Showing posts with label nicholas sparks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nicholas sparks. Show all posts

March 27, 2010

MOVIES: “LAST SONG”


Miley Cyrus puts in a solid performance in the prolific novelist Nicholas Sparks' latest book-to-film offering: "Last Song." There's something genuine about this not-quite-sure-of-herself-yet, husky-voiced, sassy country girl singer-actress. In "Last Song," Ronnie's (Miley Cyrus) parents are divorced, and she and her little brother are spending the summer with their Dad (with whom Ronnie shares an exquisite musical talent). Only she hasn't forgiven her father (played with nuance by Greg Kinnear) for the break-up, and so has given up on music. Ronnie is real hard on her Dad. Real hard.


Ronnie makes some new friends, including a beau named Will (Miley's now real-life boyfriend, Aussie Liam Hemsworth). So much of "Last Song" looks and feels like "Dear John": the hunky blonde, the seaside summer romance, rich parents with expectations of a different match for their child, etc., etc. But it's a formula we like and a formula that works. (Channing Tatum was a better actor than Amanda Seyfried in "Dear John," and Miley is a better actor than Liam in "Last Song.")


Ronnie is righteous. Almost too righteous. Her unswerving commitment to justice can burn even those she loves. The message of this film—in contrast—is: "Nobody's perfect, we all make mistakes." Over and over again. The film doth protest too much! At a certain point it sounds like making excuses.* And it sounds like just generalized excusisization, not just about the divorce. It is said in the film that love is a "fragile thing" that we just hope lasts. I understand that 1,000,000 things can go wrong between man and woman, but I don't believe that love in general (of which marriage is the core and epitome) is fragile because love is not just a whimsical feeling that comes and goes. It is attraction, sympathy, friendship and a commitment of the will. "Love is strong as death" (Song of Songs 8:6). Please note which book of the Bible that's from. How apropos.


Part of Nicholas Sparks' genius is that he has something for everyone. The little brother (played by Bobby Coleman) is an astonishing little actor and quite the comedian (as are many in this next generation of thespians! They're a bumper crop!) His tears were so real and he looked so distraught that he kind of acted everyone else under the table (without overacting). As in "Dear John," everyone's perspective, everyone's story is given a full hearing, everyone in the audience can relate to at least one of the characters. Sparks seems to be offering healing for relationships, healing for families through his tales. He creates webs of love and forgiveness. There's a sweetness and cordiality to his characters' interactions that are almost instructive. "Life is what you make it," is what his stories seem to say. "It doesn't have to be this bad, this harsh." "Just have a little courage." Sparks is a master at small dramatic, romantic moments. Just Ronnie and Will taking turns stealing glances at each other is like a sonatina.


The visuals are a smorgasbord: mud fights, sea turtles, piano playing, stained glass making, volleyball, trying on dresses. Again, something for everyone.


The dialogue and scenes, for the most part, are to-the-point, not idle, believable, amusing and well-calibrated. Just what we need to know, then a twist and on to the next thing. Some of the dialogue is throwaway and expected. When Ronnie finally lets down her guard with Will, she quickly throws it back up again because she is afraid she is just one of many to him. Will begins feeding her the lamest lines which she doesn't buy and so he just shuts her up by passionately kissing her and all is well again. There are lots of little scenes to deliver us bits of information and make sure we're tracking. There are some rather stretched out saccharine scenes that the audience in my cinema didn't seem to mind. They only whooped and hollered at what they LIKED. (I've noticed that free screenings seem to bring out the whoops and hollers.) News of a super-tragic death suddenly drops like a bomb to add some gravitas (which almost made me laugh, but then I would have been the only one in the theater laughing).

Maybe audiences eat up the slight melodrama and schmaltzy moments because it's actually something new for them (although it harkens back to "old movies"). We don't see/hear any of these tender things in movies any more, and I think we're starved for it! Another incredible feat Sparks has accomplished is that women AND men like his love stories and they watch them together--just like the "old days."


___________
We do a lot of skits in the convent. One was "I'm Only Human!" about all the excuses we could make for ourselves. Ha ha ha.




MY 10-MINUTE INTERVIEW WITH NICHOLAS SPARKS (COURTESY OF GRACE HILL MEDIA):


Q: You seem to be single-handedly saving the love story genre. WHAT IS YOUR SECRET???


A: There's really no secret. I write stories for myself, for my readers. Something everyone will enjoy. I try to always write something better than anything I've ever done.


Q: Why do you think even TEEN BOYS like your movies?


A: Because they're GOOD STORIES! They can relate to them. It's their own experiences, which makes the story feel more real. Or at least you'll know someone like that. Or some girl like that. And I let them know what that girl is thinking!


Q: Why did you choose the romance genre to write in?


A: I write love stories, not romances. They can be kind of sad subjects. My first novel was "The Notebook," which was inspired by my wife's grandparents. It did so well that I figured: if it ain't broke, don't fix it, keep going.


Q: What's your creative process? Where do you get all your ideas? You seem to have so many!


A: Well, I do have a lot of ideas, but most of them are bad! Ha ha. I get 10,000 ideas and have to discard most of them. Some sequences of ideas just feel right. Yes, sequences of ideas. I'm always thinking of my next story. It needs to feel fresh. It takes me four to five months to write a story, then one month to edit it. I keep asking myself about the characters: Is she 17 or 30? What difference would that make?


Q: So the characters don't come to you fully formed?


A: No. I keep working with them. Sometimes I know one or two things about them that I know is intuitively correct, but the rest comes later. Like I didn't know right away that Ronnie reads Tolstoy.


Q: What are your inspirations as a writer?


A: I read a lot: novels, non-fiction. My family is also my inspiration.


Q: I know that some fiction authors don't read fiction while they're writing fiction….


A: Oh, no! Not me! I could never do that. I love to read. Reading is my passion. I read all the time.


Q: How does faith inform your writing if at all? [Sparks is Catholic]


A: A lot. When you're writing a love story, the characters can't be together. You have to find a reason to keep them apart. The easiest reason is that one character is married, and I'll never write adultery in (or profanity). I put in explicit faith if it's integral to the story, like in "A Walk to Remember."


Q: But you do put in pre-marital sex, like in "Dear John." Why?


A: Because nobody's perfect. I won't put in sex between teens, though. Only when they're older.


Q: You make writing sound so simple! But it's hard to write simple.


A: Thank you. That's sweet.

February 6, 2010

MOVIES: "DEAR JOHN"


Just in time for St. Valentine’s Day, “Dear John” is a love story based on the novel by Nicholas Sparks (“A Walk To Remember,” “The Notebook”). Judging from the popularity and solid romantic weavings of these earlier novels-to-movies (let’s just skip over “Nights in Rodanthe”), “Dear John” is going to be another favorite.

Set in Charleston, South Carolina, John (super-cute Channing Tatum) is a soldier who falls for a college student, Savannah (Amanda Seyfried), while he’s on a leave one summer. The chemistry is palpable and these two really seem meant for each other. But of course there are complications, and I don’t think I’m giving anything away when I say there is a “Dear John” letter involved.

There’s really nothing earth-shaking in the story or the relationship of John and Savannah, except that it’s refreshingly ordinary, and although the sexual tension can be cut with a knife, their blossoming, unselfish love includes other people: John’s reclusive Dad and a neighbor’s autistic son. There are different kinds of love here, all overlapping.

Savannah kind of sets the tone for both of them. She’s a good girl, he’s a reformed brawler, but they’re not so different that they don’t quickly find common ground. These are two very believable characters and two very good actors, so it’s easy to get caught up in their tale. The direction is seasoned and seamless. No gimmicks, not too much melodrama.

Critics despise two kinds of movies: comedies and sentimental tearjerkers, no matter how much audiences embrace them. Is “Dear John” a tearjerker? Not really. I didn’t shed any brine. But it does portray that kind of love that we all want (although the sacrificial aspects of their love are sometimes strained, outlandish, and a bit unfathomable). Actually, a weakness in the story is a never-satisfactorily-explained sort of faithlessness on the part of one of the lovers. But the human heart is fickle. But we don’t want to be reminded of that. Not by Nicholas Sparks. (Dude-what were you thinking? )

“Dear John” also reminds that unselfish love is really, really hard. Waiting can be really, really hard. I am reading “Love and Responsibility” (by the Venerable JP2G) which is so encouraging by its acknowledgment of this, and a philosophical dissecting of the same. During the movie, the Keith Green song kept going through my head: “You Put This Love In My Heart,” reminding me that only God can make us capable of truly self-giving love.

The acting—especially on the part of Tatum--is inspired (and I’m not just saying that because he’s super-cute). What many people don’t realize is that close-up, constantly emotive acting is the toughest kind of acting. While we may think soap operas are cheesy (albeit addictively cheesy), they are proving grounds where actors cut their teeth. Tatum masters a wide range of facial expressions and guymotions (guy-emotions: yeah, I just made that up) that make “Dear John” what it is. There’s a humility to his acting—as though he realizes he’s still new at this, but he’s also a complete, gifted natural. Okay, end of gush.

I don’t like being manipulated any more than the next movie-goer, but what’s wrong with tenderness? Isn’t that what the world needs more of?

“Dear John” never lags, and there are a few lovely twists at the end, but it also feels like there are too many endings, and the final ending is rushed and a little bit meh.

There’s one pre-marital sex scene (not terribly graphic) and one “really bad judgment on the part of a married person” scene. It’s strange to me that sex SCENES can still be PG-13, while three uses of just the “F” WORD warrant an automatic “R”-rating.

Nice modeling of dating conversations.

The war scenes felt authentic, but the lack of some kind of PTSD didn’t feel too honest.

OK. What's with gals wrapping their legs around guys when they kiss, or just say hello? I know this has been going on for a while now, but that doesn't make it OK in my book. It's too much. It's inappropriate. It's explicit. I know they don't mean it to be, but am I alone in this?

Nicholas Sparks seems to like to put actual WRITING in his novels/movies: “Message in a Bottle,”“The Notebook,” “Dear John”—could this pattern have something to do with the fact that he’s involved with the Creative Writing Department at Notre Dame?

Final verdict? Keep cranking ‘em out, Mr. Sparks!

OK—I’m going to put the actual trailer here. I don’t usually do that on purpose because then you’ll think: “I don’t need to read Hell Burns© review! I’ll just watch the trailer and make up my own mind!" OR “Hey, now that I’ve seen the trailer, I don’t need to see the movie!” I put it here to show you the acting chops of you-know-who. This is one trailer that is utterly faithful to the movie. It’s no better or worse than the movie. What you see here is what you’ll see in the movie.

OK, I just checked www.imdb.com and it's not just me. CT has no less than 5 films in development and 3 in production. Case closed.


Bookmark and Share