Tales of the City: There were occasional interesting happenings with references that make me perk up when I recognize them, but mostly it’s a boring series of vignettes about somewhat hateful characters. It feels very much like it was a serial rather than being cohesive, which is not how I like my novels…usually. Well, I didn’t watch much of the mini because the dated and cheap feel made it seem like I would like it even less than the book. 2/5 for book
Empire Falls: I remember liking the book, but I could not finish this. It’s just so boring and slow and weirdly given that it’s on HBO it looks really cheap. I don’t see how this is one of 2 longforms to get 4 Sag noms; the performers’ styles range from hammy overacting (and not even in a fun way) to dull lifelessness. Eh, not much to say aside from that. 0/5 for mini
The Age of Innocence: Well, the book is better. Winona Ryder is incredibly pretty in this movie, but she is also pretty terrible. Very, very bland, to the point that the love triangle is a bit ridiculous. I mean, I know we’re supposed to be on Ellen’s side, but still. It is so dumb that the only major nom for the movie was for Winona Ryder. I would argue that Michelle Pfeiffer would have been right in submitting herself for supporting and she had a good chance at winning; certainly she’s more supporting than certain supporting winners given how she’s gone from large chunks of the movie. The only lead really is DDL, who to be fair had another movie that year and was nominated for that instead. It’s pretty irritating that actually the supporting Globe winner and the supporting Bafta winner were both from The Age of Innocence, which is likely why Pfeiffer as lead seemed to be the way to go. But Margolyes still couldn’t get the Oscar nom, and then even with her out of the way Ryder lost to that Paquin person. Thompson had just won, Hunter was obvs winning lead, Rosie Perez is…Rosie Perez, and so the two first-time nominees in movies now thought of as masterpieces could have cancelled each other out in favor of Pfeiffer with what would have been her 4th nom in 6 years esp given her earlier lead Globe win. Okay, so her actual performance wasn’t amazing, because I don’t think she got the voice down quite right, but the emotion she is able to express esp with her face and body language is impressive enough for me to label her as great. And what’s more important is whether she’s better than the winner and the apparent frontrunner, and yes, both generally and in these specific roles. Seriously, what sounds better: the Oscar winner also known for her role in that vampire porn show, or the Oscar winner also known for her roles in The Fabulous Baker Boys and Dangerous Liaisons? Oh, DDL…he’s good, though he shines more when opposite a capable screen partner, i.e. Pfeiffer>Ryder. And while there’s a fair amount of the former, there is also a fair amount of the latter. I really don’t get the hype; good thing Ryder is over now. Other things: I didn’t care for when people would talk directly to the camera when we heard the contents of their letters or whatnot; while Oscar winner Joanne Woodward did a good job narrating, the narration felt totally unnecessary; the old-age makeup at the end was terrible. 3/5 for movie, 4/5 for book
Roots: I skipped through boring parts a lot, which was a lot of this. I know this is like the most epic TV ever (6 of the T40 programs; the only other thing w/more than 2 slots is the Super Bowl) but…the characters are not complex, the acting often bugs or bores (though I can see why Uggams was the only Globe nominee; she cries well and works better when she’s not playing a 30ish teenager), they could have taken a lot of stuff out esp since Part 8 is almost entirely not even in the book and the most interesting part i.e. Kunta’s childhood was drastically reduced though I wonder if they would have gotten a kid even worse than Burton if the mini included his younger years more. The book is fairly lively in the African section, but maybe I’ve read too many narratives of slavery in the US and the early part was just new and fresh to me while its substance might be as stale as the other material. Haley’s not a bad writer, exactly, though his writing style isn’t strong enough to overcome his faults; he just has unimportant events – or even important ones – take up too many pages and it feels like it takes forever before something happens again. He’s also better at description than dialogue, in such a way that the characters whose points of view are not heard from feel like entirely artificial constructs. 1.75/5 for book, 1.25 for mini
The Thorn Birds Pretty riveting stuff for the first half, but at no point was my thought “omg great writing.” The characterization’s pretty weird in terms of how insular it is; outside of the family there are few characters, and both within and outside of it most characters are incredibly thinly written. 5 of Meggie’s brothers are practically interchangeable, and the other 3 are almost as lacking in personality for most of the book. Luke and Meggie’s bosses have one-dimensional personalities. Even in the last quarter which awkwardly centers around not Meggie but rather her daughter, Justine isn’t very interesting, not enough to like her. The last part seems to be there primarily to provide a sort of happy ending, and Meggie’s too old to have the same kind of thing. I also kinda wish we could have found out what happened with Luke. I don’t really like Ralph much. Or Fee, though the confrontation with Meggie is one of the few highlights of the later part of the book. The war thing seems to be a tidy way to say, hey, this is historically accurate; I don’t think the twins even existed in the miniseries. Going backwards: The third quarter is pretty readable, but I think largely because the reader’s come to care for Meggie; not much happens in it that really touches. Well, I guess when Meggie confronts Luke; that was cool. Meggie and Luke’s beginning is enjoyable though it has the approximate depth of a VC Andrews novel. I can’t see this being reread material. The double death was quite sad, as was the Frank thing. So I guess that leaves the part making up the first episode of the miniseries. I liked the departures of two of Meggie’s brothers. Hmm, skimming quickly over the book shows how forgettable much of it is; the part that holds up best is composed of the first two chapters, which provides richer characterization and world-building than the rest of the book. However, the miniseries cuts them out entirely. Aside from that, it’s populated largely by unattractive over-actors; also I get why they had Stanwyck in lead and how she could win, but she really is not. She’s only in the first part though I guess it’s the best part and Meggie’s role is split there. Mary’s somewhat amusing, but she doesn’t do much besides popping in from time to time acting manipulative and wicked. I’m glad Audrey didn’t take herself out of retirement for that. Overall I am glad that I read the source material for the 2nd-highest rated miniseries; it was certainly more fun than Roots…though Roots was also best in the earlier bits and there too those were mostly glossed over. Glossy soap opera tomes, even extremely long ones, are still that: overwrought, fun, and leaving few substantial memories behind. 3.5/5 for book, 1.5 for mini
