"Winter's Bone" was the first movie I saw Jennifer Lawrence act in. It convinced me that she's very, very good. It's an excellent film - worth a couple hours of your time, though I must warn anyone interested that it's pretty gruesome.

Frieda, Spain and Portugal were great, although I have to say it was the most strenuous trip I've ever made. Those old monasteries and palaces certainly had a lot of stone steps, not to mention spiral staircases. The one in the Cathedral in Evora (the whole town is a National Heritage Site) about did me in!

The library in the San Lorenzo Monastery in Escorial was breathtaking, and I feel the need to re-read Hemingway after the lectures about the Spanish Civil War.

Kathy, I'm definitely interested in "Winter's Bone" so thanks for the warning.

Carolyn, where did you start your itinerary -- Portugal or Spain? Of all the places you've been, will the Iberian peninsula or a particular part of it now be included among your favorites? I think it's fascinating that Evora was a Roman conquest. I looked it up to view photos and wound up reading the whole entry and I followed several links.

Where do you plan to go next? :-)

I highly recommend the film of "Winter's Bone." I've watched it several times and found it unforgettable. I'm also a fan of Jennifer Lawrence -- such a strong actress!

I agree about "Doctor Zhivago" (film vs. book). David Lean's interpretation is well-nigh perfect, in my opinion. I could not get into the novel at all.

Frieda, We began the trip in Barcelona and went south in Spain, ending in Portugal. In your Googling, look up the Jeronimos Monastery Portuguese custard tarts. That may have been my top experience. I enjoyed the trip very much; but no, it isn't a place I'll want to revisit. London is my all-time favorite city and England (1) and Scotland (2) my favorite countries. I really can't explain why. My husband feels the same way about Paris.

He has some heart problems and doesn't travel many places anymore, nor does my son-in-law. My daughter is my travel buddy, and their son graduates from college next spring. They are currently planning a family trip to Australia in the winter, so she and I likely will not go anywhere together next year. Bud and I may go back to Hawaii for some R&R; we never tire of being there.

Yummy! I love custard tarts. The Googled photos of the Jeronimos Monastery ones look luscious. Lucky you to get to actually taste them. If I could only collect all the most scrumptious food in the world . . . well, it's probably a good thing that I can't!

I prefer countryside to city; but of all the cities, I'd probably choose London as my favorite as well. It's certainly not because it is one of the most beautiful -- it's hardly that -- but it appeals to me on several levels, some of which don't actually exist any more.

I'm terribly fond of England and Scotland, too. I love rural France, but Paris -- although I thoroughly enjoyed living there and like to revisit it from time to time -- isn't the be-all and end-all of France that many Parisians think it is.

Your daughter, son-in-law, and grandson should love Australia. I haven't seen near enough of it.

I'm partial to the Islands myself. :-) Sometimes I just want to park at home and stay in one place for, say, six months. It doesn't usually work out that way, though.

Oh, Carolyn, I meant to mention that Governor Ige is trying to get a handle on the homelessness situation, particularly on Oahu. I don't know if you saw the homeless when you were here on your most recent trip, but some of the beaches have/had tent cities springing up. Lots of the homeless are from mainland U.S. and many other places. The draw for them to HI seems to be that they may not be able to afford to pay rent but at least they won't freeze to death. I just wonder how they managed to get here. The world sure has become a strange place.

Carolyn, there is much to see in Australia once you get used to the idea that there are little pockets of 'stuff' with large amounts of 'not much' in between. But please do suggest that your family visit Kangaroo Island, which is off the coast of South Australia, and accessible by bus and ferry (or car and ferry) from Adelaide. There is lots to see there, most notably some of our unique wildlife. It's something often overlooked by overseas visitors who only visit the east coast.

Kath, sadly for me it is the "not much in between" that I am having a problem with! I find travelling for long periods of time difficult now so am confining myself to visiting interesting places in Western Australia. I need to find someone to go with or an escorted tour like the one I took recently to Broome and Kununurra.

I would recommend Perth but that pretty city is being redeveloped and is more like a building site at present. It will look beautiful when it is completed but at the moment I try to avoid the CBD!

Kath, I have passed your comments along to my daughter for her planning file. Thanks!

Oh, and Frieda, we saw homeless people on Waikiki Beach (one man using an hibiscus bush as a urinal), and on our last morning my stepdaughter gave our leftover cereal and snacks to a discouraged looking woman. We were later told that this is frowned on because it encourages people, but she seemed really thankful.

Years ago on one of the other islands during the hippie age, we made a stop at a local grocery store/post office and were told that it was the place where the drop-out kids came to pick up their checks from home--which were being sent to them to keep them from coming home. I'm not sure that was true, but it was certainly sad to hear. I cannot imagine paying a child of mine to stay away.

Carolyn, that reminds me of the Australian "remittance men" who were also given money by their relatives to stay away from the UK.

Hawai'i has always had unemployed beach bums, and then the hippies came in droves in the 1960s and '70s (some of them are still around but they favor some of the other islands over Oahu). Most of the old-time vagrants were individuals, but in more recent years there's been an influx of whole families who apparently live together in tents, getting by through panhandling or doing odd jobs. The unwritten rule, if you are tenderhearted, is that it's okay to give these people food but not money.

Before a recent sailing trip, my son hired as a deckhand a young man who had been hanging around Ala Wai Harbor. He seemed knowledgeable and even made interisland runs with Jay (#1 son). He told us that he had been living on the North Shore (Oahu) in a tent for about a year with some 'pals' that he wanted to get away from. But less than a day out of Hilo when we were heading to Pago Pago, this young man, Fabian, got so seasick that all he could do was lie on deck or in his bunk and moan. We couldn't understand why the seasickness remedies weren't working for him. I'm not a very experienced sailor and I always get a touch of seasickness, but mine went away. We did manage to get him to eat a bit, but we were eight days out before Fabian revived enough to be of any help as a deckhand. At Pago Pago, Jay paid him off with some money and a plane ticket to Honolulu. We later learned that Fabian's problem wasn't seasickness only; he had been withdrawing cold turkey from something (don't know what).

I gave the above account because Fabian apparently is one of those kids whose parents washed their hands of him by sending him to Hawai'i and only occasionally contributing anything to his welfare. All of us felt so sorry for him. I doubt that I'll ever see him again, but I think about him quite often. I don't understand parents like that either, Carolyn.

Annpan, were the "remittance men" just ne'er-do-wells or were they criminal types in the UK?

Frieda, I believe that they were more social misfits than actual criminals. I Googled and found a couple of useful websites, like British Genealogy, that gave various explanations as to why men and sometimes women were sent away from their families.

Also I have read that some lower class women who were deemed unsuitable fiancees by a young man's family were given a "plaster" an amount of money that bribed them to go to Australia, with a family member sometimes. This was a one-off payment and enabled them to start a small business. Some romantic novels have been based on this.

Thanks, Annpan. I know I have run across the phrase "remittance men" somewhere, but I must not have researched it because I only had a vague idea what it meant. I'm thinking that it might have been in connection with Arthur W. Upfield, the writer of the Napoleon "Boney" Bonaparte detective books. If I remember correctly, his father sent him to Australia because Upfield wasn't making much of himself in England. His English wife and son were with him in Australia for a while, but they went back to England, leaving Upfield to wander Australia unencumbered. Have you read any of his mysteries? They may not be in your preferred subgenres, though. When you mentioned Broome in a previous post, I thought about his Widows of Broome.

On a separate but somewhat related subject: Have you read The Vines of Yarrabee by Dorothy Eden? I first read it circa 1969 and was quite taken with it -- enough so that I reread it quite regularly for a number of years. It's basically about an Englishman in about the 1820s who tried to establish vineyards at Parramatta. He thought he really needed an English wife to grace his house and give him social standing. He acquired the English wife, of course, as she is the main character. But he also had a relationship with a servant, a woman who had fled a prison colony. The story relates their lives together (the servant's too) for twenty-five or so years. It may not be great literature but I think it's very good historical fiction. I've never understood why The Thorn Birds got more attention than it. Btw, the "The Thorn Birds" television movie was a stinker! In my opinion.

Frieda, I agree about "The Thorn Birds" movie! They had to cut way too much of the story (and I think it was still 4 or 6 hours long).

Thank you for the synopsis on "The Vines of Yarrabee". I will have to read it!

Donna

I have The Vines of Yarrabee, but it's been so long since I read it that I've forgotten it. I'm probably the only person in the world who didn't like The Thorn Birds. My sister-in-law borrowed my copy and left it in a motel on a trip. She was mortified and wanted to replace it, but I asked her please not to.

I don't remember reading or watching The Thorn Birds. For some reason the author annoyed me because in interviews she seemed to be so cocksure! She boasted about her good memory which eventually got her into trouble when she was accused of plagarism of someone else's novel.

Carolyn, you're not alone. I read The Thorn Birds once and just did not get why it was such a sensation. I found a couple of McCullough's other books readable but nothing special.

Annpan, I thought that The Ladies of Missalonghi seemed somehow familiar when I read it, but I wasn't sure why until someone here at RP mentioned that it is essentially the same story as Lucy Maud Montgomery's The Blue Castle. The usual defense of this sort of thing is unconscious plagiarism, but it sure seems hinky. I notice, however, that The Ladies of Missalonghi is still in print.

Do you all remember Jane Campion's film "The Piano" with Holly Hunter and Anna Paquin when she was a child actress? I knew that Campion had written the original screenplay as well as directed it, but I ran across a novelization of the story by Campion herself and a co-writer. The film is stunning, in my opinion. The novel is quite good and of course it's faithful to the film!! (It's odd to write that.) I can't think of any other good novelizations of films. Can you? I wonder though: if I had never seen the film, would I have been as positively receptive to the novel?

Frieda, I think I may have mentioned about the Montgomery book before, it was quite a scandal then!

Agatha Christie and I believe someone else has written novels based on her plays so they should be true to the plot!

What I think is a bit cheeky is to advertise a book of the movie that varies a lot from the actual movie script. "These Foolish Things" isn't that close to "The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel" movie.

Frieda - "Stunning" is an apt description of The Piano (the film). It's one that does not fade from memory.

I just thought of another underwhelming movie adaptation. I was thoroughly engrossed by John Jakes' series of novels about the Civil War, but the movie (maybe TV miniseries) was really, really horrible! The only resemblances I saw to the original story were the character names and locations. The miniseries was basically a soap opera that happened to be set during the Civil War.

Donna

Annpan, I was going to give you credit for exposing me to McCullough's alleged plagiarism, but on second thought I wasn't sure so I said "someone here at RP" instead. I have noticed many things, after you have mentioned them, popping up in my reading. "Aha!" I think, "I recognize that from what Annpan said."

Kathy, I can't think of very many films that stun me. Oh, maybe I'm surprised the first time I see one (e.g., "The Crying Game") but on subsequent viewings, of course, the element of surprise is gone. But "The Piano" really did stun me and continues to floor me when I re-watch it.

Donna, did the movie/miniseries attempt to telescope John Jakes' novels? I haven't read them or know how many there are, but telescoping works so seldom that I don't know why moviemakers continue to do it. The only one that I can think of that I actually like quite well is "Master and Commander" -- which I think is a combined adaptation of O'Brien's first two books in his Aubrey-Maturin series.

The soap opera format must be an easy way to adapt books to film, since so many seem to devolve into soap operas. I have seen some good soaps, but they are just occasional gems among otherwise pedestrian vehicles.

I did think of another novelization of a film, actually a novella, that adds dimension to the visuals: Graham Greene's The Third Man. Again though, as in the case of Campion, it's the original author of the screenplay who novelized his own work. Greene evidently wrote a prose piece first to develop the screenplay and it was from that he later wrote the novella. I did a search for others but I had to wade through a lot of science fiction/fantasy works that I've never seen on screen much less wanted to read as novelizations.

Frieda, it's been a very long time since both the North & South books and miniseries came out! :) But my recollection is that the film was nothing at all like the books except for the character names. I recall in the books one of the main characters was a young Civil War officer (his surname actually was Main LOL) and he had a younger sister back home, who was doing the things many Southern ladies did to support the war effort. In the film version that sister was a horrible little tramp who was busy plotting how to "get even" with just about everyone she knew.

Donna

Frieda, I am so pleased that I mention things that you later recognise. I have always thought that my reading matter was rather trivial compared with the more serious works read by most of the RPers! However I do have quite a good background of recollections about books and movies etc. which is perhaps what you are referring to?

Speaking of truncated movies, I saw "Captain from Castile" many years ago and that only used the first half of the book, I believe. These days a teleseries would be made of the whole thing. The same applied to the movie of "A Town Like Alice." which stopped when the main characters met up again. The book has a whole lot more following on from there.

Why hasn't a teleseries been made of GWTW? Just about every other classic gets a second or even, like P&P several attempts. Perhaps no one thinks they could ever match the original?

Donna, in other words, the North & South screenwriter(s) improved things. ;-) Ha! The filmmakers probably thought they did. Don't you just want to take them by their scruffs and kick them out a door somewhere?

One film, though, that I admire absolutely actually does improve on sparse original material. It's director John Huston's last film, "The Dead", a labor of love that was adapted from Joyce's short story by Huston's son Tony, with the part of Gretta Conroy played by Anjelica Huston. I always liked the short story, but the film expanded Joyce's minimalist characterizations and some incidents not in the story were added in so seamlessly that when I reread the story I was shocked to not find them. One of the additions just blew me away: It's when the character played by Sean McClory recites "Donal Og" (also known as The Grief of a Girl's Heart), the 8th century Irish poem/ballad translated by Lady Augusta Gregory. I don't know what inspired its inclusion, but it was a stroke of genius!

Annpan, yes, it's your knowledge of books and movies and many other things.

Truncations are another pet peeve of mine. There was a big fad of them in movies during the 1960s and 1970s. I saw "92 in the Shade" (1975, with Peter Fonda, Warren Oates, Elizabeth Ashley, and Margot Kidder) and it ended so abruptly that the cinema audience just sat silently expecting the film to resume. It didn't, so people were muttering, "What the heck?" I liked the movie a lot, so I sought out Thomas McGuane's book, Ninety-two in the Shade (the number is spelled out for the book title but not the film) to find out what else happened. The adaptation was very faithful right up to the end -- the book ended or non-ended the same way! I later found out that McGuane had adapted and directed the filming of his own book.

The 1939 film of "Wuthering Heights" with Olivier and Oberon was cut short too. I never heard anyone outside my own family complain about it, however. That probably means that most people at the time didn't read the book!

I suspect you're right, Annpan, about any remake of GWTW. There was that film, though, of the sequel to GWTW, "Scarlett", from the much-hated book by Alexandra Ripley. I always liked Joanne Whalley since I saw her as Christine Keeler in "Scandal", so I watched the movie out of curiosity to see how she would play Scarlett. I think she did a creditable job. And Timothy Dalton had the look more in line with my own ideas of Rhett. Other than that, I can't recall much else besides some very green fields in Ireland when Scarlett traveled there! I wasn't as offended by the book sequel as some GWTW fans were . . . still are, probably.

Frieda, The Dead is one of my favorite movies as well. I've tried to read James Joyce but even the short stories are heavy slogging. The Piano is another movie I love.

Another one here who was stunned by "The Crying Game" and also loved "The Piano." (I have the music from the latter). I thought of a film that added extra dimension to the meaning of the book: "The End of the Affair." Taken from a novel by Graham Greene, I mean to recommend the early, b & w version of the book, NOT the more modern one. The early film is quite well-acted, true to the ethos of the story, and is quite subtle. Frieda, have you seen this?

Rosefolly, Dubliners is the only James Joyce I've managed to read and like, Most of the stories are quite good or okay, but "The Dead" is a little masterpiece. I've always been baffled by Joyce's novels, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man and Ulysses.

Another short story that was made into a wonderful film is "Babette's Feast" by Isak Dinesen. Come to think of it, that screenplay expanded on the story a bit and the characters especially were more fully realized. And what delicious irony! I love how the Danish sisters and skeptical Lutheran parishioners settle into eating the feast with audible contentment.

Hmm, maybe I have a thing for films where a good part of the 'action' is at the dining table. I like in "The Dead" when Mr. Browne asks where the applesauce is to go with the roast goose and Aunt Kate retorts that plain goose without applesauce is good enough!

Mary, I don't recall seeing the earlier b & w version of "The End of the Affair" -- is that the one with Deborah Kerr and Van Johnson? I saw the more recent one with Julianne Moore and Ralph Fiennes; directed by Neil Jordan. While I think that version is certainly watchable, I wasn't really taken with it. I can't remember specifics but I had the feeling that the point of the book was missed. Or maybe there was a lack of subtlety that you mention the earlier film had. I'll have to get both versions to watch and compare. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!

Frieda, yes, that's the one: Van Johnson and Deborah Kerr. Whoever plays Sarah's husband is also superbly cast.

I agree about "Babette's Feast."

Good morning all,

Jumping in a wee but late in the thread, but still wish to take part!

First off: The Martian. Fabulous book, fabulous movie. I am not a SF person nor am I particularly interested in science above and beyond the basics. The author seemed to take great pains to make the book accessible.

Under-rated:

The Moveable Feast by Ernest Hemingway. I am NOT an E.H. fan. But while the rest of my book club is reading The Paris Wife, (which I've read) I decided to try Hemingway's take on the time period. It reads like I am sitting in a café with the man listening to him tell me of his Paris adventures. Enjoying every page.

Most good books over 500 pages. Sadly, I think most of society lacks the attention span to tackle large books which contain depth. This frustrates me because so many of them are gems. I am thinking of books like The Sea, the Sea which is a Booker Winner, but still not read by so many who profess to love reading. And when was the last time Tolstoy was spoken of with anything other than, "Oh, War and Peace is SO LONG." Pet peeve of mine, I am quite sure.

PAM

PAM, I'm glad you jumped in! It's never too late.

I know exactly what you mean about A Moveable Feast. I like most of Hemingway's novels, as well. His machismo has never annoyed me as much as it bothers many female readers, although I can imagine it must have been a hell, of sorts, being married to him. What do you think about The Paris Wife?

I like many long books. I don't notice length when I'm engrossed. I've read excerpts of War and Peace, but not the whole thing -- though that's not because of its length. I've read Anna Karenina several times, though.

I've read all of the "Outlander" series by Diana Gabaldon. They are all 1000 pages, at least. Like Frieda, I get engrossed in the story and don't notice how long it is! Especially if I'm reading on my iPad.

Donna

I don't actually understand people's aversion to long books. If the story is interesting, what's the difference between one long book and three short ones? I do understand if the book is only long because of tedious padding.

I am quite sure that the folks here would not balk at a book due to length. But so many people who profess to love books like to stick within a comfort zone of less than 400 pages. I must peek at the bestseller list and check book length. Is there an "acceptable length" which caters more to the masses? It brings to mind the Harry Potter series.... love it or hate it, it did make reading fun again for millions of kids. And those kids did not complain about length... they complained when they got to the end of the book. Maybe we should start a fan club thread for books over 500 pages. Thoughts?

Frieda, Thank you! Perhaps A Moveable Feast gave me a new appreciation for E.H. and I will sneak him back onto my TBR list. I did love his comments about adjectives. And you are right... being married to him must have been a trial. He certainly seemed to live HIS life to the fullest without taking much time to see if his family or spouse was just as content.

PAM

Kath, I suspect some of the longer books are over-padded, sometimes. Yet what is padding to one reader can be fascinating digressions to another. Your point about one book versus three (that add up to the same number of pages as the one) makes sense to me, but maybe readers who prefer three short to one long just like more endings (I'm being semi-tongue in cheek).

PAM, I think that's a great idea about a fan club thread for long books. Please start one. It will be fun to see what books and opinions come out of the woodwork.

I read "Space" by James Michener and thought it was far too long...he could have ended the story about 500 pages sooner and it would have been fine! Even my friend who worked for NASA for years thought it was too much. LOL

I also read part of "Caribbean" by Michener. Each chapter was about a different Caribbean island, so I only read the ones I was interested in. :)

Donna

Although long books are just fine with me (I've read some great ones), I do find long paragraphs to be tedious. For me, a paragraph is overly long if it nears the length of a page. I recently stopped reading Hotel du Lac for that very reason. I kept feeling the need to review long paragraphs to remind myself of their true topics. That got old, so I placed the book in the "return to library" stack and moved on. Is anyone else annoyed by overly long paragraphs? It could easily just be me. Ha!

Yes, Kathy, I agree! I also like to have natural stopping places every so often. Sometimes I need to stop reading (like to clock in from lunch) and hate to quit in the middle of a scene. :)

Donna

Nope, Kathy, you're not the only one who gets lost in long paragraphs!

I don't know if you have tried to read Austerlitz by W. G. Sebald, but, if not, be warned: it only has ONE paragraph in 298 pages (paperback edition), interspersed with occasional photographs. If the photos weren't there, I would probably have given up.

Not only is there only one paragraph, a single sentence might take up a whole page or more. Sebald wrote in German and very long sentences are a characteristic of the German language. (It goes with their super-agglutinated words.) The translator was faithful to Sebald's German style, as much as she could be and still make it comprehensible in English. Mark Twain wrote the best spoof of reading German. He said something like: You have to read ten pages before you get to a verb.

Austerlitz is actually a very affecting story if the reader can keep track of where she is in it, so I'm not disparaging the story itself or the German style, really. I'm just noting its difficulty for many English-speaking readers.

I loved "Austerlitz" and admire Sebald's unique writing style. I've read all of his works but one.

I am not a fan of long books, but if the pacing is exceptional, it will pull me in. Two examples: "The Historian", and that old favorite, GWTW.

As for underated works, I submit the novels of Teresa deKerpeley. I think a couple of these would have made excellent films. I've never found anyone else who admired her books.

Regarding "Austerlitz", I should add that there is an underlying narrative which complements the print, which is the stunning b & w photos interspersed in the book, which make meaningful patterns. A brilliant author, who died before his time in a car wreck, a German living in England much of his life.(Sebald).

Frieda - No, I have not tried to read Austerlitz. I am astonished at the thought of a 298 page paragraph, and a one -page sentence. I don't think I could face that. Out of curiosity, however, I will take a look at it the next time I visit the library.

Kathy, I got carried away and have to make a correction. I remembered only ONE paragraph in 298 pages of Austerlitz, but actually when I skimmed it between my last post and this one, I found a break marked with a centered asterisk on page 32, and two other asterisks on pages 117 and 254, and actual indented paragraphs on pages 227 and 260. Those are all I could find. That ought to make things easier for a reader -- five paragraphs instead of only one! ;-)

My apologies for that misinformation. What I wrote about the sentences is true, however. I tried to find the longest sentence, but my eyes glazed over and I lost track.

Mary, the name of Theresa de Kerpely rang a bell with me. I searched for her novels and found three: Of Love and Wars, Arabesque, and Fugue. A few readers (five total) at Goodreads rated the first two (each with a 4.00 average), but no one wrote reviews and I couldn't find any reviews or synopses anywhere else, either. I'm thinking I read Arabesque, but I can't recall anything about it -- not even the subgenre. Could you give an encapsulation of that one or the other two or any others that you know about, please? I'll venture that TdeK's books are indeed underrated if not downright obscure. Were her books originally published in the 1970s or '80s or earlier?

Kathy, Austerlitz is not for the faint-hearted. We had a discussion here about a year ago (it is on page 6 here at Houzz) and it tested me to the limit.

Mary in my copy the b and w photos were very blurry . . . to me reading it was an intellectual challenge rather than a pleasure, as was How to be Both. In fact the Ali Smith was probably easier to deal with and was more 'readable' even if one didn't understand what she meant.

Frieda, I read all 3 de Kerpely works that you mention. It must have been in the 1980's. I found them to be romantic novels with intrigueing characters, set against a background of wars in Europe. I especially recall "Arabesque" had a curious setting in one of the former Soviet Bloc Iron Curtain countries. Her descriptions of the various folkways were marvelous and detailed. I would like to find these and re-read them. Maybe I liked them so much in part because I have traveled in the former Yugoslavia, Roumania, and Bulgaria in the 1960's.

When I first joined RP, we had a discussion of another of Sebald's books, I forget the title. It was when Russ was a member, and I think he led the discussion, having liked the work of Sebald, as much as I.

Freida - Thanks for the corrections. Not needed, but I understand you offering them. I'm like that too.

Vee - Thanks for the pointer to the discussion. I'll take a look.