Stardust-- Neil Gaiman-- Comparison Book and Film

Stardust was produced in three formats, a graphic novel, film, and a book. I am going to focus on two of them, the book and the film.

Neil Gaiman's Stardust was produced both as a film and a book. I liked the book far better than the film. There was a lot that was very different between the film and the book. Neil Gaiman apparently was inspired by Charles Vess's drawings to write Stardust.

The novel is far different than the film. There is much less violence in the novel and it is definitely more of a love story than an adventure story in the book. The ending where there is a huge battle between the three witches and the hero simply does not happen in the book. The witch cannot have the Star's heart because she has given it to Tristan Thorne because she loves him. It is no longer available for the Lilim to take.

Also the "Babylon Candle" is black magic in the film. I have no idea why they did this. Maybe they were appealing to people who believe all magic is evil. In the book, it's magic comes from the magic of nursery rhymes.

"How Many Miles to Babylon
Three Score Miles and Ten,
Can I get there by candlelight,
Yes, there and back again.
Yes, if your feet are nimble and light,
You can get there by candlelight."

Also a little man gives Tristan Thorne his candle in the book. Maybe the little man is a leprechaun. A person who helps him in the land of fairy.

There is another nursery rhyme in the book which occurs, the lion and the unicorn. Here it might have made sense if Tristan Thorne helped save the unicorn from the lion. Here is the rhyme. It is not clearly explained how the unicorn appears in the film.

The Lion and the Unicorn Were Fighting for the Crown
The Lion Beat the Unicorn All About the Town
He beat him once, he beat him twice
With All his might and main
He beat him three times over
His power to maintain

I rather like this hidden allusion to Tristan Thorne's royal blood. I also like how it describes Tristan Thorne and the Star riding the unicorn in the book. The unicorn is still a very beautiful animal in the film. This would not fit well with the theme of magic being mostly bad in the film.

The way magic was shown in the film was quite sinister. At points it became ridiculous. An old woman shooting flames at Septimus the lord of Stormhold in the final battle seemed overdone. It seemed like the final fight scenes were put in just for special effects.

Three was a lot removed from the film which I would have liked to see. I think, it would have been better if they had shown more of the "faery market" in its splendor. I thought they showed too little.

The best part of the film, I thought was the skyship, Perdida. I liked them catching lightning, dancing, and Tristan Thorne learning swordplay on the flying ship. It was really interesting watching a ship fly through the sky. Some people say that Robert DeNiro's playing a gay pirate was ridiculous. I thought it was funny. This was a very short piece in the book.

The countryside in the film was also very beautiful to look at. It had the feeling of green rolling hills where very few people live. Also the costumes were interesting to look at. They had a swashbuckling feel to them that you would see in historical romances.

There are also small differences in the book which did not appear in the book. Tristan's mother in the book had cat's ears and a tail. I guess this was a bit too odd for the film. In the book, the jewel which the Star wears is around her waist, not a necklace. It is also a topaz in the book, not a ruby. These little details changed the perception of the film ever so slightly.

Also, Victoria is in love with Mr. Monday, the shop owner, not the young fop in the movie. I rather like this a lot. It makes more sense in the book that there would be rivalry and loss of his job if Tristan Thorne worked for Mr. Monday. It is almost silly to see Tristan Thorne hit with a cane in the film.

The scene with the promise of love and following the star for Victoria is done right in both the film and the book. In the book, Tristan Thorne is let through the wall because they know he is part of faery. In the film, he has to fight an eighty year old man... This makes for a kind of silly inconsistency.

The film was enjoyable to watch with excellent cinematography, but it turned the story into a swashbuckling adventure film, rather than a fantasy romance.

Even the ending is different. Towards the end of the book, it is found out the star cannot bear children, yet lives on forever after Tristan Thorne dies. This is an allusion to the immortality of fairy. There is always a sadness which occurs when people with mortal blood love the fae. In the film, Tristan Thorne and the Star live happily ever after and have many children eventually becoming stars again.

I think Neil Gaiman created a different story for the film, one which would appeal to the swashbuckling fan. I would have preferred that he stick to the original story in the book which I enjoyed a lot more than the film. Still, the film was enjoyable enough to watch.

However, I wish they had not chosen to add unnecessary violence and chosen to portray the magic of faery as black magic or evil.

Morning Thoughts, Blog Traffic

This morning I got on the train to work. I was sitting drinking tea with lemon and honey. The train was mostly empty because it was a Saturday. It is very nice to be on an empty train with very few people around. It gives one an almost expansive peaceful feeling. I wasn't reading this morning because I wanted to have my head clear for the day. Sometimes, I don't read because I am tired or I just want to think of absolutely nothing and just sit.

It is also nice to look out the window. Usually, you see various brightly colored graffiti, tires, and industrial landscape. Sometimes there are patches of trees and greenery, or you can look out onto a street. It has a lulling effect.

It was rather odd. Directly across from me was poster. It had a picture of a happy fish and a sad fish. I noticed it was about something called The School of Practical Philosophy. I thought it rather odd that they might be teaching something like this. Apparently, it has been part of New York University since 1964.
http://www.philosophyworks.org/landing/who.php

The idea was rather intriguing. I am thinking a bit about it today. Sometimes, the right thoughts are everything.

I still haven't started writing my review for Superclass. I have to promise myself and you that I will start writing the review tonight. I usually write it out longhand then transfer it to the computer. Writing with a pen has a different feeling to it than writing on a computer. I like the feel of the pen on paper for the first draft of a review. I learn better sometimes when I can feel and see what I am doing.

I wrote some notes on the train home for the review. It is kind of awkward writing on a subway train. I feel a little cramped when I am doing it, but I do it anyway. So, I have enough material to write a review in the morning.

I also will watch Stardust by Neil Gaiman tomorrow. I actually finished watching it tonight. I would give the film three stars. It was light entertainment; not as good as the book.
___________________________________________________________________

I am thinking about blog traffic today. I tried something a little nutty today. I clicked on 300 entrecard adds, it took me five and a half hours. It seemed to be almost a waste of time. I wanted to see what the results would be.

Like most people, I am trying to increase the traffic to my blog. It seems to be an incredible popularity contest. The first person who has the most traffic wins. Of course, they don't win anything monetarily unless they are selling or advertising something. I actually do have a goal. I would like to have by December, 1000 unique visitors per day. I know this is a tall order. I don't intend to buy advertisements to do it either. It is a kind of wishful goal that points towards creating a very popular site.

One of the things, I know I will have to do is learn how advertising writing works. One of the most successful science fiction writers, Frederik Pohl, wrote advertising copy. One of his most successful books was The Space Merchants, a classic of science fiction. I think part of his success was writing in a style that sold the book to the reader. I think many of the bestselling books on the New York Times list do this. They don't just write the novel to write a novel, but to sell an appealing idea to the reader.

Morning Thoughts, Grammar

I am looking at a paperback copy of Neil Gaiman's Stardust. I just checked it out. There are ten movie stills in the center of the book. The book also has a movie cover picture on it. People who collect paperbacks would love this book. Some people just collect paperbacks for the pictures inside them and the covers. They don't seem to even want to read the books. It is very odd. I tracked down the last New York City Paperback and Pulp Expo in 2007. http://www.gryphonbooks.com/Gallery/DivaAd.html

There are various types of people that seem to love paperbacks. Some love the old style lurid book covers. The Hard Case Crime series of paperback are very interesting. The covers are a revitalization of the Gold Key style cover. Mickey Spillane would have loved these books. They are very well done. I have even read a few of them.
http://www.hardcasecrime.com/

I happen to like the shadow a lot. The best way to experience the Shadow is not as a pulp or a comic book, but on the radio. However, I did very much like the Michael Kaluta comic artist version of the shadow a lot. The shadow is the best of the old style heroes in my opinion. I could never get into Doc Savage, or the Spider Master of Men. The old pulp covers are beautiful to look at.

___________________________________________________________________

I took some time and looked through various bestseller lists. I put In Defense of Food: An Eater's Dilemma by Michael Pollan on hold. I found it shortly after in the new books section. I will be reading In Defense of Food on the train on the way home. His previous book, The Omnivore's Dilemmma was supposed to be quite good. Two other books I put on hold are Name of the Wind by Pat Ruthfuss and The Accidental Time Machine by Joe Haldeman. The Accidental Time Machine is a Nebula awards finalist.

___________________________________________________________________

I have been thinking about grammar recently. I want to read something entertaining about grammar and usage. I know it sounds like trying to find an interesting book on ball bearings or hand soap. The only entertaining book on usage that I know of is A Dictionary of Modern English Usage, by H.W. Fowler. I know of no other complete guide to english grammar which is both light and entertaining. Preferably, a book which would complement The Elements of Style or On Writing Well. Does anyone have a suggested title?