Post #10 Genre Study

The Da Vinci Code Review

The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown was a fantastic read, and it teaches a fair amount of Christian mythology, pagan mythology,(pagan gods and societies mainly), art history, and a wide variety of other subjects and it can be a thriller in some parts, but mainly kept you thinking on the edge of your seat. The amount of research Brown must have done is enormous, the detail is extensive. Now let's cut the book into separate pieces to evaluate it further. Theme, plot, characters, and writing style/voice.

We'll start with the theme: Mystery/Suspense and Brown did it flawlessly, The Da Vinci Code kept the reader hooked, albeit was a slow start, but it picks up further into the plot.  But mysteries tend to do that, hook and reel in and the reader is left in the dark until the author decides to let them in on the mystery, that is why mystery can tie into thrillers, because the unknown is scary and exciting, thus making the reader wanting more of the book. Again, Brown did this very well, he kept the mystery alive throughout the entire novel.

The plot was insanely fascinating if you are a history lover(especially European and or ancient culture) and it even gave a history lesson on many different ancient societies, symbolism, and culture, as well as secret orders(like the Priory of Sion). Anyway, the main plot line is Robert Langdon, a symbologist/historian and Harvard professor accompanied by Sophie Neveu a cryptologist find an ancient secret buried in Da Vinci's work. Is that not awesome? The story is incredibly interesting and full of historic knowledge and is just great, the extensive research is crazy and it will pull you in. The only thing that is annoying, is that the chapters are extremely short and there's a 104 of them, doesn't affect the plot, but it's annoying. The plot jumps around different characters and is told from third person perspectives every time.

The characters were very well thought out and interesting to learn about them way they think. There are around five main characters, but Robert and Sophie were the protagonists of the novel. Each character had their own field of historic knowledge and it aided them throughout the story. The protagonists Robert Langdon and Sophie Neveu were fairly different characters that were brought together unexpectedly, but were grateful for each others company. Robert, being a Harvard professor, is surprisingly the comic relief of the story, he jokes around more than Sophie does, and she is more serious than he is. Sophie has realizations of her past and how it connects to the present(of the book), and Robert is kind of just stuck in the middle of it, what luck,right? Anyways, the characters of the novel are well-crafted and interesting.

Lastly, the voice of the novel was fairly simple, a third-person perspective as if you're watching the story or someone tells you about it. But it's not completely third-person. The novel jumps around to each character, still tells the story in a third perspective, but goes into more detail about a specific character, how they're feeling, their thoughts and whatnot, that's the only unique thing about it. Otherwise, it is simply told by a narrator and jumps between characters, it's not confusing, Brown made it clear who's perspective it was when it jumped to them, each paragraph or chapter when it did, started off with their name, usually.

So The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown was a great read with a fantastic plot and good historical significance, the stuff that wasn't made up anyway. It had good and well thought out characters and a unique writing style. This novel deserves a well earned A- rating, the only reason it is not a + is because it had a slow start and confusing and disappointing ending.                                                                          
                   
Dan Brown  ^

Post #8 As a reader

I am the kind of reader who finds the deeper meaning in a story, even if the author didn't intend to put one in, I always get something out of the book, some sort of moral value out of it. Why do I do this? Well I read for the entertainment but also the development of characters, how they change and what they learn throughout the story, about the world and themselves. It's extremely fasinating to me to see how the author changes charcaters, and from them changing, I learn things about myslef as well. I find that fiction has more characterization then non-fiction.

Mostly my reading consists of fiction, namely science and fantasy, with a little mystery and horror on the side I've always enjoyed fiction, only time I've read non-fiction is when I had to for an assignment and why? Because I want to read about things created by the mind, by imgination, it's interesting to see what other peoples minds and conjure. There's an extreme more amount of creativity towards fiction than non-fiction, that's fact. Becuase non-fiction, as we all know, is true events, true stories. Fiction can be anything anyone wants it to be, the possiblites are endless with fictional ideas and writing.

I myself have always been stuck between the two worlds of science and fantasy fiction, though in the past decade, it seems science fiction has been the most popular, espcially because of The Hunger Games trilogy and the spin-offs of that, such as Divergent. The numbers are there, you can clearly see that science fiction is above fantasy, not by much, but by some. When Harry Potter was very popular, a while ago, fantasy was the top of the list. But for now, it's science fiction until a new popular fantasy novel gets hyped.

I've changed as a reader this trimester only by a little. I'm a little more open to readinghings outside my perfferd subjects and I see more of a difference between literary and genre writing.

Post #7 where the wild things are reflection

Where the wild things are reflection

I thought where the wild things are movie adaption was done okay, Jonze did a fairly good job, though I thought it was poorly executed and was stretched a bit too long. Now as a movie in and of itself, it was good, but as a book to movie, not so much. But it being based off a children's book it's understandable that the story had to be extended or else it'd be a short film, but Jonze took the movie into a different direction and made it a little depressing, and had some heartfelt moments to make it more entertaining, obviously. I just think it was unnecessary to include the things he did.

One thing he did that I didn't like was that he made the story with the monsters depressing, the whole point of Max going to be with the wild things was to get all of his wildness out, to vent. But the wild things in the movie were well thought out, their personalities were unique and original, but again from book to movie adaptation, giving the monsters personalities was unnecessary, their purpose was for Max to have things that were as wild as he was, not to help solve problems. And the infighting  between the wild things was only for drama and suspense, it didn't really have a point.

The visuals of the movie were great, I liked that the monsters were computer animated rather than people in costumes. As I said before, Jonze did a good job with the movie, he made a good film, not a good adaptation though. I did like that he included a bit of background though, like that Max had a sister and showed that he didn't have a father and his mother was dating and the connection he had to his mother, it adds emphasis to how she got mad at him in which he was so upset, he ran away. That was about the only thing I liked that he added to the story.

So in conclusion, I thought Jonze made a good movie but a poor adaptation, it was too long and had unnecessary additions and character personalities. Good background on main characters, and the only good addition. Story was too depressing for a movie based on a children's book. So, all in all, not good, but not really bad either, I'd give it a C.

Post #6 favorite book movie adaptation

A favorite book of mine that I would like to see on the big screen would be Mass Effect: Revelation written by Drew Karpyshyn. This would make a great movie because it has action, a good on-the-edge-of your-seat story, and great and well thought out characters and a bit of romance, but not the generic kind. It would make a good movie for the readers and for just people who like good movies.

How I would do it:

It would have to be more than one movie however; there is too many important scenes and such that you couldn’t fit into one two and a half hour long movie, probably two movies, there is a short story gap in the book that leaves you with a cliffhanger so it would serve as a good first to second movie transition, and want the audience wanting more of it. Casting would be fairly easy, the alien races in the movie would all be computer animated, costumes wouldn’t work. There wouldn’t be a huge amount of actual people in front of the camera; most scenes would be computer animation because of the setting. But with the technology we have? It would look great. I would keep to the story and still have action scenes of course, as many as I can, but I would have to leave some out, yes, but my goal is to make the adaptation as well as I can, and to meet the requirements of good movies: Action scenes, Loveable characters, and A story with a good ending. Which the book itself meets these requirements. Would I change anything? Probably not, not characters appearances or their roles. I’d find the actor that best fits the description the book gives about them and work with it and try to find popular actors to play the parts, because you’re more likely to see a movie with an actor you know in it more than one you don’t. The only thing that I’d change is the action scenes, because Karpyshyn uses great detail in action scenes, they usually last a few pages, and in reality they only last a few minutes. So I’d shorten them to only a few minutes long, leaving out the great detail and just getting an action scene across, outcomes would be the same, obviously. And of course long dialogue scenes would be shortened for time’s sake, and I would have good dialogue in a short scene and get the point the conversation is making and have memorable quotes from the book in the movie, people who have read the book would know it and it would get popular amongst both people who have read it and those who haven’t because it would be an epic quote, all movies have them.

Conclusion:

Mass Effect: Revelation would make a good movie, it has good, dynamic characters, epic moments and it would promote the book, its author, and the video game series it is based off of. It could be done effectively if done right and please all audiences: the readers, the non-readers, and the people who have played the games and like how the Mass Effect universe is portrayed on the big screen.