I haven't had a lot of things itching to get out of my mind lately, but I've been wanting to write something - so I thought I would throw something together. A hodgepodge, if you will. I figure a paragraph on everything will do.
- I was introduced to reddit a few weeks back; I had heard of the website before, but never really made use of it. It looked like a jumbled mess to me, and when occasionally I'd find reddit in search results, I didn't know how to navigate it. I'm still no pro at it, but I get it now and it has given me new things to read about.
- This week I've been dropping pounds like crazy. It hasn't been due to any extra exercise (that was last week...I put in some extra time due to some external pressure that ended up being unfounded). The main difference this week has been smaller dinners by using portion plates. Oh, the best part? I'm down 14.17% body fat - or, 39.3 lbs since November 2013. Crazy!
- 2048 is a simple yet addictive game. In short, the object is to move numbered tiles around a grid and combine them to ultimately create the number 2048. I've gotten has high as 1024, but that's about it. I'm close...I can feel it!
- A while back I watched Thor: The Dark World. It's not a perfect movie, but I found it really enjoyable - which is great for a character I've hardly related to in the past. I've never been a big Thor fan, so it's great that the movies can make the character relevant to me. Good comedic moments balanced with action set pieces.
- The Blue Jays are on a roll. Sort of. They had a spectacular month of May, which has set them up great considering the mediocre performance they've put forth in June & July. They've picked it up since the All-Star Break, but they have a long way to go if they want to do anything in the post-season. Sounds like Jays fans are excited again though, which is good...it's been too long.
- Recently read The Giver; I really liked this novel. It's really short, so it's an easy read. I gave it five stars on Goodreads, though thinking back to the book, it's not spectacular. Don't get me wrong - I'd still rate it five stars; but a book like Brave New World or 1984 are more up my alley than this was. Have you seen the trailer for the movie coming out soon? It looks terrible!
Showing posts with label book. Show all posts
Showing posts with label book. Show all posts
Friday, August 1, 2014
Monday, March 25, 2013
Review: Ready Player One (Novel, 2011)
Project 52: 5/52
"...Cline has written in Ready Player One a strong story..."
I'm a week late writing a review for Ernest Cline's debut novel, Ready Player One. I say I'm late, because I finished reading it a week ago and am currently half way through Redshirts (John Scalzi) - but don't worry, I'll have something for that soon. Back to the review - Ready Player One is, in a nutshell, about an immersive video game quest chock full of 80's references. I guess I'd classify it as a Young Adult novel? It's a strange one to classify, precisely because of the 80's pop culture references.
To be slightly more accurate with the book's synopsis, an eccentric billionaire leaves his entire fortune to the player who can successfully locate an "easter egg" within Oasis, a massively-multi-player-online video game the billionaire designed. As the quote on the front of the book says, it's a little like Charlie & the Chocolate Factory.
Obviously, the story is more complicated than that - it has to be. What kind of stakes could be expected in a story that takes place in a video game? "Oh no, the protagonist's avatar will die!" Thankfully, this is where Cline excels: the story takes place in 2044, in a very plausible future where money is scarce and people are forced to live in RVs stacked one on top of another (seriously).
Think about all of the real-world problems we face today, and multiply them tenfold. This creates a world where a contest to win billions of dollars - in a video game - becomes something certain people would most definitely kill for. And that's how you effectively create stakes for a story set in a video game.
As for the 80's pop culture references, as prominent as they are, they manage to take a back seat to the story. I realize how little sense that makes, considering how important those 80's references are to solving the clues that lead to the ultimate prize. What I mean is that Cline could have easily come up with some other clues that didn't hinge on knowledge of the 1980's, and the story would stand up just fine.
And the story does hold up. Cline has written in Ready Player One a strong story with characters who make choices that feel right for them. In my book, that's what counts. That a bunch of awesome 80's references were included as a gimmick? That just makes it more awesome.
Some other random observations:
I was strongly reminded of Cory Doctorow's For the Win, which isn't surprising; the subject matter in both books revolve around online video games with real-world stakes. However, I prefer Ready Player One.
I hope that the success of this book leads to more re-discoveries of some of the better aspects from 1980's pop culture. I've already put War Games on my "to-watch" list - I've never seen it, so hopefully it's an enjoyable experience.
I noticed an IMDB page for Ready Player One. While the story seems like it would translate well to the big screen (though I'm not 100% certain of that), I'm concerned about rights issues. Specifically, I imagine in some cases it would be prohibitively expensive to license certain rights and the story might actually be compromised. Well, I guess we'll see if anything actually comes from it.
"...Cline has written in Ready Player One a strong story..."
I'm a week late writing a review for Ernest Cline's debut novel, Ready Player One. I say I'm late, because I finished reading it a week ago and am currently half way through Redshirts (John Scalzi) - but don't worry, I'll have something for that soon. Back to the review - Ready Player One is, in a nutshell, about an immersive video game quest chock full of 80's references. I guess I'd classify it as a Young Adult novel? It's a strange one to classify, precisely because of the 80's pop culture references.
To be slightly more accurate with the book's synopsis, an eccentric billionaire leaves his entire fortune to the player who can successfully locate an "easter egg" within Oasis, a massively-multi-player-online video game the billionaire designed. As the quote on the front of the book says, it's a little like Charlie & the Chocolate Factory.
Obviously, the story is more complicated than that - it has to be. What kind of stakes could be expected in a story that takes place in a video game? "Oh no, the protagonist's avatar will die!" Thankfully, this is where Cline excels: the story takes place in 2044, in a very plausible future where money is scarce and people are forced to live in RVs stacked one on top of another (seriously).
Think about all of the real-world problems we face today, and multiply them tenfold. This creates a world where a contest to win billions of dollars - in a video game - becomes something certain people would most definitely kill for. And that's how you effectively create stakes for a story set in a video game.
As for the 80's pop culture references, as prominent as they are, they manage to take a back seat to the story. I realize how little sense that makes, considering how important those 80's references are to solving the clues that lead to the ultimate prize. What I mean is that Cline could have easily come up with some other clues that didn't hinge on knowledge of the 1980's, and the story would stand up just fine.
And the story does hold up. Cline has written in Ready Player One a strong story with characters who make choices that feel right for them. In my book, that's what counts. That a bunch of awesome 80's references were included as a gimmick? That just makes it more awesome.
Some other random observations:
I was strongly reminded of Cory Doctorow's For the Win, which isn't surprising; the subject matter in both books revolve around online video games with real-world stakes. However, I prefer Ready Player One.
I hope that the success of this book leads to more re-discoveries of some of the better aspects from 1980's pop culture. I've already put War Games on my "to-watch" list - I've never seen it, so hopefully it's an enjoyable experience.
I noticed an IMDB page for Ready Player One. While the story seems like it would translate well to the big screen (though I'm not 100% certain of that), I'm concerned about rights issues. Specifically, I imagine in some cases it would be prohibitively expensive to license certain rights and the story might actually be compromised. Well, I guess we'll see if anything actually comes from it.
Thursday, August 23, 2012
Is Fight Club Ruined by Spoilers?
Please note that this post will have spoilers in it - and even though I'm talking about a movie that is more than a decade old, this probably still matters to somebody out there.
Okay, that's out of the way; I can get on with this quasi-review. This week, I both read and watched Fight Club for the first time. I'd seen the first 20 minutes of Fight Club when I was in High School, but never finished the movie. I'm sure most of my readers have seen this shirt before*, so it should come as no surprise that I knew of the major twist at the end of the movie.
My question then is: did knowing this spoiler ruin the movie for me? For that matter, do spoilers in general ruin stories at all?
First, I think I should mention that while I read the book before watching the film, I'm going to concentrate on talking about the film - most people haven't read the book anyway, I assume. I should also assert that the simple fact of knowing that the narrator is Tyler Durden DID colour my viewing experience.
While I was watching, I was looking for all the clues that point to Ed Norton really being Tyler Durden. You know what? There are a lot of clues, starting with one of the opening lines: "I know this, because Tyler knows this." There's also an almost throw-away scene on a city bus where a passenger knocks into Norton, and not Tyler. All the references to sleep - the narrator never knows if he's awake or asleep; Tyler disappearing when Marla shows up; the subtle camera angles when both Tyler and Nortn are supposedly in the same room that only shows one or the other.**
These clues are fairly subtle, and I'm not sure that I would have noticed all of them had I not known the big secret at the end. These are clues that I would have definitely picked up on during a second viewing of the movie. Honestly, as much as I enjoyed the film, I don't think I would watch it again. In a way, this was my second viewing.
In this instance - just this particular case - I believe the spoiler did ruin the movie for me. But not because of someone else telling me the secret; I would have only watched it a second time anyway, no more. What may have been ruined was the whole "my mind is blown" moment, but I'm not too concerned about that. I can tell you what wasn't ruined: how I enjoyed the film.
Yes, the joy of discovering the truth about Tyler Durden was taken away from me, but instead I had fun picking out those "Aha!" moments that I mentioned earlier. You know what? I probably even missed more than what I mentioned, and could find more on a second viewing. So to answer my initial question, Fight Club was NOT ruined for me because I knew the story's secret.
But what about in general - are stories really ruined by spoilers? Most of the time a spoiler is just one small tidbit of information, and in no way affects the rest of it. I knew that Snape Kills Dumbledore, but I didn't know the Snape was the Half-Blood Prince (sorry). While I'm not presenting very much evidence in support of my theory, I think my stance here is fairly obvious. Spoilers don't ruin anything beyond a brief surprise at the end of it all.
* I'm not a fan of the wording of "Tyler Durden isn't real". While it gets the point across, I'd very much argue that Tyler Durden is very, very real in Fight Club.
** I really appreciated the way these clues were pulled off. Also the fact that the writers/director didn't feel it necessary to go back to each instance and hit us over the head with it, as many other entries into pop culture dealing with an imaginary person do (*cough*Dexter*cough*).
Okay, that's out of the way; I can get on with this quasi-review. This week, I both read and watched Fight Club for the first time. I'd seen the first 20 minutes of Fight Club when I was in High School, but never finished the movie. I'm sure most of my readers have seen this shirt before*, so it should come as no surprise that I knew of the major twist at the end of the movie.
My question then is: did knowing this spoiler ruin the movie for me? For that matter, do spoilers in general ruin stories at all?
First, I think I should mention that while I read the book before watching the film, I'm going to concentrate on talking about the film - most people haven't read the book anyway, I assume. I should also assert that the simple fact of knowing that the narrator is Tyler Durden DID colour my viewing experience.
While I was watching, I was looking for all the clues that point to Ed Norton really being Tyler Durden. You know what? There are a lot of clues, starting with one of the opening lines: "I know this, because Tyler knows this." There's also an almost throw-away scene on a city bus where a passenger knocks into Norton, and not Tyler. All the references to sleep - the narrator never knows if he's awake or asleep; Tyler disappearing when Marla shows up; the subtle camera angles when both Tyler and Nortn are supposedly in the same room that only shows one or the other.**
These clues are fairly subtle, and I'm not sure that I would have noticed all of them had I not known the big secret at the end. These are clues that I would have definitely picked up on during a second viewing of the movie. Honestly, as much as I enjoyed the film, I don't think I would watch it again. In a way, this was my second viewing.
In this instance - just this particular case - I believe the spoiler did ruin the movie for me. But not because of someone else telling me the secret; I would have only watched it a second time anyway, no more. What may have been ruined was the whole "my mind is blown" moment, but I'm not too concerned about that. I can tell you what wasn't ruined: how I enjoyed the film.
Yes, the joy of discovering the truth about Tyler Durden was taken away from me, but instead I had fun picking out those "Aha!" moments that I mentioned earlier. You know what? I probably even missed more than what I mentioned, and could find more on a second viewing. So to answer my initial question, Fight Club was NOT ruined for me because I knew the story's secret.
But what about in general - are stories really ruined by spoilers? Most of the time a spoiler is just one small tidbit of information, and in no way affects the rest of it. I knew that Snape Kills Dumbledore, but I didn't know the Snape was the Half-Blood Prince (sorry). While I'm not presenting very much evidence in support of my theory, I think my stance here is fairly obvious. Spoilers don't ruin anything beyond a brief surprise at the end of it all.
* I'm not a fan of the wording of "Tyler Durden isn't real". While it gets the point across, I'd very much argue that Tyler Durden is very, very real in Fight Club.
** I really appreciated the way these clues were pulled off. Also the fact that the writers/director didn't feel it necessary to go back to each instance and hit us over the head with it, as many other entries into pop culture dealing with an imaginary person do (*cough*Dexter*cough*).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)