A small semi-detached house with two bedroom. It's just quaint and nice; I don't know how to describe it. The kitchen is big for a British home... hmmm... It goes a lot to her homemaking skills though. I suspect that if it was my place... Well... it wouldn't be as lovely as I am one lazy person. Haha.

Went to Mansfield and I got perfumes. OMG I paid about 10 pounds for 2 Elizabeth Arden perfumes; 100ml Sunflower and 30ml Green Tea. Freaking cheap, right? I can't remember what else I got though... Jeans... Lotions from M&S... Ooohhh!! My sheep teapot set for one from Whittard!! OMG so excited that it's arriving soon!! Weee!! And my mom insisted that I got the matching mug. I wanted to get the plate as well but it was finished. Somehow I regret not getting the Winnie the Pooh teapot as well. Oh well... When I start earning, I suppose.

Arrived home, exhausted--obviously--and had to pack for our trip to York and Edinburgh, which was the next morning. Our train was at 7. Crazy hectic traveling non-stop. Arrived at York and decided, why don't we just go straight to the B&B as my mom felt that out backpacks were too heavy to bring to Castle Howard. York is beautiful!! I miss it loads. I don't know why but it is so relaxing, to me. Went to the B&B and the landlady graciously allowed us to leave our bags there even though we said we'll come later (check in time was much later as well). When we were going back to the train station to catch the bus to Howard Castle, it started raining. The bus driver initially refused to let us go as it was raining so heavily, but I manage to convince him that since it's my last fortnight in England, I wanted to see a castle!! As if I haven't seen one. Haha. Still, I got to go. Haha. The scene was beautiful, but I was tired, so I slept along the way.

The place is gorgeous!! My mom said she died and went to heaven, with the amount of fine bone China that greeted us when we entered. Hahaha. Though on closer inspection, she didn't quite like the design. Still. The place is gorgeous. It is where they filmed Brideshead Revisited. Their gardens is absolutely amazing. Pity that it was still raining heavily. Oh, they also have this glass blowing shop, which sells absolutely gorgeous stuff. Really one of a kind; Jorvik glass. I got a pretty windchime there; even though it's pink and my room is blue. It's just absolutely adorable!! My mom got a Wall Hanger, which she has no idea where to hang as it is rather heavy.

Came back to York and had the wonderful Turkish dinner which my mom still talks about. The lamb was absolutely heavenly. The meat just falls off the bone when you touch it. Yum!! Crap, I'm salivating now. Hahaha.

The next day we just went around York. Wanted to have tea at Betty's but the place was full. Didn't want to miss our train to Edinburgh and we were quite full anyway. Got shortbread from Little Betty's, which my mom thinks is the best one around. Hrmph. I still think Irish ones are better. Which I just finished. Haha. Crap. Now no more. Going to ask Fatin to bring back some when she comes back in December. My mom didn't feel like entering yet another church, so we didn't enter the Minster. We actually bought shoes in York. Well, not "we" really... My mom did. I just tried on the outrageous shoes that I would buy but only behind my mom's back. Hahaha.

There was an antique store near our B&B, but the owner refused to let my mom in. I don't get why does he need a shop if he doesn't welcome customers in? Absolutely weird. Oh, I got an adorable sheep which I remember I couldn't post the picture on the train. I still can't, sadly. I don't get why my laptop acts up when I'm using wireless. Hrmph.

It was soooo cool to go online on the train. Hahaha. I don't know why but it was sooo cool. Hahaha. I think I'm being silly. Haha. Oh well. I remember we had to stop somewhere because some alarm was triggered. And outside the train was a sheep farm!! OMG!! And the sheep were looking in curiously. Soooo cute!!! If I could get off, I would have kidnapped one of them!! Hahahahaha.

I once told Faliq, when you look at sheep, they look as if they're smiling all the time. Apart from Gemuk McGrumpy, at least. Haha. And look at cats; they look grumpy all the time. Hahahahahahaha.

When the train arrived at Edinburgh, when we got off, there was this guy with the biggest briefcase I've ever seen. Seriously, it was HUGE!!!!! He looks a bit like Chad Michael Murray, but with bigger eyes. Don't you thick Chad Michael Murray bermata sepet? I always thought so... Hahahahaha.

I have to say that Edinburgh is hilly. However, not as bad as Durham. Hahahaha. How are you missing Durham, Amni? Hahahahahahahahaha :P

Hmmm... What did we do in Edinburgh? We walked around before the sun set. Walked at the park along Princess Street... My mom wanted to go on the tour around Highland Scotland, but it was full. Oh well. I preferred just going around Edinburgh, which we did. Hahaha. Our only full day was spent walking around the Royal Mile. Oh, first we went to the Holyrood Palace. We had typical Scottish weather; rain rain rain. Still, it didn't dampen my spirits. Nyeh nyeh. We entered the Parliament for a bit, but since I wasn't a big fan of devolution anyway (I manage to get my Constitutional Law tutor to tell me that if I promise him to only skip devolution (hahahaha. That wasn't the only one!!), I should be alright. Haha), we left after I got an adorable teddy. Hehehe. I have to say, I went in and out of the shops, getting sheep and looking at things for gifts. It was fun, though my mom was not in the mood. She keep swatting my suggestions. I regret not getting quite a few things. Sigh. She felt too tired and decided to go back to our hotel and let me go about on my own... Went about on my own, which is when I met that guy who somewhat changed my accent. I'll finish the entry on that and not bother here.

I do love Edinburgh. I absolutely love it, hilliness and all. I do wish I could go there again. Probably live there maybe? Oh I don't know. It's just... *shrugs* I prefer it to Dublin (says the person who hardly went out bed when she was in Dublin). Okay, maybe I'm judging purely on the accents... Hahaha :P

Oh God... We arrived at my place at night. Sooo exhausted!! Oh, we didn't go to Edinburgh Castle; my mom has been there and I've been to Warwick Castle, so I thought it wasn't worth it. Also, we had our train to catch!! They recommended 2 hours, but I knew that I'll take my own sweet time and might miss the train. So, nahh... Spend the day tidying up my room...

The next day, a Saturday, we went down to London to go to Portobello Road. Brought some of our luggages to Faliq's as we were flying off the next week. Thank God we did that, as our luggages were super heavy the next week!! Oh, my mom is also an antique freak. Haha. However, we didn't get anything there except two china flowers. No idea what are they called really. My mom said it is a bargain. Alright then... Nonetheless, we had the best nectarines ever!! We didn't bother washing it; it was just soooo goood!!!!! Aphrodisiac!! I miss them... that old granny with the awesome nectarines. Hahahaha.

The tube was horrid though. The Circle and District line was closed. At least from St Pancras we just took the Piccadilly line down to Earl's Court and changed to Kensington Olympia. However, it was a nightmare to get to Notting Hill Gate. I would never want to take the Jubilee line if I ever have to. Urgh. It is soooo far from the other lines!!! Bleurgh. It also didn't help when we were going back, the Central line was horribly delayed as someone fell under the train (??? I've no idea how it happened, really!! That was the notice they tell us anyway!!) at Queensway. It was so bad that we decided we'll just wait at St Pancras for our train. However, when we wanted to get off at Holborn to change to the Piccadilly line, people were rushing in that I almost couldn't get out!! How bloody rude and impatient!! It's absolutely ridiculous, especially considering that you'll only save few minutes. It's the bloody weekend!! And what is a few minutes when your life is at stake? It was at stake, seriously, considering that the train was so full and could hardly close properly, yet people still want to force themselves in. It was really scary...

Got back and felt super tired, so we slept. We woke up in the middle of the night with my mom deciding, why don't we make karipaps? Alright, I thought, since I wasn't feeling sleepy anymore.

Oh, when we were at Sheffield, I told my cousin that we planned to go down to London to go to Portobello Road. Oh, the said cousin is Malay, and according to my surgeon (they were in the same batch), a good cook. I've tasted her cooking and it is quite good la. Anyway, she said that we should continue walking till we get to a bridge; underneath it there is a Malaysian restaurant called Makan, which literally means "eat". And the food there would make it worth walking all the way to get there. To be honest, when we were there, we forgot about it and continued walking as my mom didn't want to miss anything. We saw a restaurant and thought, why don't we get a drink, as we stupidly didn't bring any. Saw Malaysian snacks, so I glanced up, wondering what is the name of the shop. When I saw the name, I remembered what my cousin said. I was like "Mommy!! This must be the place Naseem meant!!"

Huh!! The food looked absolutely pathetic. The karipap was like those that you used the mold; not folded with your own hands. And it was shortcrust pastry instead of layered ones. My mom literally stomped off, wondering what in the world is wrong with her niece who supposedly could cool really well.

So while we were making the karipaps... My mom started to be Mat Jenin. In Malay folklore, Mat Jenin is this guy who is always fantasizing of a better life. Quite a grandiose dude. What was my mom fantasizing? I think I mentioned before... Nonetheless, she was fantasizing that she will build a karipap empire. All starting off with just bringing competition to Makan. I'm not being biased due to being her daughter, but she does make good karipaps. With her filling and my aunt's skin... they can rule the world of karipaps. Seriously. So she'll start with selling outside of Makan with the karipaps in the basket, where she will win all Makan customers just from the karipap. And in no time, Makan would run out of business and would have to move. My mom would take over the shop and start selling more things... And everyone in London would come to her place and patronize her place and her place only.

Seriously, Ma.

I couldn't stop laughing at it. And when I put on my facebook status that I am laughing at her karipap empire dreams, quite a few people wrote on my wall telling me they support me.

Hahahahahahahaha.

Now she's back in her actual area of specialization; poverty.

Sorry to disappoint. ;)

I think I've finished what happened in England... Oh, the trip to Stoke-Upon-Trent for the fine bone china. Not much; we got a set for 12. Pattern both of us liked, and not made in England but Bangladesh. Hehehehehe. Oh well..

Orwell and Waugh lived at the same time, observed a similar world and country and expressed opinions on the same topics.  Orwell is known for his dark views of a downtrodden futuristic society, while Waugh's literary world was lush and populated with an aristocratic crowd. 

The book that epitomizes Waugh for me is Brideshead Revisited.  OK, I admit it was the 1982 miniseries, featuring a young Jeremy Irons, that first drew my attention to Waugh.  Recently, a shorter version of Brideshead Revisited made it to the theater screen.  I don't see how it can top the first one, but I know I'll see it eventually.  I'm a sucker for any period piece, even if it takes place last year.

If you want some reviews about the new Orwell/Waugh book go to my book club blog.

Writer/Director Todd Solondz (Palindromes) is giving his 1998 film Happiness a sequel. The first movie focused on three sisters and their respective families in New Jersey, dealing with sex problems and stuff. The as yet untitled movie, which stars Emma Thompson (Brideshead Revisited), Paul Reubens (aka Pee-Wee Herman) and Demi Moore (Mr. Brooks), will start shooting in Puerto Rico this October. It should be a sequel "in spirit only", with its characters struggling to find their place in the world (aka new people with sex problems) and probably won't feature any link to the original.

Source

Mas A-HÁ! Esse fim de semana assisti o primeiro episódio da série da BBC baseada no livro. Ver o Sebastian carregando Aloysius não foi tão normal quanto minha ansiedade antecipava. Na verdade, tenho certeza que foi uma das imagens mais bizarras que já vi, por isso minha imaginação um tanto pequena (devo admitir) se recusou a manter constantemente viva tão estranha imagem. De todas as excentricidades descritas ao longo do livro - TODO o Anthony Blanche, o comportamento do Sebastian em suas viagens feitas já em pleno declínio -, tudo isso me pareceu menos incômodo do que um homem crescido carregando um urso de pelúcia em aparições públicas. Acho que por toda a facilidade do gesto (agarrar um urso depois de vestir um bom terno não demanda muito esforço físico), a caminhada em público com um urso nas mãos me parece A atitude mais excêntrica da qual já tomei conhecimento.

Creio eu que mudanças nesse posto não irão ocorrer em tão breve momento, porque continuo imaginando todo o efeito provocado pela disseminação desse comportamento: adultos carregando ursos de pelúcia, paralelamente à mochilas, malas e outros objetos que possam ser carregados na outra mão. Imagino que em 1945 - data da primeira edição de Brideshead Revisited e também ano em que a II Guerra Mundial chegou ao fim - toda uma multidão de sobreviventes dos campos de batalha voltou para casa e teve que encontrar sua jovem prole carregando ursos de pelúcia pelos pátios das universidades e pior!! dando nomes aos seres inanimados e levando-os aos salões de festa, barbearias, praças...

Sinto que a presença das gravatas borboleta, dos chapéus-coco e dos bigodes aliviava um pouco o choque da visão de um urso sendo carregado por um homem em locais públicos. Transpondo a imagem para os dias de hoje, na principal avenida da minha cidade, tenho certeza que visões de homens em sungas fazendo caminhadas na beira da praia, com um squeeze em uma mão e um teddy bear na outra, me levariam a convulsões instantâneas. E há quem se submeta à dor provocada por perfurações cutâneas com o intuíto de provocar algum choque na comunidade local e chamar a atenção dos mais carolas, desconhecendo o maior e mais indolor causador de espanto: o ato de carregar um urso de pelúcia à vista de todos.

(Mas há mais, bem mais, em Brideshead Revisited do que um bando de afetadinhos fazendo coisas excêntricas. Há um declínio tão onipresente que alcança a todos os personagens, via decadência, ação do tempo ou remorso irredutível. E todos eles caem e é tudo penosamente divertido).

Other than a meaningless exploration of why Catholicism sucks, that couldn’t have been relevant when the book was written, much less now, Brideshead Revisited is, to put it nicely, extremely generic. Lovers separated? Poor people and rich people in love? These are things I’ve never heard of before. Never has elicit sex and heavy boozing been more lifeless, with more blank stares than actual drama or conflict. Mathew Goode clearly has no idea what the heck was going on during filming, and has no place in a community theater play, much less an actual movie. Fortunately, his non-performance is overshadowed by the terrible performances of every other actor. Watching Ben Whishaw moan and whimper, and Hayley Atwell stare pathetically, blending in with the walls, made me wonder why more of these characters weren’t dying of consumption. Coughing up blood doesn’t constitute emoting, but it would have been more exciting than anything else that happened in this comatose drama. Someone needs to strangle Merchant-Ivory wannabe Julian Jarrold with a corset so that he will never unleash another terrible costume drama on the world again.

vicky Cristina Barcelona - Rated PG-13, 96 minutes - comedy

Friday & Saturday @ 1pm, 3:10, 5:20, 7:40 & 9:45

Sunday to Thursday @ 1pm, 3:10, 5:20, 7:30 & 9:35

Elegy - Rated R, 1 hour 46 minutes, drama

Friday & Saturday @ 2:10, 4:30, 7pm & 9:45

Sunday to Thursday @ 2:10, 4:30, 7pm & 9:35

Brideshead Revisited - Rated PG-13, 2 hours 13 minutes, drama

Friday & Saturday @ 12:15, 5pm & 9:45

Sunday to Thursday @ 12:15, 5pm & 9:35

Henry Poole Is Here - Rated PG, 1 hour 40 minutes, comedy

Friday & Saturday @ 3pm & 7:40

Sunday to Thursday @ 3pm & 7:30

Bottleshock - Rated PG-13, 1 hour 52 minutes, mild comedy

Friday to Thursday @ 2:10 & 7pm only

Sixty-six - Rated PG, 93 minutes, comedy

Friday & Saturday @ 4:30 & 9:45

Sunday to Thursday @ 4:30 & 9:35

Kit Kittredge An American Girl - Rated G, 1 hour 41 minutes

Friday to Thursday @ 12 noon only

Wall-E - Rated G, 1 hour 43 minutes, animation

Friday to Thursday @ 12 noon only

COMING NEXT  for the Malverne Cinema:

"Burn After Reading" and "Transsiberian" and "The Duchess" and more!

people on the subway reading one of The Great Books on account of its movie adaptation. sure i read casino royale right before seeing the flick -- mind your own fucking business.

The new film version of Evelyn Waugh's novel Brideshead Revisited, looked at simply on its own terms, is a lovely piece of filmmaking. The cinematography is rich and sensuous, the actors are excellent -- Ben Whishaw, in the challengingly diverse role of Sebastian Flyte, carries the film until Emma Thompson, as overbearing matriarch Lady Marchmain, takes over the dramatic heavy lifting.

The film's pacing shows nice moments of admirable restraint, lingering lovingly for a moment or two on a particularly intimate moment between characters before moving on with the story. If it seems hurried in other places, it's only because it has a lot of story to cram into its two-hour and thirteen-minute running time. Yet it didn't feel like a particularly long movie. Given the depth of character, drama, and metaphor, it could have easily filled another two and a half hours -- or five. Or it could have filled out an eleven-hour miniseries.

So much for enjoying it on its own terms.

The fact is that in this story of familial dysfunction among Britain's gentry, Waugh created a wonderful, rich metaphor for the Catholic Church as it made its way into the Twentieth Century and beyond. Surrounded by one of the finest, most majestic old estates in all of England, the Lords and Ladies of Brideshead Manor fail to see or appreciate the rich legacy they are all heir to. Only their friend Charles Ryder (played here by Matthew Goode) seems to truly appreciate it.

As an artist and historian, Ryder is particularly attracted to the beauty the others take for granted. As an avowed atheist, he is the consummate outsider. Little wonder that Sebastian, the unabashedly homosexual black sheep of the family, and Julia (Hayley Atwell) the self-professed "heathen" daughter, both fall in love with him-- even as he falls in love not only with them but with the stately grandeur of their heritage.

Both the novel and the 1981 miniseries are able to take time to develop these relationships -- a luxury this movie just doesn't have. Here, characters are too often reduced to quick, easy stereotypes. Ultimately, I came away feeling that the movie sacrifices too much in order to just get through the story.

It's been many years since I read Waugh's novel, and several more since I saw the British TV miniseries.  I came away from this movie with the urge to revisit both these masterful works.   If that was the aim of the film, then it certainly succeeded.  But, much as I enjoyed this new movie version, I don't expect I'll feel the same desire to return to it years from now.  So the movie succeeds only insofar as it points back toward its original source.  But as a work of art in its own right, it falls somewhat short.

As part of the Bookworms Carnival, Jessica at BlueStocking Society is hosting February's theme of literature and film. To get the carnival up and running, she's hosting a 6 month challenge from September 1, 2008 to February 28, 2009. Please make sure you check out her website for more details on the monthly prizes and activities.

RULES
1. Challenge runs from September 1, 2008 to February 28, 2009.
2. Read 5 books that have been made into movies.
3. Then watch at least 2 of the movie adaptations of the works you read.
4. Your list may change at any time and may include overlaps with other challenges.
5. Sign up after you’ve posted about this challenge using Mr. Linky here.
6. Check in around the first of each month to find activities and giveaways for participants.
7. Link to your reviews and posts using the second Mr. Linky here.

OFFICIAL CHALLENGE PAGE
Jessica has set up a challenge headquarters page. It includes all the official stuff: the button, the rules, links to lists of qualifying books, the sign-up Mr. Linky, and the review/post Mr. Linky. Head on over there and sign on up!

MY LIST
Here is my initial selection of books to read for this challenge:
1. Brideshead Revisited (Evelyn Waugh)
2. Shop Girl (Steve Martin)
3. Big Fish (Daniel Wallace)
4. Time Traveler's Wife (Audrey Niffenegger) - This gives a me a good reason to reread the books before going to see the movie.
5. My Antonia (Willa Cather)
6. All The Pretty Horses (Cormac McCarthy)

If you haven’t already, please check out my review and giveaway of a copy of Immortal to one lucky winner. Contest ends TODAY!

Rose once told me that when she first came to America she was surprised to hear people say that they go to the movies to be entertained. She goes to the movies to think. Very Germanic of her. My own preference is for the latter. It must be my Teutonic roots coming through. Don't get me wrong, I love being entertained. I will very willingly go see slick and silly films. But as silly and slick as they can be, they have to have an element, a spark of something, an intelligence, that redeems them. Otherwise I'm totally turned off. Which is what happened when I went to see The Dark Kight with Karen. My God, how I hated that film.

But, back to Brideshead...I haven't read the Waugh novel, although now I really want to. Surprisingly and appropriately (for me, that is) one of the major themes is God, or more accurately, religion. Religion's role in life, how it takes over some people and twists and perverts them, how it causes so much pain and suffering, and yet is often the only comfort in a cruel and cold world. What is morality, right action, grace? What is sin? So fascinating. Appropriately again, Sebastian Flyte is a raving, tortured alcoholic. At the end he winds up in a hospital in Morocco which is run by a French order of Monks. Does he find redemption, peace? At one point he tells Charles Ryder that he simply wanted to much from him, and that only "God can give you that kind of love."

Does Charles Ryder find redemption and peace? He wants the boy, the girl, and the huge country estate as well. He wants connection and family. In the end, he doesn't get any of it.

Henry Poole Is Here - Rated PG, 1 hour 40 minutes - (both films will be shown at:)

Friday & Saturday - 1:00, 3:10, 5:20, 7:40 & 9:45

Sunday to Thursday - 1:00, 3:10, 5:20, 7:30 & 9:35

Bottleshock - Rated PG-13, 1 hour 52 minutes

Friday & Saturday - 2:00, 4:30, 7:00 & 9:45

Sunday to Thursday - 2:00, 4:30, 7:00 & 9:35

Brideshead Revisited - Rated PG-13, 2 hour 13 minutes, drama

Friday & Saturday - 1:05, 3:45, 6:30 & 9:45

Sunday to Thursday - 1:05, 3:45, 6:30 & 9:35

Sixty-Six - Rated PG, 1 hour 33 minutes, mild comedy

Friday & Saturday - 1:00, 3:10, & 7:40

Sunday to Thursday - 1:00, 3:10, & 7:30

Tell No One - Unrated, 2 hour 5 minutes SUBTITLED produced in French, Drama

Friday & Saturday - 5:10 & 8:45

Sunday to Thursday - 5:10 & 9:35

Coming next week "Elegy" starring Penelope Cruz and Ben Kingsley

"It is a little, shy wine, like a gazelle."
"Like a leprechaun."
"Dappled, in a tapestry meadow."
"Like a flute by still water."
"And this is a wise old wine."
"A prophet in a cave."
"And this is a necklace of pearls on a white neck."
"Like a swan."
"Like a unicorn."

I've always been fascinated by the topic of wine vocabulary. They way we talk about wine now is really quite different than the approach of previous generations. In his autobiography, the venerable Hugh Johnson says about current wine vocabulary, "I don't really want my favourite subject to be ridiculed. There is a problem when these people list all these flavours and aromas they think they have detected. It then gets on to the label of the bottle and what you are looking at appears to be a recipe for fruit salad."

Touché. However, his generation had their own approach (itself not beyond reproach), which usually meant describing wines as various types of women, e.g. "voluptuous", "shy", "seductive" or "frigid." 

In the last few decades, there have been attempts to formalize and standardize wine vocabulary. Ann Noble, an emeritus professor of enology at UC Davis, created the Aroma Wheel in 1982. It is made up of concentric circles: the innermost circles are more general (floral, fruity, herbaceous) and the outer circles become increasingly specific (violet, blackberry, eucalyptus).  The Wine and Spirit Education Trust has a devised a similar system, called the WSET Systematic Approach to Tasting. While I think it is a little silly to formalize something that could (and perhaps should) come naturally, I found these to be helpful when learning about wine for the first time. Some grape varieties really do smell like other fruits. Specifically, Sauvignon Blanc and Scheurebe often smell like citrus. Gewurtztraminer smells like either roses or lychees,  no doubt about it.  

Ideally, one develops their own style of tasting note, incorporating whatever one likes from current or historic traditions. In my own tasting notes, I tend to summon the character of fruits, as well as other smells found in the world. Here are some examples of recent tasting notes of mine:

On a dessert Muscat: "Orange blossom...is exactly what [the wine] smells like.  Also, dried peaches and apricots, honey, and something else lovely and unnameable.  It is sweet and viscous like honey, but with enough acidity to prevent it from being too heavy on the tongue."  

On Trousseau from the Jura: "The wine smelled like cranberry, graphite, and indeed game; the palate was full of red fruits and a subtle bitterness that was pleasantly reminiscent of a cherry pit.  It was wonderful, and hauntingly contradictory–light and heavy, refreshing and rich, fruity and mineral." 

Really, there is nothing to stop you from saying something is both reminiscent of a fruit and a person. I can easily imagine a wine (Australian Shiraz, perhaps) having the following description: "Smells like plums, cream, and vanilla. Tastes as flabby and overripe as a sweaty, out of shape son of a bitch." That ought to make both the current guard and Hugh Johnson happy.

I am completely unqualified to write this review.

I have not read Evelyn Waugh’s novel on which this movie is based. Nor have I seen the famous and acclaimed 1982 miniseries based on that novel. In fact, I’ve never read a thing by Evelyn Waugh, despite my English degree from a semi-prestigious liberal arts college, and I’m not a big fan of miniseries, especially BBC miniseries. I don’t even know much about 1982 – I was five years old. So.

Normally, this kind of lack of qualification wouldn’t slow me a down a bit. I’d turn ignorance into strength: I come to the movie clean and fresh, with no expectations based on the book or the miniseries. There would be no whining about how the movie doesn’t measure up to the book (really, what movie ever does?) And no complaining about which actor was the better whatshisname. But that’s where “Brideshead Revisited,” the movie, is different. This is a movie based on a miniseries based on a novel. The entire way the movie played out felt like a series of Cliffnotes. I might be able to pass a high school level quiz on the material, but when it comes to its deeper points, or its beauty, its style and its importance, I’m lost. The movie is a series of adaptations, abbreviations, references, and footnotes. Like the little yellow paperbacks, it’s an attempt to cram an awful lot of material into a much smaller space than ever before, with the intent of reaching an audience who may not sit through a 17 hour miniseries, much less a 1000 page book. The summer has been full of movie versions of comic books; “Brideshead Revisited” is the comic book version of a (really long) movie.

Charles Ryder (Matthew Goode) is a student at Oxford from a working-class family. He bumps into the aristocratic Sebastien Flyte, who latches on to him immediately. Sebastien is gay, sensitive, and flamboyant; Charles is steady and soft-spoken. Sebastien takes Charles to Brideshead, his palatial home, and we’re supposed to understand that Charles falls in love with the aristocratic lifestyle, and will do almost anything to stay in that circle, a la Matt Damon’s Mr. Ripley. This never really comes across, because Goode plays the character so flatly.

Sebastien falls in love with (an incredibly naïve) Charles, Charles falls in love Sebastien’s sister Celia, and Lady Marchmain keep everyone out of bed with each other, because she’s a Catholic, and thus they are by proxy. I gathered that religion was supposed to be important in this movie, but for 90% of the movie, it just feels like a tool Marchmain uses to make people do what she wants or feel miserable. Then, suddenly, at the climax of the movie, we’re supposed to understand that religion really is important to everybody in the family, and influences every decision they make. This doesn’t really come off, either.

“Brideshead Revisited” is full of English manners, English manors, gardens with sparkling ponds where young men go skinny dipping, torrid affairs, crushing guilt, crushing girdles, sudden trips to exotic locations, and train stations. All the necessary ingredients for an adequate English period drama. Sadly, the ingredients don’t add up to much at all, beyond another generic English period drama. I haven’t read or seen the source material, but I’m pretty sure it was better than this.

Recommended

• to anyone who simply loves the form and fancy of the English period drama.
• To fans of the original novel. You may be able to supply the subtext that makes this a good story, or you may just really enjoy hating it.

Not Recommended

• to 90% of males on the planet.
• To fans of the miniseries. I don’t think loving that will translate to loving this, as might happen with the novel. Probably the opposite.

Literature buffs and BBC addicts alike are already quite familiar with Evelyn Waugh's Brideshead Revisited - a tortured ale of class, religion and romance set amidst the finery of pre-war English aristocracy. The story has been retold on more than one occasion but the latest version to hit theaters is especially interesting to look at from a costume perspective. In Julian Jarrold's adaptation whole plot points are amplified by clothing.

The contrast between Charles' natty beige suits and Sebastian's array of vividly rakish ensembles outlines everything about the dynamics of their complex relationship. Even on a purely visual level Sebastian is a compelling respite from Charles' bourgeois upbringing. The tailored jackets and crimson silk pajamas Sebastian flaunts with ease are part of the charisma that draws Charles in. Their fascination with one another lies in their differences.

Costume designer Eimer Ni Mhaoldomhnaigh, does wonderful job of illustrating the personalities of the boys without letting other characters fall by the wayside. The dowager gowns Emma Thompson wears as Lady Marchmain are dazzling, as are the creations for Haley Atwell's immaculately bobbed Julia. Mhaoldomhnaigh's comprehensive notes on each costume (housed on the film's official site) also offer unique behind the scenes tidbits. For instance, an unforgettable brocade jacket worn by Whishaw in a pivotal scene was actually made from the remnants of a 1920s throw.

Re-reading the novel years later apparently soured the author on its content and merit. Waugh stated that"the book is infused with a kind of gluttony, for food and wine, for the splendours of the recent past, and for rhetorical and ornamental language which now, with a full stomach, I find distasteful". Sounds like the makings of a great romance film, no?

I haven't read the novel, but I did glean this background info from its Wiki page before seeing it in theaters. Thus, my hopes for the film were high. Commercials led me to believe that it would be the period-piece love story that Atonement was not-that it would redeem the entire genre! After all, it's been eleven years since Titanic came out, haven't we waited long enough?

At two hours thirteen minutes, the film is entirely too long. Of these 133 minutes, the 'lovers'- a painter named Charles and trust fund baby Julia Flyte-spend approximately seven together. Their relationship is underdeveloped, the scene jumps are sometimes difficult to follow, and the only likable character in the film (Julia's brother) runs off to Morocco within the first hour.

This likable character is Sebastian Flyte -played by (my new celeb crush) Ben Wishaw. Wishaw plays a whimsical, alcoholic and flamingly gay Oxford student ruined by his Catholic mother's intolerance. He embodies the gluttony that Waugh, in retrospect, found so distasteful. The film is focused largely upon his demise, which begins when he finds out that his best friend-cum-crush, Charles, is really in love with his sister. Catholicism ruins even this hetero relationship- Charles won't convert on principle, and Julia cannot marry outside the faith. So, is this really a love story at all? Not really. It's mostly a period piece, and a dull one at that.

Synopsis: Countryside scenery, well-dressed cast, 'star-crossed' lovers, one act of intercourse, many lackluster marriages & many invocations of God's name

On Saturday, Abby, Cambria and I got into a discussion about why men don't like Sarah Jessica Parker while women tend to love her over margaritas and fries at Dallas BBQ, which eventually segued into a discussion about why men don't like Gwyneth Paltrow and Nicole Kidman. I said basically what Sadie said in the above linked Jezebel article, that it's because what men are attracted to (boobs, ass, Jessica Alba basically) is not what women necessarily aspire to be. Women (and not all women, of course, but all the women I know at least, which is many) want to be beautiful and composed; Paltrow and Kidman and to an extent Parker are all very statuesque, ladylike, and some might say cold. I swear to God this is relevant.

How I feel about Gwyneth Paltrow is how I feel about Brideshead Revisited. It is a beautiful novel, statuesque, refined and amazingly constructed, but, ultimately, a bit cold. This is not your cozy, funny Jane Austen, or your hilarious Nancy Mitford (a great, great friend of Evelyn Waugh's, whose book, The Pursuit of Love, Abby called, "A warm cup of tea"), or even the sort of blazing, epic romance found in Atonement. This is a sculpture of a book, with a majestic beauty not unlike the house referenced in the title. Its characters are all fairly unlikeable while remaining sympathetic, not a small feat, and its hero is more inconsolably lonely at the end than he was in the beginning, still resistant, although weakly, to the sort of deep faith that drove him from everyone he ever really loved.

I saw the new film version of Brideshead Revisited on Saturday, after the aforementioned margaritas, and though I have not seen the BBC miniseries and thus cannot compare them, I thought Julian Jerrold, who also directed my beloved Becoming Jane, did an excellent job of communicating this beautiful coldness on screen. The lighting is pitch perfect, and while they take the relationship between Charles Ryder and Sebastian Flyte a bit farther than I would given the source material, the acting is spot-on, creating a strong, shadowy connection between all of the characters. Matthew Goode, who I had heretofor only seen in The Lookout (where he was the victim of an American accent, cliche characterization, and having to play opposite the amazing Joseph Gordon Levitt), was AMAZING as Charles Ryder. Emma Thompson, despite being great as Lady Marchmain, was distractingly Emma Thompson, I never really like Sebastian much so while I appreciate Ben Whishaw I wasn't particularly affected by his performance, and Hayley Atwell (who is not the same person as Michelle Monahan, despite Cambria's insistence to the contrary) was very impressive as the guilt-ridden Julia Flyte, but Matthew Goode was the obvious star of the film, and his portrayal of Charles Ryder is the one that sticks in your mind when you leave the theater.

I thought Jerrold's choices with the film were really interesting. Catholicism plays a large part in the novel, as the entire aristocratic Flyte family (Mother Lady Marchmain, sons Bridey and Sebastian, daughters Julia and Cordelia) are Catholic, born and raised, with varying levels of devotion and observance, while their father, the likeably wicked Lord Marchmain, has fallen away from the church that he adopted in order to marry Lady Marchmain and is living in sin with his Italian mistress in Venice. Charles Ryder, the man whose memoirs we are experiencing, is neither aristocratic nor religious--he is atheist, although at first he seems not to have given it much thought in the past, but as time goes by, as his life becomes more and more entangled with that of the Flytes, he becomes more and more resistant to the pull of the faith he feels is destroying his friends. The author, Evelyn Waugh, a convert to Catholicism, wrote the book specifically to combat the widely held opinion that the religious, especially staunch Catholics in a laxadasically Anglican England, were ridiculous people whose deeply held faiths were easily shaken and disproven by the brilliant insight of nonbelievers. He meant it to be an exploration of the ways in which God's Grace can operate in a group of diverse but interconnected people, not a condemnation of the Church or religion or the faithful.

This is not to say that Waugh's book presents religion in an altogether positive light. But I think what Waugh is trying to do is show what a struggle it is to remain moral and faithful in the face of overwhelming desire and despair, and how sometimes it can appear to cause outrageous suffering. I don't think Charles misunderstands Lady Marchmain--she is manipulating people by invoking God, and in many ways she fails to comprehend that the trappings of religion and the convictions of religion are not the same (as when she convinces Julia to marry recent Catholic convert Rex Mottram, when Julia is clearly in love with Charles). HOWEVER, what Jerrold's film seems to miss (and here I am fully willing to admit that I have missed it in this adaptation, that the failing might lie in my interpretation) is that, at the end, all of the characters who began the novel in varying degrees of religious certainty have come full circle to appreciate the operation of divine Grace in their lives, that they are not defeated by Charles' agnostic pragmatism and that he, instead, is changed by their considered submission to the will of God. I cannot decide if the way Jerrold decided to end the film was a determination to be as subtle with Charles' conversion to the faith as Waugh was, the differences being caused by medium, or if he was deliberately leaving it ambiguous so that purists could not be angry and he could retain this sense that Charles will never believe for those who would be bothered by an admission of faith from him.

(The only other thing that I thought was missing was a strong impression of how connected Charles is to Brideshead. In the book, he imprints himself on the place, painting those pictures for Lady Marchmain. It makes Julia's accusation that Charles isn't so much in love with her as with the idea of living at Brideshead with her carry so much more weight if you are aware of just how much he loves the place. But that's a minor quibble--as Abby said, I'm willing to just assume that, having read the book.)

Nevertheless, the movie was completely engrossing, the acting was great, the shots were amazing, the costuming was stunning, and the story was perfectly wrought within the smaller framework of a two hour film. I would definitely recommend it if it is ever widely released.

So apparently Brideshead Revisited has been butchered.  According to Church of the Masses they took, "a profoundly catholic novel" (it is) and made it "viciously anti-catholic."   Now mind you, this comes as no surprise after watching the trailer.  It seems like screenwriters, writers, the intelligentsia, etc, all think it is still profoundly original to bash catholics (I'm not one but even I feel offended sometimes).  All I can say is I'm leaving this one to rent, or dare I say it, download.  My only question right now: Is Rex still Canadian in their remake? I'm guessing no.

Swanner: Charles Ryder looks back on his life starting as a young man entering Oxford where he meets the love of his life. The question is whether that love is for Lord Sebastian Flyte, his sister Lady Julia or for Brideshead, the aristocrats’ family manor. This question never gets answered but that doesn't stop Brideshead Revisited from being stirring and haunting and at times amazingly beautiful.

Judd: I wasn’t looking forward to it’s 2 hour and 10 minute runtime, but I suspected I was going to get something special when I learned that Matthew Goode (Match Point) was playing Charles and Ben Whishaw (Perfume, I’m Not There) was Lord Sebastian. While neither one of them have a very long resume, the films they have worked on have been very well done. Not to mention they’re both lithe beauties and there’s a nude scene.

Swanner: Lithe beauties? They looked like starving prisoners. That poor child who plays Sebastian...it was sad and creepy how thin he was. I loved the way they layered on the clothes to give him some bulk and not look so much like a young girl. Anyway, the movie moved really well for a period piece romance. I also thought the filming and production values were Oscar worthy. The acting was amazing and Emma Thompson can do no wrong in my eyes.

Judd: Aside from the two willowy young men, I agree the movie was excellent. It was beautiful and the story is very scandalous and tawdry in a very dignified BBC sort of way. You’ve got to love the British—even their trash is polished. I think people familiar with the 11 hour miniseries may be disappointed with the films lack of depth; this version is a Cliff’s Notes version of the first. But I think this is a good thing for today’s ADD lifestyle.

Swanner: I loved the miniseries for its pace and sprawling story. This one has two hours to tell that same story so everything is condensed but nothing is really edited. It focuses on Charles and his motivations without turning the rest into one dimensional characters. Every role has it's moments and the actors take full advantage of the wonderful script. I really felt I got more out of this remake than the original because I didn't have the option of making cocktails during the screening like I did at home.

Judd: Brideshead Revisited is also very much about people’s convictions to religion and the torture it can put a person through. Julia and Sebastian are tortured by religion while at the same time self-proclaimed atheist Charles always seems to be caught up in his own desire. The movie addresses some really heavy themes but doesn’t do it without getting bogged down in them. My two complaints are that I didn’t care for the ending—though it was appropriate—and the svelte Whishaw was on screen for only the first half of the movie.

Swanner: Religion does play a big part in this story but it doesn't ask you to take sides. I may have been too drunk with the miniseries but I just don't remember it being such a major storyline. That doesn't mean it wasn't there but I do think it was handled really nicely here. I liked the ending and I did miss Whishaw in the second half because he's a good actor not because of his waifishness. I liked the movie a lot but I think that some men might find it uncomfortable to sit through.

Swanner: 3 1/2 Stars
Judd: 4 Stars