Mare Somniorum

Hrrmpf. I really enjoyed the first third or so of the book. The middle part was interesting and I quite liked some of the character transitions we were witness to. Oh, and of course, the “guest appearances” were nice — even if they did feel a tad tacked on, but that was probably done to avoid requiring previous understanding of the setting. The last third of the book though, well, it just doesn’t really work for me. It’s not bad, it’s not a big cliché, it’s not dull… But it is however fairly predictable, fairly typical and quite heavy on the techno-talk. It might not be babble, but in certain quantities, it might as well have been.

The last third of the book is tying a lot of things together and the tying itself happens to work well enough, but it doesn’t give the individuals much space, it doesn’t give them much of a journey and there is “too much” stuff going on at once. Where “Chasm City” was pure and to the bone, this does indeed become a space opera. Down to the point of requiring “Revelation Space” to be read and remembered. As a side note on that, there are some story lines that could be cut without very little real loss to the story.

All in all, “meh”. I’ve read worse, I’ve after all read things like “The Swarm” semi-recently, it’s amazing what noisy kids on an eight hour plane ride can make you accept. “Revelation Space” grew on me, it got better and better the more I read. “Redemption Ark” had almost the opposite effect. At this point I’m going to go back to “The mind’s eye” and “Labyrinths” for a few, before I pick up “Absolution Gap”. It’s the classical trap where you’ve read so much of a series that you might as well read on — Peter F. Hamiltion perfected bits of this in the “Nights Dawn” saga. Don’t get me wrong, “Nights Dawn” isn’t bad (I’ve read it twice), but it has parts that make you wonder if Hamilton is on autopilot and getting payed by word count.

Now, sadly, I feel that “Absolution Gap” shares some of the same pitfalls. Bits just aren’t that good, at least not when you’ve read “Chasm City” to get a feel for what the author can provide. I suppose, if this was the first book I’d read of Reynolds, I’d be a fair bit more positive about it, but right now I’m even putting off the next book for a bit. The upside? I get to read other great books!

I actually saw this movie over the summer, so this is a bit of a delayed musing. However, “Ratatouille” is a movie that deserves mention. Pixar and Brad Bird have proved that they can deliver animated movies that aren’t “kids movies”, while still being loved by pretty much every age group out there. The stories are rather easy tales, but have a surprising amount of depth for the medium they’ve been embedded into. They recently delivered “The Incredibles” and we as an audience loved it. So, how do you top that? Easy, you make a rat want to become a chef…

From the onset you’d think, geeze, this is disturbing, disgusting and distasteful. And yet, somehow, it’s not only pulled off, but it’s done with a huge amount of success. The (voice) cast deserves more than honorable mention, but let’s face it, the animators deserve a medal for the work.  No, I’m not going to argue how technically brilliant the movie is (and trust me, it is), but rather let it be sufficient to say that you don’t catch yourself thinking of it as an animated movie.  It just transcends the format and comes alive like nothing else.

The opening sequences are stunning and set the stage for a fantastic journey of men and mice.  Bird grabs you by the collar and doesn’t let go until the final curtain, having you laugh, weep, smile, smirk and clap with joy as the story unfolds.   If you ever thought “it’s animated”, do yourself a favor, go see “Ratatouille”.  It’s been said before, but honestly, if you avoid “Ratatoullie”, you’re doing yourself a great injustice.  This is a movie to be experienced by everyone, small and big rats alike.

No, no points for the reference in question, but feel free to comment on it.

Anyway, I saw “Stardust” a second time. It’s funny really, this time around it was an even better movie. How so? Well, I was done comparing it to the book so I could just sit back and watch the movie. Which, incidentally, is a very good way to spend a few hours. First off, the music. I noticed it last time around, but this time it blew me away. It is extremely well done all the way through the movie. Yeah, I mentioned the cast last time around, yeah, they’re good, but dang. Everyone actually works, I love them even more the second time around — and to whomever who got De Niro to dance Cha-cha-cha in drag? Thanks! Well, except I might never watch “Raging Bull” or “Taxi Driver” the same way again…

It is funny how a second take on something gives you a different experience than the first one. Some select movies (“When Night is Falling”, “Brazil”, “Heat” and others) are movies I’ve seen many times over, but after tonight I’m contemplating if the second viewing is the magic one. I’ll just have to keep that in mind for movies that seem to warrant it — and probably some that don’t, just to make sure.

Good movie the first time around, great movie the second time around. It’s not the book made into a movie. It’s the concept of the book transferred into a different medium, and accepting that (which means even forgetting about the book as you see the movie) will grant you an even better experience.