Review: The Chronicles of Narnia: The Silver Chair (novel)

Camp NaNoWriMo starts on Wednesday. Depending on how well it goes, I may not be able to keep to the posting schedule. So this might be the last review until it's over.

The Silver Chair is the sixth novel of the Narnia series, but when it was published in 1953 it was the fourth book. It was adapted by the BBC in 1990. A film version is reportedly being made. (Don't hold your breath waiting for it.)

Like most of the books, the plot starts when people from our world find themselves in Narnia. Unlike the others, the Pevensies are nowhere to be seen. Instead the main characters are Eustace Scrubb, whose experience on the Dawn Treader has made him a much nicer boy, and Jill Pole, who's never appeared in earlier books.

As usual years have passed in Narnia. Caspian is now an old man, Trumpkin is mostly deaf and even more crabby than before, and Caspian's nameless wife is long dead. His son Rilian has mysteriously disappeared. So Aslan calls Jill and Eustace, gives Jill four signs she mustn't forget, and sends them to find Rilian. Their trip takes them to never-before-seen parts of Narnia, accompanied by a member of a never-before-seen species: Puddleglum, a wonderfully, well, glum Marsh-wiggle.

The book isn't quite as good as the earlier installments. When I first read it I was disappointed the Pevensies were barely even mentioned. The Marsh-wiggles are sadly underused. They're mentioned only in this book (The Last Battle doesn't count), and Puddleglum is the only one who ever actually appears. C. S. Lewis had a habit of creating fascinating parts of Narnia's world and then never elaborating on them. (The same thing happened with the winged horses way back in The Magician's Nephew.)

But it has enough good points for it to be my third-favourite book. It gives a glimpse of how large the world of Narnia really is; something that's easy to forget when Narnia itself is usually the focus of the stories. And Puddleglum is one of my favourite characters in the whole series. His delightfully gloomy comments are always good for a laugh 😆

Is it available online?: Not as far as I know.

Rating: 7/10.

Review: The Magnificent Century Season 1

It took me ages to make any progress with this drama. At last, after many breaks when I just couldn't be bothered watching it, I've decided to drop it. Here are my thoughts on what I did watch, and why I lost interest.

The Magnificent Century/Muhteşem Yüzyıl is a Turkish series that aired from 2011 to 2014. It was followed by a sequel, The Magnificent Century: Kösem, in 2015.

I didn't recognise any of the actors, so on to the plot.

The series revolves around Alexandra/Hürrem, starting when she's kidnapped and forced to become one of the Sultan's concubines. She eventually becomes Suleiman's legal wife, in spite of the other concubines plotting against her.

As I said in my first impressions of the series, the main problem with the story is how it pretends a deeply dysfunctional relationship is a grand romance. (I have no idea what happened historically; this is entirely the series' highly fictionalised version of events.) Alexandra loses her parents, her fiancé, her home, her language, her religion, and even her name when she's brought to the palace, but she's only upset about any of this for about half an episode. Then she falls in "love" with Suleiman and starts plotting to gain his favour like all the rest of the concubines.

In any other series that would be the grim, depressing tragedy of a woman who has everything taken from her and has no choice but to adapt to her new "home" to survive. This series pretends everything's just fine and dandy and look, Suleiman really loves Hürrem even though she's just one of God-knows-how-many concubines! Not to mention that part where he slept with Hürrem's former friend while Hürrem was giving birth to his child. There's no way to view that as a romance. It's more disturbing than some true crime documentaries I've seen.

The series doesn't even have the benefit of being interesting. It's incredibly repetitive. Every episode was another rehash of the "Mahidevran plots again Hürrem" story. Nor could I sympathise with any of the characters. They're all doing their best to destroy their own and everyone else's lives, and after the first two episodes all of them blurred together.

So, after eight painful and infuriating episodes, I've given up this series and have no intention of ever returning to it.

Is it available online?: It's on YouTube. I can't be bothered giving a link.

Rating: 1/10.

Review: Hard Times (novel)

Some of Charles Dickens' novels are rightly regarded as masterpieces. Others are more obscure. This is one of his little-known works, and for good reason.

Hard Times is Charles Dickens' tenth novel, first published in 1854. It's the shortest novel he ever wrote, with a conspicuous lack of the many subplots and colourful characters he's known for. It's been adapted into a silent film, two miniseries, and at least one stage version.

In some ways the story is reminiscent of North and South. It's set in a grim manufacturing town, and features trade unions, mill owners, and the misery of people who work in the mills. But it's also a harsh criticism of the sort of schooling that relies entirely on facts, with disastrous consequences.

My opinion of the book is divided between loving some of it and being bored by the rest. Sissy is the only character I truly like. Louisa frequently infuriates me -- especially when she married Bounderby. She hated him and no one forced her to marry him, so why accept his proposal?! 😒 On the other hand, the scene where she confronts her father and calls him out for his terrible parenting is my favourite part of the book. All the other characters are either boring or despicable. Tom manages the extraordinary feat of being both.

For such a short novel, Hard Times is relentlessly depressing. Everyone suffers whether they deserve it or not. Even the ending is bittersweet at best. It's easy to see why this book is largely forgotten. I'd recommend it only for people who are already Dickens fans and/or don't mind books full of endless misery.

Is it available online?: Yes, on Gutenberg.

Rating: 6/10.

Review: The Terror (2018)

I watched this series last year and meant to review it after finishing it. Of course, being the scatterbrain I am, I promptly forgot all about it until now. I known I've forgotten a lot about the series, but I remember enough to give my general thoughts on it.

The Terror is a 2018 period drama/horror miniseries, based on the 2007 novel of the same name, which in turn is loosely based on Franklin's lost expedition. I haven't read the book, so I don't know how closely it sticks to it. A second season aired in 2019; it was unrelated to the novel and set in an entirely different place and era.

I only recognised a few actors:
Jared Harris (King George VI in The Crown) as Crozier
Tobias Menzies (Prince Philip in The Crown season three) as Fitzjames
Ciarán Hinds (Edward Rochester in Jane Eyre 1997) as Franklin
Alistair Petrie (Major Gordon in Cranford) as the doctor
John Lynch (Nemo in Bleak House 2005) as Bridgens

The series starts with the expedition's two ships, Terror and Erebus, getting stuck in ice. Things quickly go from bad to worse when a monstrous bear starts hunting the crew -- and an equally monstrous member of the expedition starts killing those lucky enough to escape the bear.

I have to admit, it was a chore to stay interested in the series. The very first scene makes it clear almost everyone's going to die. That removed all suspense at once, and all that remained was to see how they died. It also meant I didn't care for any of the characters. What's the point of getting attached to people who you know will die horribly? (And very few of them are likeable anyway.)

After reading the plot summary I expected the Tuunbaq would be the main villain. Well, it's certainly one of them, but Hickey is arguably even worse. Not to mention the Tuunbaq has surprisingly little screentime. And its death is a real anticlimax. The rest of the series built it up as some supernatural monster that can eat souls, then it... eats Hickey and chokes to death. Or maybe he poisoned it; he was certainly vile enough. Either way, that left me wondering just what it was supposed to be. A real animal? A spirit? Some weird combination of the two?

The series has its good moments. (Since it's a horror series, "good" means everything from "suspenseful" to "terrifying".) The Tuunbaq's attacks stand out. I would probably have been more interested if it hadn't revealed the characters' fates in the first five minutes. As it is, it's not one of my favourites, and I'm not likely to watch it again.

Is it available online?: Not as far as I know.

Rating: 5/10.

(Not Really a) Review: First Impressions of The Magnificent Century

After several years of thinking "I want to watch this" and promptly forgetting all about it, I've finally managed to start this series.

The Magnificent Century is a Turkish historical fiction series based on the life of Hürrem, wife of Suleiman the Magnificent. This is the first time I've ever watched a Turkish drama. The first thing that struck me was how long the episodes are. Episode one alone is over one hour and forty minutes. I've seen films that aren't that long. Somehow I suspect it will take me ages to finish the series.

To be honest, I've never given much thought to Turkish history. What I knew about it before this series could be boiled down to three things: the Turks fought Dracula (the historical figure, not the fictional vampire named after him); whoever got the throne murdered all his brothers; and Turkey has a habit of committing genocide and lying about it. Even if the series isn't historically accurate, it still taught me about the sultanate of women and the existence of people I'd never heard of before.

Even if the story is sometimes predictable, the series is worth watching for the costumes alone. (Fun fact: I only learnt it existed by seeing pictures of the costumes on Pinterest and Tumblr.)

I've only watched the first episode, and I can already tell what my biggest problem will be with the story. Alexandra, later renamed Hürrem, was kidnapped from her home, taken to a foreign country, and made one of Suleiman's concubines against her will. It looks ominously like the series is going to portray their relationship as some grand romance. No, no, no. Setting aside whatever happened in real life, the series' version of events is disturbingly reminiscent of Stockholm syndrome.

So far I'm ambivalent towards this series. It's not utterly atrocious, but I doubt it will ever be one of my favourites. I'll write a longer review when (if) I finish it.

Review: Mary Poppins (novel)

I picked up this book expecting it would be like the Disney film. I was in for a surprise.

Mary Poppins is a 1934 novel by P. L. Travers, the first in a series of eight books. Aside from the most famous adaptation, it was also adapted into a Russian film and a radio drama. Not to mention a stage musical based on the Disney film.

The basic story is exactly what you'd expect. Mary Poppins becomes the nanny of Jane and Michael Banks, takes them on extraordinary adventures, and uses her umbrella to fly away at the end. But almost everything else is different.

First, Mary Poppins' personality is much harsher and colder than her film counterpart's. I can't picture this Mary Poppins ever singing "A Spoonful of Sugar" or "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious". This was the most jarring difference. It took me a long time to warm up to this version of the character.

Next, the Banks have four children, not two. Bert exists, but he doesn't have the film version's character. (Thankfully he doesn't have the atrocious accent either.)

But by far the most unexpected are the adventures Mary Poppins takes the children on. They don't ride merry-go-round horses or get sucked up chimneys here. Instead they see a woman and her daughters climbing up ladders to turn sweet-wrappers into stars(!) and travel around the world with a compass. Though they do have a tea party on the ceiling.

I recognised some incidents and characters from the film. But by and large the film and the book are two different stories with different settings. Not quite what I expected, but still entertaining. You'll probably enjoy this book as long as you know beforehand that it's not much like the film.

Is it available online?: Not as far as I know.

Rating: 7/10.

Review: A Gentleman's Guide to Love and Murder (Broadway, 2014)

I love so many musicals that it's impossible to decide which one I like best. This one might not be at the top of the list, but it's certainly in the top ten.

A Gentleman's Guide to Love and Murder is a 2012 musical based on the 1949 film Kind Hearts and Coronets, which in turn is based on the novel Israel Rank. I haven't read the novel, but I have seen the film. In some ways the musical sticks closely to it -- most notably, almost an entire family (including the women!) are played by the same actor.

I didn't recognise any of the cast, so on to the plot.

Like the film, the musical starts with the main character in prison for murder. The rest of the show explains how he got there. Two years earlier, Monty Navarro learns that his recently-deceased mother was actually an aristocrat who was disowned by her family. He's ninth in line to become an earl. So he decides to move up the line of succession by murdering everyone in front of him. Hilarity ensues, impossible though it sounds.

Now, a few of my thoughts while I was watching it.

For some reason our "hero"'s name has been changed. So has the surname of the family. But Sibella's name is unchanged. Why?

There are a lot of songs. And they're all incredibly catchy. (I caught myself humming "A Warning to the Company" while washing dishes.)

The staging of the reverend's death is frankly ridiculous. I know it's a black comedy, and a stage performance, but how did anyone think "staggering around the stage like a drunkard" was a convincing way to show "falling to his death"?

In the same scene Monty goes from acting out what happened, to sitting in his prison cell and writing his memoirs. The way he has to frantically rush from one part of the stage to the other, in full view of the audience, struck me as incredibly amateurish and better-suited to high school productions than Broadway. Couldn't they at least dim the lights to show the scene had changed?

That massive... curtain... thing in the middle of the stage leaves the actors with very little room to move around it. I spent several scenes expecting someone to trip or bump into it.

When I was annoyed or puzzled by the blocking I frequently found myself picturing how I'd stage a performance of this musical. (I suppose if I can't find any other job I could always try to get work as a theatre director!)

All right, so a black comedy isn't exactly the place to look for character development, but Sibella's decision to marry Lionel when she knows she won't be happy makes no sense. Monty just asked her to marry him, she knows he has money, and she certainly doesn't love Lionel, so... why?

For some reason Edith is renamed Phoebe. So Sibella and Lionel are the only characters to keep their names from Kind Hearts and Coronets. Again, why? If they were changing names anyway, why leave those two the same?

"Inside Out" had me in stitches XD A love song while someone's dying in the background should not be funny. But a love song where one of the singers is the murderer, about how the world would be better if we could see people's true natures? While the victim runs around chased by bees? Priceless!

Phoebe is Monty's cousin here, unlike in the film. I was confused. Was she going to become another victim? (Nope; she's one of the few D'Ysquiths Monty doesn't kill.)

All but two of the murders happen in the first act. Unfortunately, this means that the first act is much longer than the second. Too long, in fact. The second act feels incredibly rushed as a result.

"Why Are All the D'Ysquiths Dying?" is wonderfully morbid and funny. And it has some of my favourite lines in the show: "What a tasteless way of showing off!", "To lose one relative one can certainly forgive. But how can you excuse losing two or three or four or seven?", and "I can't imagine missing someone less." (Perfectly sums up my reaction to news of some people's deaths!)

Phoebe proposing to Monty while Sibella is in the house made me giggle even while being irritated by Monty and Sibella. I prefer the film's version of this sordid mess to the musical's. At least the film made me feel sorry for Edith/Phoebe; she did nothing to deserve being married to a serial killer. Here I was just impatiently waiting for the inevitable next murder and Monty's arrest.

The circumstances of Monty's arrest are different here. He's arrested for murdering the earl, and Sibella and Phoebe both pretend they're the murderer to get him released. The part that really annoyed me about this was when it's suddenly revealed Miss Shingle was the murderer this time. That comes out of nowhere and makes no sense 😒

Weirdest of all is the twist ending that there's another D'Ysquith still alive who's planning to kill Monty. I prefer the film's ending, especially the ambiguity about whether or not his memoirs were discovered.

Overall the musical is thoroughly entertaining and frequently very funny. The good parts outweigh the bad, and I love all of the songs!

Is it available online?: Yes, but I'd better not say where.

Rating: 8/10.

Review: Annihilation (2018)

Every so often you find a film that can't decide what genre it wants to be. Such films are almost always a mess. This one is even more of a mess than I expected.

Annihilation is a 2018 science fiction/horror/goodness-knows-what-else film very loosely based on the novel of the same name by Jeff VanderMeer. The novel is part of a trilogy, but the film is a standalone.

I only recognised three of the actors:
Natalie Portman (Jane in Thor) as Lena
Oscar Isaac (Poe in Star Wars) as Kane
Tessa Thompson (Valkyrie in Thor: Ragnarok) as Josie

Early in the film the main problem with it becomes only too apparent. The story keeps jumping around between the past and present. On its own that's not a problem, but the story also makes no sense. It feels like the writer, director, and actors all had different ideas of what the film was about.

Another major problem is the characters. To put it bluntly, they might as well be cardboard cutouts. They're interchangeable, unmemorable, and impossible to care anything for. I fast-forwarded until the main characters go into the Shimmer. Only then does the story become interesting.

The scenes in the Shimmer are really the only part of the film worth watching. They're incredibly eerie, beautiful, and terrifying. (In fact it was through seeing GIFs on Tumblr of the Shimmer that I first learnt of this film's existence. Let's just say I'd rather look at the GIFs than the film itself.) The bear attack is the most memorable, nightmarish thing I've seen for a long time.

Unfortunately, towards the end the film disintegrates into even more chaos. The alien's existence was easy to see coming. Its defeat and apparent death made sense. But then that final scene comes along and turns an underwhelming film into a mind-boggling mess. I wracked my brains trying to figure out what it meant. All I got was a headache.

If you want to watch a science fiction film, there are far better ones out there. (Pun unintentional.) If you decide to watch this film anyway, you're probably better off if you only watch the scenes in the Shimmer and stop the film as soon as the alien dies. That way you'll see the good parts without the boring or incomprehensible.

Is it available online?: I don't think so.

Rating: 4/10.

(Not Really a) Review: My Four Favourite Sites for Learning Languages

How is it March already?! Seems like Christmas was only yesterday 😮 Anyway, I'm back, my cold is gone, and life is slightly less hectic.

Instead of reviewing a book, series, or film, today's post will be about one of my favourite things: learning languages. More specifically, the sites I've personally found are helpful for teaching languages.

No. 1: Memrise

If you know me in real life you may already know that I'm learning German. It's an uphill struggle that's lasted at least two years, and I'm still nowhere near fluent. I've tried several different language courses, including books (verdict: not helpful; I need to hear words before I know how to pronounce them), CDs (verdict: more helpful), and websites (verdict: depends on the website). Memrise's German courses are the most helpful I've found.

In addition to German, it also has courses in almost any other language you can think of. To say nothing of courses in history, maths, geography, astronomy, and basically every subject imaginable. I haven't tried any of those courses, though, so I can't say how helpful they are.

No. 2: Duolingo

The helpfulness of this site depends on what language you want to learn. It's good for learning something like French or Spanish. It's nowhere near as good for learning languages with non-Latin alphabets, like Korean or Japanese. I tried both those courses a year or two ago. Unless they've changed something since then, the courses lack a transliteration option. That means that when learning Korean you'd better be able to memorise hangeul characters instantly, and when faced with Japanese kanji -- and no hiragana 😣-- you have to copy and paste the kanji into a Japanese dictionary just to figure out how it's pronounced.

Duolingo is also prone to making you learn very strange sentences. There are at least two Tumblrs dedicated to the weird and wonderful phrases it thinks every language-learner should know. They include "Insects can't speak Spanish" (you don't say!) and "The bee writes a letter".

No. 3: Forvo

Forvo is slightly different from the other three sites on this list. It isn't actually a language course. Instead it's a multi-language dictionary. Look up a word in, say, Norwegian, and you'll find an audio clip of a native Norwegian speaker saying that word.

Unfortunately, it doesn't have many words in lesser-known languages. If you want to know how to pronounce something in Georgian, for example, the word probably won't even be on Forvo.

(No image for this one 😔)
No. 4: JapaneseClass.jp

This one will obviously only be helpful for people who want to learn Japanese. I'm not actually studying Japanese (yet), but occasionally I'll do a few lessons to make sure I remember hiragana/learn a few new kanji/guess at what the actresses are saying in a Takarazuka production. This is the most helpful Japanese course I've found: it provides the hiragana or katakana for kanji, it teaches both kanji and vocabulary, and it actually shows how to draw kanji.

If you're interested in learning languages online, I hope this post is helpful! And if you already are using online language courses, feel free to comment with your favourite ones!