Oh, my gosh! I loved, loved, loved "Wuthering Heights". I actually loved the book so much that I don't even feel like writing about it because my scribble will most certainly do the novel no justice. I believe that "Wuthering Heights" is the first book, out of those I've managed to read in the last few years, that I have unequivocally enjoyed from the very fist page and could not put down. I got so caught up in the story that, having opened the book yesterday morning, I could not take my mind away from it until I have turned the last page, in the process neglecting hundreds of pages of the reading that I was supposed to do for college.

As a girl ought, I have always enjoyed reading a good romantic novel, which has led me to adore Dumas as a teenager as well as to waste quite a few hours on dime novels many of which are not worth paper they are printed on. Plenty of the stories in this genre have succeeded in stirring my emotions to some extent, which, I admit, is a very easy task; nevertheless, I have hard time remembering anything that have left me as wrought-up as "Wuthering Heights" did. There is no doubt that the wild, maddening and all-consuming passion that is the main subject of the book is like nothing I have previously encountered.

Being perhaps the least imaginative reader out there, even I managed to feel completely immersed in the gloomy world of "Wuthering Heights". None of the characters has left me indifferent -- the intensity of their feelings, the reckless abandon with which they live, the extremes of their behavior are sure to find a response in many readers. While to some extent a romantic novel, the books is as far from typical love story as one can get, which, in my opinion, makes it ten time as interesting. I do not usually recommend books, but I'll make an exception for this one. I think that "Wuthering Heights" is something one who enjoys reading absolutely must add to her reading list. No movie -- and there are a few of them -- can do it justice!

Осталось прочитать 27 книг списка на 2010 год

I became a little familiar with the story many years ago when I watched a movie of the same name with Demi Moore. Since I could hardly remember a thing about that film and the name of the novel quite often appears in various lists of important works of literature, I've decided to give it a try. I believe that the main focus of the movie was the adulterous affair between the main characters, so I expected some sort of a love story with a tragic ending. It was not the case.

Unlike the movie, a significant part of which is devoted to the development of the relationship between the priest and Hester Pryne, "The Scarlet letter" begins after that relationship had tragically ended. A resident of God-fearing puritan community, Hester, whose affair with the priest ended with her getting pregnant, is sentenced to wearing a letter A, which stands for "adultery," on her chest for the rest of her life. A scene of her standing on the scaffold, with the letter on her chest and a baby daughter in her arms, opens the narration.

The conflict of the story revolves around four main characters: the wearer of the letter A, Hester; her lover, Dimmersdale, who happens to be the most revered clergyman in the community; her husband, who has been missing for the past two years and now swears to avenge his honor by destroying the man who stole his wife; Perl, Hester's illegitimate child. "The Scarlet Letter" covers seven years of the main characters' life and is concerned with Hester dealing with her ignominy, the priest being tortured by his conscience, and the husband trying to uncover the truth.

The novel was written in mid-nineteenth century, and this is easy to tell from Hawthorn's manner of writing. In it, the author explores social and religious norms of Puritanical society, as well as the ways in which sin can affect people. His style is often convoluted and rather formal; the story is somber and moves very slowly. The characters and their actions are often exaggerated to the point of ceasing to be believable. Overall, "The Scarlet Letter" was definitely not a page turner, and while it is undoubtedly a solid and meaningful work of literature, I found it to be a chore, not an enjoyment.

Осталось прочитать 29 книг списка на 2010 год

After three earlier unsuccessful attempts to get tickets for IMAX showing of Avatar, today I have finally got to see this movie. To begin with, I should have gone to a regular 3D weeks ago - while sound was definitely an improvement, the IMAX screen in our theater seemed to be hardly any bigger than a regular one; the only major difference I've noticed was in for some reason very uncomfortable chairs.

I am probably one of the last people of earth to see the movie, so I don't think it is necessary to tell anyone what it is about. There is no doubt that technically this film is the acme of not only its director's career, but all modern cinematic art. A product of Cameron's genius, Avatar has definitely reestablished its creator as one of the best directors of our time.

The amount of imagination that went into it is mindboggling - every plant and creature of Pandora is something incredible; the special effects are top notch; the implementation of 3D makes the whole thing twice as great. For 160 minutes the viewer emerges into a completely different world, every detail of which is so well thought and crafted that it makes you almost believe that it is all real. As far as technical aspect of film making is concerned, Avatar is undoubtedly the best movie I have ever seen.

Somewhat of a drawback was, however, the fact that Pandora and its creatures that are supposed to be a background to the story take the center stage. When watching Avatar, I often felt that the story was just an excuse for showcasing advances of modern cinematography - the dialogs were few, not very interesting, and seemed to be written by a fifth grader; the characters, especially that of "I didn't sign up for this shit" girl, were flat, somewhat cliched and uninspired. Highly unoriginal names of the planet and the mineral, unobtainium, the humans were after once again made me question whether too much of the creators' mind power went into the CGI, taking away from the story.

In conclusion, I think that Avatar was an OK, not an amazing, movie; it was, however, an amazing moviegoing EXPERIENCE. After seeing it, I'll probably never spend a dime on watching 2D film in a theater: Paying 10 bucks to see a romantic comedy on a big screen is definitely not worth it; any Sci-Fi or cartoon that is not shot in 3D, on the other hand, will be put to shame from now on.

"Seriously?" was the first thought that came to my mind after the credits of "Up in the Air" started to roll. I've spent almost two hours waiting for this snooze fest to take a sharp turn and magically become worthy of all the buzz it has generated, but this has never happened.

"Up in the Air" received 6 Golden Globe nominations: best picture, best director, best actor, and best supporting actress for both Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendrick. I say that the critics were either blind or drunk. Vera Farmiga is the only part of this movie that makes it more or less bearable. The rest of the film is lackluster, to say the least. The script is unimaginative and lacks in dynamics; the camera work is bad; Anna Kendrick is just ok; George Clooney...well he is just George Clooney.

For two hours, the audience is subjected to watching a guy who spends more than 200 days per year traveling all over the country and firing people. He sincerely believes that everything that most of other people value in life is an unnecessary baggage that weights them down. Another two characters are overeager recent college graduate, who is supposed, I guess, to charm both the audience and the main character with her lack of real world experience, and a woman that Clooney's personage meets in the airport and whose purpose is to help him discover what really matters.

The action in the movie is pretty much limited to scenes of firing a bunch of random people and to for the most part boring dialogs between the main characters. Clooney is undoubtedly nice to look at, but if anyone is able to find 5 distinctions between this personage and, let's say, his character in the whole array of "Ocean's Twelve" movies or any other of his movies for any of that matter, I'll be very surprised. The premise of the film is highly unrealistic; the storyline is predictable and full of clichés. The message? - family is important; being alone stinks. Wow, that is quite a revelation!

I can't believe that I have finally finished this book! It took me five whole months to do it, which, taking into consideration that I'm a very fast reader and generally enjoy most of the fiction I happen to come across, is unbelievable. During these five months, I've actually returned "Catch-22" to the library two or three times when I got particularly frustrated; then cooled off a bit and tried my best to gave it another shot. Not surprisingly, having finally turned the last page of "Catch-22", I can officially declare that this Joseph Heller's "masterpiece" is the worst book I have ever read. So far, it is the second book on the list that I hated, but comparing to it, "Clockwork Orange" actually was a very easy and enjoyable read.

To be honest, I can't even tell what "Catch-22" was about. Moreover, I have a very strong suspicion that Heller was on crack when writing it. The whole story is based on life of a young man, Yossarian, who servers in the US forces in Italy during the Second World War. This story, however, is no more than a collection of chapters devoid of both chronological order and meaning that constantly jump from one topic, character, or event to another. All of the events happening in the book are an absolute nonsense, which, I guess, is supposed to be satirical or at least funny. I did understand that, in choosing this style of narration, one of the author's intention was perhaps to criticize how absurd can bureaucracy in the military or elsewhere be, but, unfortunately, this understanding did not make reading the book any more pleasant.

To summarize my experience, I can just say that "Catch-22" is a pretty long book, and I was confused for the most part of it. I could hardly keep track of the characters and events, which only added to my frustration. Only a few of hundreds of absurd situations described by the author have made me laugh, but it definitely was more of a hysterical giggle caused by my brain boiling from all the confusing information. If the author, indeed, had some point he wanted to bring across, he has lost me after just a few chapters. Finally, "Catch-22", in my opinion, is similar of some of those very abstract paintings, like "Black Square" by Malevich: People claim to admire them because some bunch of drunken critics once said that it was a good thing, but quietly think that it was a total waste of both paper and their time.

Осталось прочесть 15 произведений списка