![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A couple of reviews
Taking a few minutes while the potatoes are cooking for the potato salad to write a couple of reviews. Warning: Spoilers aplenty.
"The Unholy Cause"
I read this book over three days last week (which for me, that's like speed reading). It was a very quick read. It read so much like an episode that I had the urge to get on-line and give my episode review. Then realizing that I couldn't "re-watch" it easily, and that only a handful of people would understand what I was talking about.
Gory to the point that even Kripke would approve, the story was action packed with interesting turnabouts and challenges. It used a key event in both American history and American culture and pop culture as its context, which was very cool, especially considering that I wish they'd do that more in the show.
A couple things did make me a little twitchy (Note: This is specific to me personally, and I wouldn't expect it to bother anyone else):
1. Judas. Judas shows up in the story, not just as a concept or a lesson, but as a demon. This made me a little twitchy in that it strikes very close to my faith. Judas plays an important, unpleasant, slightly complex role in the Gospel, and to bring in an actual historical person made me a little bit nervous. That said, however, I ended up being much more okay with the way it worked out than I had originally thought. And the way Judas is incorporated into the mytharc was very interesting. (Castiel is looking for a First Witness, someone who actually broke bread with Jesus. That made me think of all the possibilities included in that, considering how often Jesus sat down to a meal with sinners from all walks of life. Of course I figured it would be Judas, and it made for an interesting take. And he really wasn't that major of a player in the overall storyline; he only shows up in one scene with Castiel.)
It also makes sense in the context of Show, given what we're given about Judas in the New Testament, that he would show up as a demon.
2. The Judas Noose. Again, wasn't sure how I felt about this at first, since Judas hung himself out of a sense of guilt. (He tried to return the silver, too.) Also the number 7, which I always associate with perfection. But in this case, they were using 7 to symbolize completion--completely unleashing the curse and evil spirits, rather than "perfection."
Anyway, as a mythical artifact, the Judas noose made for a really creepy thing that was all kinds of trouble. So I was quite better with that then I thought I would be. And Judas being the ultimate betrayer, it played in well with where I think the Boys are at this point. (I place the book sometime after "Fallen Idols" but before . . . whatever the next episode was.)
Moving on . . .
What I liked about the book:
Everything else. Seriously. Quick read, characters felt solid, decent mystery, cameo appearance by Rufus, twists, peril, and a train race at the end. (Got a little flail-y when the silver shekels showed up, because that was a pretty cool twist.)
It also got me to thinking (again) about what a terrible tragedy the Civil War was. Necessary, I believe, in the growth of our country, to solidify us as one nation, but still . . . families fighting each other. Friends, brothers . . . it just . . . so tragic.
All in all, a fun read. I kinda wish I had something similar to take with me to NC in a couple weeks.
The Hurt Locker
(I'm a little distracted with Memorial Day prep, so apologies if this seems a little unfocused.)
Watched The Hurt Locker last night. I don't usually go for war movies, but I think the director was the first female director in history to win an Oscar, and it won Best Picture, and it's been referenced recently in conversation, so I Netflixed it.
I'm still trying to figure out how I feel about the movie. As a piece of cinema, it's pretty darn amazing. (They shot it in Jordan, close to the Jordan/Iraq border, as I understand it, for realism. Oy. They also shot parts of it in Vancouver, because Vancouver looks so much like the Middle East. Heh!)
People will tell you the movie is about the war in Iraq. It's not. It's about these guys who have been put in an impossible situation and how they go about dealing with it until they're out of there. As Geo would tell you, no good war movie is about the war. Or maybe not only about the war. It's about the characters in the war.
I didn't really like the lead character, William James, very much. He was . . . too reckless, too blasé with his team mates' lives. He was an addict, and as long as he got his rush, the rest didn't matter. I didn't get an inkling of liking him until he started looking after his team mates, and then I had to confirm with Geo that it was indeed the same character. He just wasn't a very . . . sympathetic character, I guess. Didn't really see that he had a problem.
But in the end, it was just . . . sad. Not crying sad, but scary, hopeless sad. He had become so consumed with the rush of bomb diffusion that he took the easy way out and re-upped rather than learn to cope with and even appreciate his civilian life. And I'm thinking, "You know, you could take up an extreme sport. Or join a bomb squad, or something." It was a fitting ending to the movie, no question, but you kind of hurt for the character that he couldn't move past his addiction.
I liked the other two members of his team, though, real well. Sandborn, the 2IC, who was just holding himself and his team together until they rotated out.
And Eldridge, the poor kid who was constantly scared he was going to die, or get someone else killed, or have to kill someone. But he kept going, regardless.
It was a good movie. A "gritty" movie. An intense movie. And it made me feel all over again for our men and women in the war zone.
Guests have started arriving. Will be back later with a report on the homemade ice cream. Yummy!
"The Unholy Cause"
I read this book over three days last week (which for me, that's like speed reading). It was a very quick read. It read so much like an episode that I had the urge to get on-line and give my episode review. Then realizing that I couldn't "re-watch" it easily, and that only a handful of people would understand what I was talking about.
Gory to the point that even Kripke would approve, the story was action packed with interesting turnabouts and challenges. It used a key event in both American history and American culture and pop culture as its context, which was very cool, especially considering that I wish they'd do that more in the show.
A couple things did make me a little twitchy (Note: This is specific to me personally, and I wouldn't expect it to bother anyone else):
1. Judas. Judas shows up in the story, not just as a concept or a lesson, but as a demon. This made me a little twitchy in that it strikes very close to my faith. Judas plays an important, unpleasant, slightly complex role in the Gospel, and to bring in an actual historical person made me a little bit nervous. That said, however, I ended up being much more okay with the way it worked out than I had originally thought. And the way Judas is incorporated into the mytharc was very interesting. (Castiel is looking for a First Witness, someone who actually broke bread with Jesus. That made me think of all the possibilities included in that, considering how often Jesus sat down to a meal with sinners from all walks of life. Of course I figured it would be Judas, and it made for an interesting take. And he really wasn't that major of a player in the overall storyline; he only shows up in one scene with Castiel.)
It also makes sense in the context of Show, given what we're given about Judas in the New Testament, that he would show up as a demon.
2. The Judas Noose. Again, wasn't sure how I felt about this at first, since Judas hung himself out of a sense of guilt. (He tried to return the silver, too.) Also the number 7, which I always associate with perfection. But in this case, they were using 7 to symbolize completion--completely unleashing the curse and evil spirits, rather than "perfection."
Anyway, as a mythical artifact, the Judas noose made for a really creepy thing that was all kinds of trouble. So I was quite better with that then I thought I would be. And Judas being the ultimate betrayer, it played in well with where I think the Boys are at this point. (I place the book sometime after "Fallen Idols" but before . . . whatever the next episode was.)
Moving on . . .
What I liked about the book:
Everything else. Seriously. Quick read, characters felt solid, decent mystery, cameo appearance by Rufus, twists, peril, and a train race at the end. (Got a little flail-y when the silver shekels showed up, because that was a pretty cool twist.)
It also got me to thinking (again) about what a terrible tragedy the Civil War was. Necessary, I believe, in the growth of our country, to solidify us as one nation, but still . . . families fighting each other. Friends, brothers . . . it just . . . so tragic.
All in all, a fun read. I kinda wish I had something similar to take with me to NC in a couple weeks.
The Hurt Locker
(I'm a little distracted with Memorial Day prep, so apologies if this seems a little unfocused.)
Watched The Hurt Locker last night. I don't usually go for war movies, but I think the director was the first female director in history to win an Oscar, and it won Best Picture, and it's been referenced recently in conversation, so I Netflixed it.
I'm still trying to figure out how I feel about the movie. As a piece of cinema, it's pretty darn amazing. (They shot it in Jordan, close to the Jordan/Iraq border, as I understand it, for realism. Oy. They also shot parts of it in Vancouver, because Vancouver looks so much like the Middle East. Heh!)
People will tell you the movie is about the war in Iraq. It's not. It's about these guys who have been put in an impossible situation and how they go about dealing with it until they're out of there. As Geo would tell you, no good war movie is about the war. Or maybe not only about the war. It's about the characters in the war.
I didn't really like the lead character, William James, very much. He was . . . too reckless, too blasé with his team mates' lives. He was an addict, and as long as he got his rush, the rest didn't matter. I didn't get an inkling of liking him until he started looking after his team mates, and then I had to confirm with Geo that it was indeed the same character. He just wasn't a very . . . sympathetic character, I guess. Didn't really see that he had a problem.
But in the end, it was just . . . sad. Not crying sad, but scary, hopeless sad. He had become so consumed with the rush of bomb diffusion that he took the easy way out and re-upped rather than learn to cope with and even appreciate his civilian life. And I'm thinking, "You know, you could take up an extreme sport. Or join a bomb squad, or something." It was a fitting ending to the movie, no question, but you kind of hurt for the character that he couldn't move past his addiction.
I liked the other two members of his team, though, real well. Sandborn, the 2IC, who was just holding himself and his team together until they rotated out.
And Eldridge, the poor kid who was constantly scared he was going to die, or get someone else killed, or have to kill someone. But he kept going, regardless.
It was a good movie. A "gritty" movie. An intense movie. And it made me feel all over again for our men and women in the war zone.
Guests have started arriving. Will be back later with a report on the homemade ice cream. Yummy!
no subject
I did wonder, as I was reading, whether it would be a bit prickly for people of strong faith. I don't think Schreiber meant any of it to be offensive (at least, no more so than Kripke does), so I'm glad it didn't bug you too much. It was such fun!
On a side note, you've seen the slide show of Jared's wedding, yes?
no subject
Squee!! You liked it too!
Oh, yeah. It was a really fun book. (Well, you know, aside from all he carnage.) Those couple of things niggled at me, but I think you're right in that Schreiber was using them to tell a story and create an interesting artifact rather than purposely screw with things.
I think what bothered me was depicting Judas as a gleeful demon. In Scripture, it talks about how when Judas found out what was to become of Jesus, he was "seized with remorse" and returned the silver and knew he had sinned in a big way. But rather than stick around and seek forgiveness, he hung himself. (Judas is sort of a complex and maybe even perplexing character: selfish and arrogant and greedy and thieving and out to push his own agenda, betraying his friend to the end of that Friend being executed; and then, at the end, realizing he'd committed a horrible wrong and still not getting it, and killing himself.) I had problems picturing that kind of remorse ending up as a gleeful demon. Then I got to thinking about 2000 years in Hell, and multiply that by Hell-time, and how even Dean was on his way to becoming a demon, "liking"--for whatever reason--what he was doing. And within the context of Show, Judas as a demon made sense.
And Judas himself didn't play so much a part of the story as the noose and the shekels did. (Which, I don't know if there even is such lore about a noose, so that just made for a creepy fictitious artifact.)
I'm hoping the next book is as good. And if it could come out before we head to NC, I'd be very happy.
So. Pictures?
no subject
I actually agree with youor view of lead character of Hurt locker. I even think we as viewers weren't supposed to like him (at least at first). For me it was a story not about liking a character but aboout understanding him. Does it have a sense?
You said it right - he's junkie and his dangerous that way. I think the narration in the beginning of the movie told the same thing. In the end i was hoping that it was just a part of his life and maybe in the future he'll meet someone who will teach him how to cope. it's strange actually, i didn't like a character but i felt for him. Usually if i don't like someone on screen i feel nothing for them. I think that was a lesson of that movie (at least for me)and why it was praised so much. it grabs you even if you don't like a character it tells its story through.
Oh, and i think the lead actor (don't remember his name, sorry) did a very good job portraying Will.
no subject
I know the character was supposed to be hard and reckless. And it was sad to see him continue on in his self-destructive ways. But I think I would have felt it on a more emotional level if I'd actually liked the character.
But you're right in that it still told its story.
no subject
Emmm... it's hard for me to describe what i feel about the movie in english. It's like it wasn't a story of one guy it was more a picture of every day life there that we never saw and never understand. And how it changes people.