Book Review: Maniac Magee

Title: Maniac Magee
Author: Jerry Spinelli
Release Date: 1990
Genre: children's fiction, family, adventure, cultural fiction, racism
My Rating: ****
Official Rating: Children's Fiction
Age Group: 14+ (probably good for 12+, just keep in mind the drinking problem)

Summary: Jeffrey Lionel Magee. His parents died in a train crash, and he spent the next eight years with his aunt and uncle. They couldn't share, so they had two of everything, except, of course Jeffrey.
Well Jeffrey eventually tired of the fighting and being shared. So he ran away. He ran very far away.
One day, Jeffrey wanders into the town of Two Mills. A huge war is going on, just below the surface, but he doesn't even realize it. Instead, he waltzes right in and crosses the boundary from one side to the other as he pleases. This causes all sorts of problems, and eventually Jeffrey has to face what he believes to be a complete lie: the difference between the people on West End and the people on East End.
Tensions rise. Jeffrey continues to wander. Until one day when he finally decides to bring the war to an end--so he brings a friend to a birthday party.

Word of Warning

• Racism. The people on West End are white, the people on East End are black. Each side thinks poorly of the other, almost considering them to be sub-human and forbidding any interaction between either side. Probably the most outlandish example of this is the McNabs, who build a "bomb" shelter from which they plan to attack the "enemies."
• Drinking. Neglect. Death. Divorce. Families for real, and families torn apart.
• A character sleeps in a zoo.
• A character dies a rather heartbreaking (but calm and peaceful) death.
• Characters are rude to one another.
• Someone hits a frog with a baseball bat (we're assured the frog is not injured).
• Lying, bribing, cheating, screaming, whining, all the stuff that kids will do from time to time. For the most part, they don't get away with it.
• "Trash talk". No actual words, but Jeffrey apparently learns trash talk while playing football, and is quickly told that is not to be used in the house but only on the football field.

My Thoughts
Right up there at the top of my list, this book. The author ingeniously chose the perfect narration style for a tall tale like this one, and it worked wonders on the story itself.
The story itself? It's a wild tale of a boy who completes crazy feats, sometimes for a cause, sometimes just to do it. It's an insane cast of characters who are just unique enough for you to fall in love with them (no matter how crabby), and yet just common enough for you to match them up with all of your own neighbors.
It's also the story of differences. Spinelli creates a mirror world in East End and West End, something a careful reader will notice. This mirror world is eventually forced to face the other side, and even that confrontation is well done.
Honestly? It's just a great book.

"They say Maniac Magee was born in a dump. They say his stomach was a cereal box and his heart a sofa spring. They say he kept an eight-inch cockroach on a leash and that rats stood guard over him while he slept. They say if you knew he was coming and you sprinkled salt on the ground and he ran over it, within two or three blocks he would be as slow as everybody else. They say....
But that's ok, because the history of a kid os one part fact, two parts legend, and three parts snowball. And if you want to know what it was like back when Maniac Magee roamed these parts, well, just run your hand under your movie seat and be very, very careful not to let the facts get mixed up with the truth."

With a beginning like that, how could it not be?

Book Review: Legion

Title: Legion
Author: Brandon Sanderson
Release Date: 2012
Genre: Adventure, drama, sci-fi
My Rating: ****
Official Rating: adult fiction
Age Group: 12+

Summary
"My name is Stephen Leeds, and I am perfectly sane. My hallucinations, however, are all quite mad."
Thus begins a mind-bending adventure in which we meet Stephen Leeds' hallucinations, or aspects, as he calls them. He's a brilliant man and essentially what happens is he has different characters in his head. One's a SEAL, one a therapist, another a history expert, then there's the one who speaks Hebrew...and so on until he has nearly all 47 rooms in his mansion filled.
Of course, no one can see or hear these aspects except Leeds, but he still gives them actual space, and thankfully so does his faithful butler Wilson.
Leeds is a recluse, hiding away from the scientists who want to figure out his "condition" but when a woman presents to him an interesting mystery, he agrees to go to Israel to try to solve it.
Afterall, why not try to find a camera that can take pictures of the past?
Well, one reason could be the terrorist group that wants to use it to destroy all major world religions. Or that could be a motivator. Either way, Leeds is off to Israel!

Word of Warning
Very few problems with this book. I think it's not put in children's or YA fiction just because it's not structured or targeted as one, but I think it really hits the three major areas (children, YA, adult) rather well.

• Language: damn, "oh my God", and bastard. Each time these are used (as rarely as it is), one of the aspects kindly warns "Language!"
• Terrorists. They attack, blow a car up, capture major characters, and torture/beat a man almost to death before shooting him. They also cut off his hand (but that's done before we meet him).
• Speaking of shooting, there is an aspect, J.C. (the SEAL) who is practicing his aim by shooting at a picture of bin Laden. He tends to request "Can I shoot him?" quite often, but I'm not entirely sure he's serious. He does come in handy when the terrorists are in the heat of a battle.
• Essentially, Leeds murders about five people in self-defense, but it's complicated by by the fact that he attributes this to J.C.
• The goal of the terrorist group is to prove all major world religions wrong. This is nicely contrasted by another character who is trying to use the camera to prove Christianity (more specifically Catholicism) true. And it's not that this character doubts it, it's that he wants to prove it to doubters.
• One of the aspects is very impressed by the man's persistence in remaining a serious scientist and a faithful Christian (probably Catholic). While this is really great, the aspect spends a few moments making it sound like these two things actually don't go together and should in a normal world compete. Eventually the aspect tries to conclude that they can work together, but the conclusion is a little weak when put up against his speech before it.

My Thoughts
It's a fast read, really only about 84 pages, mostly dialogue since Leeds spends a good amount of time talking to his aspects. It's fun, watching a character talk to compartmentalized information in his head that is manifested as characters. Plus the adventure is a fun, fast-paced story that isn't too complicated to follow but just enough to make you think, and just when you thought you had it, turns out you didn't.
And Leeds knows his aspects aren't real. He also thinks he can't live without them. But there's a mysterious woman who was teaching him how to control them, and himself, to get his life back into order. And he's torn between how much he loves life with his aspects, and knowing that he really needs something more from life, and something needs to change.
With something this easy and enjoyable to read, I can say two things: I'm off to find the rest of the series, and I'm interested to see where Leeds goes next.

Movie Review: Earth to Echo

Title: Earth to Echo
Author: Disney
Release Date: 2014
Genre: adventure, sci-fi, family, friendship
My Rating ****
Official Rating: PG for action, peril, and mild language
Age Group: 8+ (my only concern for this age group is the bar scene, mentioned below)

Summary
Tuck, Alex, and Munch. They're best friends, and suddenly, per a government ruling that a freeway will be built right through their neighborhood, they're forced to part. The boys are devastated and are pretty sure this is going to be the end of their friendship. But when their phones "barf" the day before they're all scheduled to move, the boys decide to have one last adventure together. They're going to figure out what is going on with the phones, no matter what it takes.
Tuck will, of course, film the whole thing. Always gotta have a good home video!

Word of Warning

• The boys all lie to their parents about where they'll be so they can run off to the desert, alone. Later, they're joined by a girl, who also lies. Another issue with this is how easily the boys get away with this, and for how long. It's clear that while their parents probably do love them, they're not paid nearly enough close attention.
• The group soon learns that in order to complete their mission, they need to break into various places where havoc results--not by their direct doing, but they do enable it.
• One of the places the group ends up at is a bar. People are partying and drinking, and an older woman at the bar buys some of the boys drinks (they bravely resist, and are luckily able to escape before they're forced to drink).
• One character goes on and on about how her father is a drunk (or an addict...it was hard to hear) and how she just wants to get away from him and her poor mother....All as a lie to distract someone whom she doesn't want asking questions. The whole story is completely made up and mumbled through fake tears.
• Someone gets left behind and caught by a security guard. He's rescued, and nothing bad happens aside from a mildly-harsh scolding from the guard, but this experience is traumatizing for the kid who is an orphan and living with foster parents. He has a fear of being left behind, and this experience does NOT help matters.
• The kids are eventually "captured" by government agents. They're questioned and while the most fearful of them breaks down and sobs out every answer asked for, the others don't seem nearly as scared. The agents themselves behave as children would imagine them to, not telling their parents and forcing them to do things against their wills.
• One of the boys tells a story about how he and a girl at school kissed in the bathroom. He rates the kiss as ok, saying that "he's kissed girls in better places" but this comment seems much more related to the bathroom setting than it does to other possibilities.
• One of the boys remarks that he'll be sleeping over, "In your mother's bed. Not playing video games", a comment meant to be inappropriate but honestly just really funny to an older audience because of how innocent and ridiculous it sounds.
• The kids end up at a teen party where there is clearly under-age drinking, passionate kissing, and one guy is passed out in the bathtub (fully clothed, alone, no implications made).
• Under-age driving.
• The boys, having met an alien, decide to do whatever they can to rescue it. Sometimes this means just following a map, but eventually it means breaking into places, trespassing, and breaking various other laws. At the climax, they decide to trust the alien, at the risk of hundreds of human families, and give it what it wants. It's not clear whether they expect the alien to harm the hundreds, but they do know it's a very real possibility. While this might seem honorable in terms of friendship, it's childishly short-sighted.

My Thoughts
There are a few texts that I am honestly impressed with their make up or structure. Finding Neverland captures J. M. Barrie so well and has such a beautiful supportive structure that, as a whole, it's a wonderful work of art. Sea of Tranquility uses alternating narration to navigate difficult issues in a way that is very human but also honest and open. Chasing Shadows blends narration with comic strips to give a sense of urgency and intense emotions. Salt to the Sea uses multiple narrators, finally circling each other in a fascinating way, to tell a story so horrible and yet so full of goodness you cry at the end, even if you're not a crier for anything else. And The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society uses letters to tell a great story, adding an edge that the story could never have in classic narration form. While there are others, they are sadly few and far between.

But this movie joins those ranks. Tuck is proposed as the "author" of the story, narrating, filming, and apparently later compiling the videos to create the final product. We're given his camera, the other boys' cameras, and the alien's camera. We're convinced that these are just boys adventuring, and honestly, it's so genuine I don't even know how someone wrote this. It makes me wonder if they handed the boys cameras and said, "You find an alien and it needs help" and let them go from there.
I know that's not what happened, but that's how well-done this movie is. It fits well as a whole. The dialogue, the characters, the structure, the camera, the music, everything--it comes together as an incredible whole that is worth seeing.

Movie Review: Pan

Title: Pan
Author: Warner Brothers
Release Date: 2015
Genre: fantasy, family, adventure, Peter Pan, British literature, children
My Rating: ***
Official Rating PG for fantasy action violence, language, and some thematic material
Age Group: 10+

Summary
Poor Peter and his friends. They're orphans in a very miserable orphanage, as apparently all orphanages always are. He wants his mother, and he's positive that she'll come back for him. But with WWII raging on outdoors, doesn't he have bigger things to think about?
Unlike all literary orphanages, this one has a crabby old nun (wait for it, I promise this is different)...who sells the boys to pirates who fly ships across the sky.
Wait, what?
Peter and some of the boys are kidnapped by Blackbeard where they are forced to mine fairy dust and fight for their survival. But Peter still wants his mother, and his new buddy James Hook wants to go home, so why not work together?
Just when they're ready to take off though, Tiger Lily shows up spewing nonsense about a chosen one, a savior, someone called the Pan. And she's pretty sure Peter is it.
So is Blackbeard, and he'll stop at nothing to get what he wants.

Word of Warning

• As mentioned above, Peter and the other boys live in a sad orphanage with a cruel nun character who is fat and ugly and basically a tyrant. She also sells the boys to pirates. She's just an all-around nasty character.
• As with any orphanage, there are abandoned children.
• The characters are not all together good, even though we're to believe they're on the good side. They break into places, steal, and do general mischief.
• The PG rating comes from fantasy action violence and thematic material. We see scenes where characters fall to their deaths, bombs are dropped (on England and on pirate ships), characters are nearly crushed by a falling metal car, there is an animated war scene (shown as historical of Neverland), an animated battle scene shows a woman made of bubbles being stabbed and dying, a man looks possessed when attacked by fairies (and quite honestly, attacking fairies are rather fierce), and so on.
• The mermaids apparently do not even wear shells. Their hair covers what is absolutely necessary. Tiger Lily wears a bandeau style shirt for significantly long parts of the movie. 
• There is a light, somewhat playful, romance that never amounts to anything physical (not even a hug).
• Blackbeard is using fairy dust to stay young forever. This can be (and should be) disturbing.
• An old man is shot and killed. Other characters die as well, though some of these deaths are meant to be comical.
• Brief mention of suicide, not as an action to take, but rather as a caution.
• The animals of Neverland are creepy and dangerous.

My Thoughts
If you're looking for something accurate to the original Peter Pan stories by J. M. Barrie, this isn't it. It's much closer to the original feel than, say, Hook starring Robin Williams and a grown up Peter Pan (wait, isn't that a contradiction?). However, there is much focus on family, knowing where one comes from, and heroism for the sake of doing the right thing. This is very much not the vibe of the original book.

But if you're looking for a well done movie with little known actors who are incredibly skilled, a fun fantasy adventure romp, this is a great option. I enjoyed it in theaters, and I enjoyed it again while watching it for research. It proposes some interesting questions, and I'd like to see how it is connected, eventually, to the original Peter Pan. By the end of the movie, you get the feeling this is the first half of a prequel to Peter Pan. I'd like to see where it goes from here.
And even if it goes nowhere, it's still a good, well done movie worth watching and enjoying.

Movie Review: Hook

Title: Hook
Author: Steven Spielberg, Robin Williams, Julia Roberts
Release Date: 1991
Genre: Adventure, Peter Pan, fantasy, pirates, family
My Rating: *
Official Rating: PG
Age Group: 10+

Summary:
Wendy Darling took the Lost Boys back with her and found them homes. That was once upon a time, long long ago. Peter Pan came back for Wendy, his "mother", only to find her all grown up with a daughter, Jane. So he took her to Neverland instead. That lasted about as long as Wendy's adventure did.
Then Peter Pan came to Wendy once more, only to find her an old woman. And in the little bed, her granddaugther Moria. Peter Pan fell in love--and decided to stay and grow up.
Now, Peter is a successful businessman in the US with two children (whom he never seems to have enough time for) and a beautiful wife. Off they go to visit Great Grandma Wendy and Tootles (who seems to live with her).
But when Hook kidnaps Peter's young children to take revenge on his arch enemy, Peter is confused. There is no Neverland, no Hook, no Tinker Bell. The police will find his children. Wendy's a sweet (but entirely crazy) little old lady.
Right?


Word of Warning

• This is more explicitly dark than the original Peter Pan stories. Hook is clearly evil and spiteful.
• The grown up Peter is focused entirely on his career and not on his family. This is often painful to watch.
• A character (appears to be in his teens) is stabbed in the back and killed.
• Mermaids are barely dressed, shells acting as bikinis.
• People are killed, some shot and some stabbed, and much of it is for comic relief.
• Language: ass, hell, damn, and God's name is used in vain a few times as well.
• Being Lost Boys with no guidance, the boys throw some pretty Dahl-esque insults at each other (think rude, potty humor, and just mean).
• In passing, someone says "I didn't do drugs. I missed the sixties. I was an accountant." This isn't dwelt upon.
• There is a suggested romance between Peter and Tinker Bell. Which is all fine and rather accurate to the original (though it was very one-sided, as were all girls' crushes on Peter, for interesting reasons I won't go into here), but Peter at this point is married. Eventually Peter does refuse her offer of a kiss, but it still feels very unfaithful.
• Women wear dresses that are a bit low in the front (this isn't counting the mermaids, mentioned above).
• A grown man because disturbingly childish.

My Thoughts
Me while I'm watching, "That isn't right. That's not how it goes. That's completely contradictory to the original! Why are they doing that? It goes against the original intention" and so on. My siblings, who were watching over my shoulder, rightfully hushed me with a, "Just enjoy the movie."
In my defense, I was actually watching it for a research project I am doing for a class. So it was my job to analyze it properly.
Still, they had a point. The movie on its own wasn't all that bad. Probably not interesting for kids, because an adult is the main character, and it's much darker (explicitly) than the other Peter Pan stories. And maybe not for people who are very familiar with the Peter Pan stories (because yes, there were many, even by Barrie himself).
It wasn't a bad movie. It wasn't a great movie either. And it doesn't capture the spirit of the original Peter Pan or any of his stories.

Book Review: Matilda

Title: Matilda
Author: Roald Dahl
Release Date: 1988? (hard to tell)
Genre: adventure, comedy, children's fiction, British literature, school
My Rating: ***
Official Rating: Children's literature
Age Group: 8+ (will probably require some discussion, not a read-alone book for this age)

Summary: Matilda is a very special little girl. She taught herself to read. She knows her times tables. She completely blows away her first year teacher.
Of course, her parents think she's stupid. But then again, they're not much better. Her father is a swindler, and her mother's goal in life seems to be to watch her programmes on TV. Her brother...well he doesn't even merit mentioning, aside from saying that her father seems to think the lad is very bright and has a future in the car selling business.
School, then, should be a safe haven for Matilda to really grow. It's not. With Miss Trunchbull as the headmistress, no child is safe at school. I mean that in a very literal sense. They get throw out windows and hung by their ears. Miss Trunchbull is a very mean woman.
When Matilda sees what Trunchbull does to the other children, and her beloved teacher Miss Honey, the little girl sets her brilliant mind to finding a solution and saving the school. Can she do it?

Word of Warning

•  Understand that this is classic Roald Dahl. He has a very British sense of humor (snarky, slightly rude/crude). This particular book is full of great insults. None bad words (so far as I know, given my limited knowledge of British English), but some real whoppers, nonetheless.
• Violence. Children are beaten, hung by their ears, and forced to do miserable things (eating a whole cake, standing in the Chokey (a torture device), and slapped about). This is cartoonish in terms of rules of the universe, which means everyone is fine and not injured, but it can still be rather concerning.
• Matilda is a completely independent child it seems like. She is not even five years old at the beginning of the book. She goes to the library and reads numerous mature books. She goes off to her teacher's house. She decides to live with her teacher (this, for some reason, requires the consent of her parents).
• Matilda's parents are stupid, and portrayed as such, and she likes to "punish" them for their stupidity by playing pranks on them.
• There seems to be a huge role reversal here with Matilda being the "parent" and her parents being the "children".
• It is implied that a man was killed by his sister-in-law.
• A trick is played in which it is pretended that a man (who is dead) writes a message on a blackboard to his implied killer.
• Roald Dahl tends to have a rather snarky slightly negative view of children, but in a more playful way than, say, Augustine's description of babies, or Barrie's description of children as happy, fun, and heartless. Still, one of the harsher words he uses to describe children is "scab" (something to be picked off as soon as possible).

My Thoughts
My first inclination as I was reading this book was to smile a bit and shake my head. Then I laughed a few times. Then I winced while laughing. Then I wondered what the target audience was, since it was getting pretty intense.
Overall, it was a fun book. Roald Dahl can be a bit crude at times when it comes to his language and stories, but he's still good entertainment, and Matilda is no exception.

Book Review: The Five Children and It

Title: The Five Children and It
Author: E. Nesbit
Release Date: 1902
Genre: children's literature, fantasy, adventure, family
My Rating: ***
Official Rating: Children's Fiction
Age Group: 4+ (good read aloud)

Summary:
While on holiday in their country house, five siblings decide to go exploring the gravel pit (going to it by the safe route). There, they find It. It is a Psammead (say: Sammy-add), or a Sand-Fairy. The Sand-Fairy is crabby and old and looks sort of like a furry monkey with snail eyes. If It's appearance is not enough for you, perhaps the fact that It can grant wishes will catch your interest. Yes, It can give you anything you desire, but whatever you wish is, it will turn to stone (or disappear) at sunset.
The kids try all sorts of things. They try for fun, they try for good things for their mother, and a lot of the time their tendency to say "I wish such-and-such" in everyday speech gets them things they never really wanted.
And what if you accidentally wish that everyone wanted your little baby brother? Or to live in a besieged castle? What then?

Word of Warning
There is very little here to warn about, which is why it makes such a good read aloud book for the family. I will say that even when things appear to be dangerous and the children in the book are worried, the reader never has that moment of panic and "are they going to make it this time?!" that other books can supply. It's not urgent, not scary, and more of a fun romp that offers instead the question of, "how will they wiggle out of this one?"

• The kids are normal siblings. They clearly love each other, but they don't always get along.
• There is a rather disrespectful representation of Native Americans. Not inappropriate, but rude. The same can be said for a band of gypsies.
• Speaking of rudeness, while the children never swear, they are not above tossing out an insulting comment now and then to each other.
• Kidnapping.
• The kids are not always big fans of having to bring their baby brother with them.
• It has been proposed that the representation of girls and boys in this book is lopsided and slightly sexist. I honestly see it more as little children just being little children, but it does merit at least mentioning.
• The narrator is different from our usual American children's literature. This can be challenging for the readers to handle sometimes.
• The children never learn their lesson. It feels like they just might, but then they don't, and they wake up in the morning and repeat the whole ordeal all over again.

My Thoughts
 It's fun. It's British. It's cute. It's a romp.
There are no obvious lessons or morals (though some are debated). This is not a preaching book. It's really just a fun adventure with British children as they enjoy their summer home. This is a fast read, and one you probably do not want to miss out on, especially if you have the opportunity to read it aloud to a younger audience.

Fun Facts

• E. Nesbit was a rather controversial figure and would be considered so even now, let alone during her own life time. She preferred to write adult fiction, but her children's fiction sold better. Strangely enough, she wasn't a big fan of children.
• The book was published as a serial novel in The Strand. This might be why it feels so episodic, to the point where you could reorder the chapters and have very little difficulty understanding the story.
• Over the years, this book has been offered numerous sequels from many different authors. It was a huge hit in England and has shaped many aspects of children's fiction for a very long time. C. S. Lewis writes about how she influenced his Narnia series. There are also many film adaptions.
• Since its publication in 1902, it has never been out of print.
• Nesbit also wrote the children's classics The Railway Children and The Treasure Seekers.

Book Review: The Club of Queer Trades

Title: The Club of Queer Trades
Author: G. K. Chesterton
Release Date: 1905 (pre-conversion)

Genre: mystery, adventure, humor, morals
My Rating: ***
Official Rating: fiction (adult)
Age Group: 12+
Students' Rating: "confusing but funny"

Summary
A collection of G. K. Chesterton's writings about Basil Grant, this novel is more episodic than the classic novel we are used to. It revolves around men belonging to the Club of Queer Trades, where one must create an entirely new way of earning an honest living in a way that has never been done before. Basil Grant, likely a precursor to Fr. Brown, left his job as judge long ago, apparently having gone crazy. Now, he wanders about England with his brother Rupert (a mockery of Sherlock Holmes) solving apparent mysteries that, well, aren't nearly as mysterious and criminal as they appear.
 
Word of Warning

• Mention of opium
• Mention of adventures that involve going to different countries and killing animals for sport
• Fist fights
• Apparent danger, prisoners
• Some slightly immoral businesses. Not immoral along the lines of inappropriate, but immoral as in not morally right.
• There are lots of things that simply have to be interpreted a different way for them to be understood as not crimes but merely interesting ways of living.
• Basil is a mystic and stargazer (among other random things)
• Characters smoke

My Thoughts
Think the beginnings of Fr. Brown and Manalive. It's got enough misunderstandings, moral and philosophical murmurings, quirky characters, ramblings, bashing of others' ideas and authors (Darwinism, Doyle, etc), and Chestertonian-ness to be amusing and full of insights. These are fun little capers that are just quirky enough to keep you smiling and reading. Sure, there's a lot going on, and it's not the best of Chesterton's writings, and it doesn't hold together well. But it's still a fun read that can be thought provoking.
At the very least, it's very, very interesting to watch what new methods of work/income GKC can come up with. There really is no end to this guy's imagination.

Movie Review: Captain America: Civil War

Super excited to welcome a new student author, reviewing, of all things, a contemporary movie which came out less than a week ago. For the future, if we do not have a review of something you're looking for, you can usually find something at Plugged In.


Title: Captain America: Civil War
Author: Marvel
Release Date: 2016
Genre: Action/Adventure, Superhero, Sci Fi, Fantasy, drama
My Rating: 4.5 Stars!!! (****)
Official Rating: PG-13
Age Group: 13&older

Summary:
Helmut Zemo’s family was killed by one of the Avenger’s exploits, making him vengeful.  To try to get even, he devises a plan to tear the team from the inside, which would prove much more effective than trying to kill them himself.  When certain events happen resulting in deaths of innocent people (including the king of Wakanda), the world starts seeing Superheroes as more of a threat than a safety.  In an attempt to make things right, the United Nation’s government makes the Avengers decide between letting them govern their actions or to retire as a superhero.  The team divides themselves, with one side for the idea of the government judging whether an emergency is important enough for them to save people, and the other against.  After multiple epic battle scenes, Tony Stark finds evidence that the Avengers were framed just so they would fight each other.  Though there were multiple plots and countless twists, the Avengers managed to resolve it all without killing each other.

Word of Warning:
Swearing: Actually, not much swearing considering this is a Marvel movie.  Compared to most others, this one is pretty clean in this aspect.
Blood:  Lots of blood and gore. 
Violence:  Considering most of the movie is fighting, lots of violence.

My Thoughts:
Man.  This was a great movie.  I’d heard good things, I’d heard bad things, but nothing that prepared me to what I saw in the theater.  Sure, there was some questionable scenes where I was like, um, what just happened, but overall it was just a really good movie!  It had everything I wanted: Action, adventure, comedy, even some feels!  The fight from the inside had me on the edge of my seat, and although I was on Cap’s side, there was a couple times during the movie where I second guessed myself and thought that Iron Man had some pretty valid points with his argument.  Like any Marvel movie though, the pace was too fast and multiple times during the movie I was left with that feeling where you go, what the heck just happened, and then just forget it because the next scene is playing.  I loved how there were a lot of super heroes, ranging from Ant-Man to Spider Man to even Black Panther!  And as always, Marvel never fails to impress me with it multiple plotlines and how everything ties together at the end even though you have no idea what is going on in the middle.  This movie was really good, much better than I thought it would be.


Author Bio:
Hello!  I am a decent author, with a number of literature and writing classes under my belt.  In my free time, I like to experiment with my awesome tree power and my sweet Super Ninja Monkey Magical Dragon skills.  I have Master’s degrees in weirdness and eating sugar from the U of Me, and hopefully at least a minor in awesomeness.  Don’t know for sure about that one though.  You can find me fishing, hanging out with friends, being weird, eating sugar, practicing how to be awesome (have to take lessons), and perfecting my Super Ninja Monkey Magical Dragon.  My newest accomplishment is granting wishes.

Movie Review: The Peanuts Movie

Title: The Peanuts Movie
Author: Twentieth Century Fox, Blue Sky Studios
Release Date: 2015
Genre: animation, comedy, romance, friendship, adventure, animals
My Rating: ****
Official Rating: G (all ages)
Age Group: family movie night!

Summary
Charlie Brown is a failure. I mean, seriously, we all know him because he's always messing things up and we can, unfortunately relate to that all too well.
But when a new kid moves into two, Charlie's excited to have the chance to start over. He doesn't have a reputation with this new kid, and he's looking forward to that opportunity. He has high hopes.
Then he discovers that the new kid is a girl, and the stakes rise considerably.
So when Charlie suddenly becomes a hero, what does that do to our good old Charlie Brown?

Word of Warning
 These are going to be extremely nit-picky, because this film was incredibly clean.

• Comic scenes of violence and failure. No actual injuries are incurred. (think cartoon mishaps used for laughter)
• Characters gloat and are sometimes rude to one another. Flirting, insults...think Lucy.
• Charlie desperately wants someone who will just love him for who he is and not judge or give advice. That isn't really a good friendship though, and his best friendship (with Snoopy) involves all sorts of advice and judgement.
• The age old Peppermint Paddy being called "sir" takes on a new connotation in our day. The movie doesn't give any reason for the viewer to think this, but we bring social connotations to every text we consume.
• Snoopy has a few battle scenes with the Red Baron.
• Charlie "stalks" the Little Red Haired Girl. This is supposed to be sweet, but it's really a little weird.
• Charlie faces the "I'm nothing" and "she's something" conflict and believes it.
• Words: rats, good grief, stupid, blockhead
• Someone remarks "it was written in the cards" when names are drawn for a final assignment.
• In Snoopy's stories, a female dog is kidnapped and held prisoner (this isn't very dramatic).
• Adults are not visible and barely participate. This is classic Peanuts, but still odd.
• Snoopy shouts, "Curse you, Red Baron!"

My Thoughts
I had a huge grin on my face the whole movie. Except when I was sad for Charlie Brown. Or when I was laughing.
I had been expecting, with dread, the modern film industry to ruin this classic by making it modern. It didn't. This was Peanuts like it has always been. A little more hopeful, but still Peanuts.
Snoopy made a great best friend, one everyone wants to have. Charlie Brown did the right thing, which lead every one to think poorly of him--twice. Once, out of integrity. Once, for his sister. Charlie Brown, when he is at his lowest point, finds himself by helping another (interesting theological points could be made about that).

There isn't much to say about the movie. It was simple. It was the Peanuts. It was good. It was family friendly.
So go ahead. Borrow or rent it and enjoy a family movie night without worry about bad words or veiled inappropriate references. For the first time in a very long time, you can watch something made by mainstream movie producers after the year 2000 without holding that remote at ready.

Series Review: Trixie Belden

Title: Trixie Belden (series)
Author: Julie Campbell (first 6) (involved in Ginny Gordon and Cherry Ames), then  Kathryn Kenny (a name taken on by an unknown number of authors)
Release Date: 1948-1986
Genre: friendship, family, mystery, drama, adventure
My Rating: ***** (possibly biased by my young tween self who was obsessed with the series)
Official Rating: children's fiction
Age Group: 10+ (mostly dependent upon reading level)

Summary
Sleepyside is a nice little town, home of Beatrix (Trixie, please!) Belden, her two older brothers Brian and Martin (Mart), and their youngest brother Bobby. Their lives are simple. Not much happens. They help out around the house, go to school, etc.
Then one summer Madeline (Honey) Wheeler's family moves in up the hill. No doubt about it, they're rich. She has a governess, the house is huge. Horses, house staff, you get the idea. Money.
Honey is lonely. Trixie's brothers are away assisting at a boys' summer camp. The two meet and hit it off, even though they're complete opposites. Honey likes Trixie's tomboyish love of adventure and danger. Trixie finds Honey's girlishness new (albeit really hard to understand)--but mostly she just likes the companionship and the horses. Who doesn't like horses?

The two girls meet a runaway boy, and everything just picks up from there.
The friends from a club called the Bobwhites of the Glen and they try to help people in need. The club consists of: Brian Belden, Mart Belden, Trixie Belden, Honey Wheeler, Jim Frayne, Dan Mangan, and Diana Lynch (the last two usually not present in the books).

Friendship. Mysteries. Adventure. Travel. Fun.
What more could one possibly want to read about? Especially as a young reader just jumping into chapter books.

Word of Warning
 Please note that while I am not reviewing specific books (for the most part), I am commenting on trends the series carries. I will also do my best to comment on any problems that really stand out, even if they were only in one book.

• Jim Frayne's stepfather beat, starved, and didn't care for him. Basically, Jonsey was abusive. We don't get much detail on this, and he's relatively mentally untouched (it's a 1940's children's book), but it is still a reality that is faced.
• Dan Mangan was part of a gang at one point (it doesn't appear he did anything too horrible, but this makes him untrustworthy).
• Some suspense. In a few books, characters are kidnapped. I remember only three or four times where the lives of the characters were in question. All the other times, the kidnapping did not lead the reader to expect death.
• Bad guys.
• No murders as far as I can remember.
• As the books rise in number, they become a bit more intense. All dealt with in a good, rather old-fashioned way, but more intense. An accidental poisoning, near drowning, an accidentally abandoned child, car crash victim with amnesia, etc.
• Also as the books rise in number, they sort of peter out. I'd say they are at their best in the late teens and early twenties. The rest are worth reading, but aren't nearly as good.
• Book 32, The Mystery of the Whispering Witch was very frustrating. For the most part, the books stay on the straight and narrow, and so do the characters. This one went over the edge. It is implied that a house is haunted, and a rather horrible story is told of a woman who was once burned to death inside of it after being accused of witchcraft. Trixie very stubbornly refuses to believe in such things (a much-appreciated element of the book), but right near the end seems to question her firm beliefs.
• Frustrations:
• Bobby's language. This is more of a rather annoying element than an actual problem. The kid is supposed to be 6 years old, but he talks like a 3 year old. As the oldest of 8, this always really bothered me because I knew he wasn't talking right.
• Continuity. As the books continued to change hands, major plot threads would get lost and important facts would be changed. Strawberry the horse would change from male to female and back again (in different books, obviously). Honey's hair color would shift, Jim's eye color, character's attractions and relationships, etc. I always thought if you're going to enter a series, know the series. I was a fan and I knew it better than the authors and editors. This drove other fans crazy as well.

The Good

• It's fun. Lots of adventure, relatively good plots (at least, not identical like the Hardy Boys* plots).
• Vocabulary. I know this isn't about education, but man the vocab in these books is great. Mart is a walking dictionary, and we learn many of the words he uses from the confusion of his friends. Others can be looked up if one so desires. I hadn't considered this when first reading these years ago, but now I see great value to what's going on here.
• Good characters. These characters come from all different backgrounds, but they join together and want to do good for others.
• Great friendships. They aren't without their struggles and complications, but they're solid.
• Great families. No, they're not torn by divorce or death or anything else. They're supportive. They're there and they care. It's very refreshing.
• Good guys. I know this sounds strange, but in contemporary books it is getting harder and harder to find good guy characters. But take a few steps back on the timeline, and we have the Belden boys and Jim Frayne (every girl who read these had a literary crush on him). Brian is responsible. Mart is a little annoying but very funny. Both brothers care deeply about their sister and her friends and do their best to protect them. Jim is stubborn and does the right thing all the time (mostly). He's respectful and loves his sister dearly, as well as her best friend, and does his best to make sure they go unharmed.
• Good ages. I remember reading Nancy Drew and quickly losing interest. She was nearly 8 years older than me! And when you're 10 or 12, that's a really big deal. Trixie, on the other hand, was so much closer and easy to relate to. And if you didn't relate to tomboy Trixie, perhaps Honey or Diana. 
• Mistakes. The kids mess up. They make bad decisions, they're not always nice to each other or others, and they get into all sorts of "scrapes." And then they dig themselves out with help from each other, family, other friends, authorities, etc. Basically, all is not well all the time--and far from it!

 *I'm not bashing the Hardy Boys series. On the contrary. Even though nearly every plot was identical, I loved those books too.

My Thoughts

They were great. With the help of very wonderful family members, I managed to get my hands on every single book, all the way from 1 to 39--and that is not an easy thing to do. I knew those things inside out. I had my favorites (still do) and my complaints. I read them to my sister because she was too young to read herself. I could draw a map of Sleepyside. I could tell you Trixie's cousins' names and where they lived, and all about the Bigfoot story. I knew the names of the minor characters and all the criminals.

Basically, I was hooked. I might propose that aside from The Boxcar Children books, this series was really what launched me into the great world of literature.

Why though? Because the characters were fun and easy to relate to. Because the adventures were great. Because it wasn't too hard to read but it didn't feel like I was being written down to. Because I shipped Jim and Trixie and wanted to find out how that turned out (spoiler: it's never addressed). Because even the romance was something a 12 year old girl not interested in romance could get behind.
Because they were good. And they're still good. Now my second sister is involved, and some of my summer students have mentioned interest (poor things. I immediately offered my thoughts, little-known trivia, and the entire series for their borrowing pleasure).
They're old but they don't get old. They're decent literature that's readable. Sadly, that can be very hard to get.

But Trixie Belden joins those childhood loves, joining the ranks of Boxcar Children, Hardy Boys, Anne of Green Gables, Little House on the Prairie, American Girl books (Sisters In Time were better), and Caddie Woodlawn.
And yes, some day I will try to get reviews of those up here too. Until then, know that they are strongly endorsed by myself and other readers of this household.


Further Reading
A very interesting article on the books: Schoolgirl Shamus that already-established fans might find enjoyable.
A blog that summarizes each book, comments on the historical/cultural aspects of them (because yes, words change meaning, societal movements come and go, etc): Brian's Jalopy

Movie Review: Antman

Title: Antman
Author: Marvel
Release Date: 2015
Genre: adventure, action, superheroes, science fiction, family, fathers, romance
My Rating: ****
Brother's Rating: **** */2 (4.5)
Official Rating: PG-13 (for sci-fi action violence)
Age Group: 14+ (that's probably over cautious, but there's one line that makes me uneasy)

Summary
Scott isn't a robber, he's a burglar. He doesn't like violence, and honestly, the only time he stole was for the greater good. Rich people were ripping off their clients, so he hacked the system and got the money back.
Then he went to jail, leaving his daughter and a woman he loved behind.
But now he's out, and he's determined to stay on track and be a good guy. Unfortunately, life is hard for people who spent time in jail, and he finds himself doing just one last job with some buddies for money, desperate to see his little girl again but unable to do so without money.
Then he steals something he isn't too sure he wants. Then he returns it and goes back to jail. Then he is rescued from jail by the man he stole from.
And told there is a mission he needs to complete, to "be the hero his daughter already knows he is." He's got to break into a super secure facility and steal a tiny little suit that can shrink the wearer to the size of an ant. After all, we can't have bad guys getting their hands on that suit.
And to do that, he's got to team up with a strange old man, an apparently cold young woman, and a whole awful lot of ants.
And he has to shrink down to the size of an ant and lead the attack. No problem. Right?

Word of Warning

•  The beginning scene is a fist fight between men in jail. One is much bigger than the other, but no serious injuries are received. There are several other fist fights throughout the movie, all resulting in something similar (unfairly matched opponents, no serious injuries).
• A man mentions that "those were the first boobs I touched." (this is the line that makes me bump up the age recommendation)
• A woman died by shrinking into eternity forever.
• A character is caught in a bug zapper.
• Women in tight clothes and low shirts and short skirts. This is usually in scenes when on character is story telling (twice, that I recall) because the other times they are wearing business clothes. Also one kiss, more implied than seen.
• People get knocked out, kicked around, etc. Typical superhero violence, but nothing graphic or even that serious. However, a few people are shot (again, not graphic).
• A building blows up.
• A woman and her fiance are living together with her little daughter (who has a different father).
• A man calls another an "a**hat". S*** is used a few times, as well as d***, a**, and b****. God's name is used in vane about three times.
• An ant gets supersized. So does a toy Thomas the Train engine, which promptly tears a whole in the roof.
• A man is shrunken unsuccessfully and turns into a blob of gooey organic matter. The same happens with a really cute lamb.
• Scenes are shown where a super tiny man punches bigger men with serious power, knocking them out (or possibly killing them. this is unclear, as it is an old recorded war scene).
• A man is shrunken piece by piece until he explodes or disappears (it's unclear which).

Something to note: unlike most Marvel movies, the body count and destruction of cities is kept pretty low.

My Thoughts
Bear with me for a moment as an apparently-nonapplicable story becomes applicable.
Over the summers, I teach writing classes to local students. In "Fiction 2" this summer we delved deep into all sorts of devices, techniques, and ways to form a story. One lesson spent much time on how to deal with plot holes in a story. Plot holes can never completely be avoided, my premise was, and we can never meet fully a reader's expectation of narrative fidelity (taken from Walter Fischer's Narrative Paradigm Theory of Communication). The trick, then, is to do what we can so the reader believes us anyway. Engaging style, fast story, something just a tad too complex for the reader to completely follow, engaging character, and others. Or, you can own it.

Well this film has an awful lot of plot holes. The plot itself is honestly ridiculous, when you really think about it.
And the writers owned it. It was like they said, "Yeah, we know we got a crazy story for you that doesn't make any sense, but we're going to own it and still be totally awesome." They knew the plot was weird and fell apart almost right away. They were probably painfully aware that this worked much better as a comic (I assume, as I am sadly unfamiliar with the Marvel comic universe, other than what the screen tells me).

Well they succeeded fantastically. I had that idiotic "teacher/English nerd who is super stunned and impressed" grin on on my face the whole time.
I watched it twice. I'd watch it again, and probably laugh just as hard.

It wasn't all laughter. There were moments of heroics. Moments of great fathers learning to be great. Moments of reconciliation between characters who had no reason to be reconciled save for a little girl. There was seriousness.

But there was also an awful lot of craziness. And the writers owned it--brilliantly.

TV Show Review: The (Green) Arrow

Title: The (Green) Arrow
Author: DC Comics
Release Date: 2012 (season 4 showing now)
Genre: action, adventure, superheroes, science fiction
My Rating: **
Official Rating: TV-14 (probably PG-13)
Age Group: 16+ or 18+

Summary
Oliver Queen and his father died on a yacht trip years ago, a rich teen cut down in his prime. Well, then there was Sara Lance, Oliver's girlfriend's sister, who snuck aboard at the last moment at Oliver's urging. But that's complicated.
So they died.
And then Oliver appears again, apparently not dead after all. And what happens with billionaires who disappear for a long time? They continue their playboy lives by day, and by night they turn into epic bad-guy-beating heroes who have crazy combat skills. Far be it for Oliver to do anything but live up to our expectations. Of course, he forms a team around himself, mostly consisting of cute tech genius Felicity Smoak but suplimented by friend John Diggle, former army man.
And while others come and go, ultimately it's up to these three to save the world of Starling City from the rather messed up crime lords.

Word of Warning
Please note that while I am not reviewing specific episodes (for the most part), I am commenting on trends the show carries. I will also do my best to comment on any problems that really stand out, even if they were only in one episode.

• Comic book violence. Can get pretty graphic. People die a lot, to the point where you're numb against it.
• Torture. Sometimes this is done by the bad guys, sometimes by Oliver.
• Oliver is a playboy. Like, a lot. We get passionate kissing scenes and more than once a trip to the bedroom is implied. The only scene I can remember where we actually saw the characters in bed is in season 3 and is discrete as to what is shown, but there is no doubt what is going on.
• Evil mentors. Deception. Dark themes (death, killing, manipulation, torture, etc).
• Injuries. Blood, broken bones, etc. While painful, Oliver is somewhat superhuman in that he can take injuries pretty well (usually).
• Drinking to the point of getting drunk.
• There is a whole cult thing (the League of Shadows, I believe) where the people are very cruel. They have a Lazarus Pit which brings people back to life, but when they come back they're usually pretty messed up and go kind of crazy (having what is called a "bloodlust").

This list looks a lot shorter than that of The Flash, but there are a few reasons for that:

1. This show has so many problems it's hard to be as specific as I was with the other show.
2. I don't watch this one as closely or carefully as I do The Flash, partially because I don't like how its dark themes affect my thinking (not that I would do any of these things, just that it skews my view of the world).
3. It's so dark there is no end to the problems.
4. There are a lot more seasons here to deal with.

My Thoughts
I remember describing this show to Stacy when I first discovered it. I tried to give her the intro shpeel, but eventually, since it was identical to Batman, I reached for something else. How about Oliver's character and his relationships? Five minutes in and I had lost count of the girls I'd mentioned. And while Bruce Wayne is in love with Rachel but pretending with the girls he plays, it's super hard to figure out what Oliver is doing. The one thing we know is that he's in love with Felicity (spoiler alert really isn't necessary since this is so obvious), and she's in love with him.
So of course that never actually works out for them.

Oliver's problems with girls, as well as his inner darkness, it all just hits me the wrong way. Sure, I've enjoyed the series, since I usually enjoy a DC or Marvel story, but the enjoyment is usually in the moment and mixed with so much frustration and darkness that when I step back and actually think about it, I wonder why I watch in the first place.


It's dark, very dark, and just keeps getting darker. Oliver is no hero, just as Batman and Katniss aren't heroes. Oliver does try, but not hard enough.

TV Show Review: The Flash

Title: The Flash
Author: DC Comics
Release Date: 2014
Genre: action, adventure, superheroes, science fiction
My Rating: *****
Stacy's Rating: *****
Official Rating: TV-PG (I propose a PG-13 rating)
Age Group: 14+

Summary
Harrison Wells built a particle accelerator because, well, he's brilliant.
And Barry Allen's role model.
But let's back up. Barry Allen is an orphan adopted by a police detective after his father apparently murdered his mother (Barry believes differently). The 10 year old whose mother died is now in his twenties and working as a forensic scientist--a very good forensic scientist who, in his spare time, still tries to prove his father innocent.
Alright. Forward now.
Wells' big scientific thing explodes. That same night, Barry is hit by lightening and goes into a coma. Nine months later, he wakes up with abs and the ability to run super super fast.
Cool.
But he also discovers his first love (who he never actually approached on the topic) is dating someone else and apparently does not return his affections.
Bummer.
It keeps going! Barry discovers other people have been changed by that explosion too and now they have powers. Unfortunately, he's having a really hard time finding anyone who doesn't want to use their powers to do evil.
It's a known fact that selfish people get more selfish when big sci-fi explosions happen. And nice people like Barry?
They become superheroes.

Word of Warning
Please note that while I am not reviewing specific episodes (for the most part), I am commenting on trends the show carries. I will also do my best to comment on any problems that really stand out, even if they were only in one episode.
All these problems are very spread out over two seasons. I would like to point out that the second season is more violent, a little darker (though really, you can't be the happy go lucky  hero in a city with a vortex to another world with super villains for every long), and more intense. Not so much that I need to change the rating from season 1 to 2.

General:

• Comic book violence. Relatively non-graphic. Few deaths. When they do die, it's generally very heartbreaking.
•  Dead parents. Both Barry and Iris have death mothers.
• Injuries. Blood, broken bones, etc. While painful, these clear up pretty quickly (super fast healing and all that).
• There's a running joke that Barry can't get drunk, and this seems to be a disappointment to everyone.
• Very mild swearing. So much so that Stacy had to remind me it was there.
• One character often makes rather veiled inappropriate comments. One or two are more obvious than the rest.
• Kisses here and there.

Specific:

• A mother is kicked out of her house and daughter's life due to a drug problem that puts the daughter in danger more than once. This is all in the past and is only verbally related.
• At a low point, Barry breaks a bad guy out of jail, threatens him, and then leaves him to be caught and sentenced more harshly than before.
• A man shoots himself to save the city. Heroic, but still suicide.
• Barry watches his mother die in a horrible tear-inducing scene.
• Barry's romantic relationship gets a little too physical in two episodes. Passionate kissing and, in one scene, both characters lose their shirts while kissing passionately on the couch. This is ended rather abruptly (but by chance, not because someone was actually thinking).
• A female character gets very drunk and undresses down to her underwear in front of a male character. While this is awful (and her "did you take a peek at my goods?" comment is worse), this is also one of my favorite scenes because the male character does everything right.
• It's implied that a woman and her fiance are living together.
• A few really big violent moments: a man's head is smashed against a wall and a huge blood smear is left (season 2); people's heads get blown of by implanted bombs, we see only the stumps (season 2); an innocent girl blows up off screen after dying (season 1).

My Thoughts
If there's one thing I do when life gets crazy and I'm super busy with homework and work, it's to watch The Flash. While I may be a few days ahead of Stacy, she's usually right on my trail.
Do remember we're both full time students. I have two jobs, Stacy has one really big one. And we have various other things going on in our lives.
So when we say this is a really good show, and we make sure to stay up to date on it, you should know that it is, in fact, fantastic.

DC seems to have a dark brooding side (think Batman and Arrow) and a lighter side (think Superman). Well, the Flash falls on this lighter side. This isn't to say that horrible things are made small, or that good moral points are not made. The opposite, in fact. They're there, they're just not shrouded by all the other messy things.

Stacy says: Watch it. It's awesome. Also, it's addicting. So expect to lose half your life to Netflix. But you won't regret it.

I agree.

Book Review: The Scarlet Pimpernel

Title: The Scarlet Pimpernel
Author: Baroness Emmuska Orczy
Published: between 1903-05 (that's a bit unclear)
Genre: action, adventure, romance, historical fiction, war, politics
My Rating: *****
Official Rating: Historical fiction (adult fiction)
Age Group: 14+ (for reading difficulty. It's probably appropriate, though not much appreciated, for 10+)

Summary
Horrible things are happening in France. All those who once had power are being tracked down and killed at the guillotine.
There is, however, a man in England who will not stand for this. He is known only as the Scarlet Pimpernel, and he will do whatever it takes to rescue French aristocrats before they lose their lives.
But Chauvlin, one of France's best, is going to track down that man, and he is going to bring him back to France, and that man will pay dearly.

"They seek him here,

They seek him there,

Those Frenchies seek him everywhere.

Is he in heaven or is he in hell?

That demmed elusive Pimpernel!"

Word of Warning

•  The biggest challenge I see with this book is that it's considered a classic, and is written as such. This means as far as reading goes, it can get a bit long, it can get a bit confusing. It also has French words in it that are not translated.
• One of the nobles tends to favor the word "demmed"
• Blackmail.
• Kidnapping.
• Two men are hit on the head, knocking them unconscious. There is little to no drama in this scene and everyone is fine.
• A young man was beaten for sending a love note (know this is before the French Revolution, so the note was probably appropriate for any eyes) to an aristocratic young woman. This all happens in the past, before the book begins.
• Parents are reported as dead (in the past). One man's mother apparently went insane.
• People are in danger of being killed quite often, but this is more of a theme and less of a dramatic reality (such as one would get if there a knife or gun in play).
• A main character is beaten brutally by soldiers. This scene is narrated by a woman who can only hear the man's cries but cannot see the beating.

My Thoughts
The Scarlet Pimpernel and the Virginian--my two biggest literary crushes.
Both married.
But once upon a time, Stacy and I found the English language particularly constricting and redefined/clarified "crush" as an attraction to the God-given beauty and goodness in another human being, and a desire to partake in it (of course, that lead us to creating a whole bunch of "crush" subsets, but that's irrelevant).
Yes, I know neither of those characters is a real human, but they were created in the image of humanity and given beauty and goodness by an author who (whether knowing or not) was influenced by God.
My point? My point is that this is a fantastic book about fantastic adventures undertaken by a truly awesome character.

On a more literary note, it's interesting that the author chooses to tell the story from the perspective of a character who is not the Scarlet Pimpernel. It makes it especially tricky to really figure out who is and also pin down the personality of that character. But it's very well done and, honestly, a brilliant choice.

Fun Facts
This being a book my British Literature students read, I did more research on this book than I usually do. Might I add that this (and Prisoner of Zenda) were very popular among both the boys and the girls?
Interesting things about the author:

• Hungarian immigrant to Britain.
• Wrote short stories of a woman working for the Scotland Yard, similar to Sherlock Holmes. Unfortunately, these stories never took off.
• Novelist, playwright, and artist
• Her crime stories were based on real-life instances
• Happily married woman with one known kid. This son (John Montague Oczy-Barstow) wrote  a book titled The Life and Exploits of the Scarlet Pimpernel (also known as "The Gay Adventurer") which is meant to be the biography and family history of the man who is the Scarlet Pimpernel. He published this under the name John Blakeney, and his mother wrote the forward.

Interesting things about the book:

• Often seen as the inspiration for today's espionage heroes (think James Bond, Jack Ryan, etc), as well as our dual-identity superheroes (Arrow/Oliver Queen, Flash/Barry Allen, Batman/Bruce Wayne, Superman/Clark Kent--hopefully I didn't ruin any of these for you).
• Originally written as a play. The Baroness's husband helped with the writing.
• Sequels were not as popular.

Movie Review: Tomorrow, When the War Began

Title: Tomorrow, When the War Began
Author: Caitlin Stasey (Lady Kenna in Reign series), Rachel Hurd-Wood, Lincoln Lewis, etc. Basically people I recognized by face, but not name. All with awesome Australian accents.
Release Date: 2010
Genre: war, drama, romance, coming of age, action, adventure, survival
My Rating: ***
Official Rating: R (according to IMDb, but that seems a little high, which is odd given MPAA ratings tend to be too low in my opinion); proposed rating: PG-13
Age Group: 16+ (could be 14+ if not for mention of teens having sex)

Summary
Seven unlikely friends go camping in the beautiful wilderness of their native Australia. Two best friends from childhood, a boyfriend, the rich (but sweet) girl, the town trouble-maker, the boy whose family owns a restaurant, and a church girl (because the parents wanted 8 to go, but they decided 7 would be fine as long as one was a church girl--keep them all in line and whatnot).
They're having a great time on their last big hurray before graduation and moving on to bigger responsibilities. Sure, there are deadly snakes and they have to hunt rabbits, but really, small price to pay for such a great adventure.
Then they go home. And no one is there. The kids eventually learn Australia has been invaded and everyone has been rounded up into camps. Trying to avoid being killed themselves, the kids flee back to their campsite, bringing along yet another unlikely member (a sweet guy who smokes pot).
Guilt eats at them. Finally, they decide to wage guerrilla warfare on the enemy until help comes.

Word of Warning

As noted above, I find the MPAA rating a little high. Granted, I advised the movie not be watched by anyone younger than 16 (mainly because of my first bullet point below), but I am used to MPAA ratings being a bit young. What I see in this movie is horrible, yes, because it is war, but not what I've seen in the very few R rated movies I've seen.

•  Two girls at the beginning of the movie talk about sex. There is nothing graphic. One girl says she and her boyfriend did it, and the other girl responds. Both seem excited, and nothing negative is said.
• Clothing. Low cut shirts, short shorts, and a girl wearing a bikini (a guy ogles her unashamedly).
• Kissing. The couple mentioned above is seen kissing a few times. One girl says she kissed a member of the group and claims he is "a really good kisser." Another kiss is shown that starts to get passionate (and, quite honestly, is grossly loud with headphones on).
• Injuries. One kid gets shot in the leg (we don't see it, only blood, and the healing is fast). A girl cuts her leg pretty badly. One kid is shot in the abdomen and is rushed to a hospital (that is the last we see of this character). A person is shot through the head, scene is a far-off shot but still very disturbing.
• This is war. There are guns, people get shot at (and hit sometimes), buildings are bombed, and things blow up. The kids barely escape more than once.
• In a heartbreaking scene the most innocent of the group mows down three enemy soldiers with a semi-automatic to save other members of the group.
• One character lights a stick on fire and causes an explosion that lights several enemy soldiers on fire. We see one soldier in a close-up, her face melted, and she presumably dies. The character who caused the explosion rightfully has a very hard time getting over this.
• A dead dog is shown, eye clouded, flies buzzing about. I realize in the grand scheme of this movie, this really isn't a big deal. But the scene is disturbing and startling based on where it is put in the movie.
• A car chase involving a garbage truck and two to three little zippy cars (no clue what to call them). Cars blow up and flip and the chase is rather harrowing. It's also a good point, because really, a garbage truck and speedy car chase?
• One character smokes pot. In one scene he talks about being stoned, but he's clearly still high.
• Kids lie to their parents, particularly a religious figure.
• Language. I didn't write down the words or the numbers. I hadn't even intended to review the movie originally. Basically, if you deem the other stuff in this list appropriate, the language content should be fine too.

My Thoughts
The movie took a little while to get anywhere, which frustrated me. Then again, they were dealing with seven (then eight) characters, so I can understand why it took a little while to establish any character development. When it does come, I appreciated the raw look at killing and how it changes the soul. The poor teens propose different views of this but ultimately cannot come to a conclusion: only that it seems to be necessary given the circumstances, and that it's awful. Who gets to decide who dies? Why is one person's life more valuable than another? Good moral questions, and the movie does not shy away from them.
My biggest objection (aside from the completely unnecessary mention of sexual intimacy at the beginning, and the apparent glorification of it) is the ending.
Which simply isn't.
I realize this is a movie based on a book series by John Marsden, and this is probably how the first book ended. But still. If you watch it, you'll see what I mean. However, don't avoid the movie just because of the dissatisfying ending.

Fun Quote:
"That a good book?"
"Yes. Better than the movie."
"Books always are."

Book Review: The Prisoner of Zenda

This book, like Peter Pan, is one of the books I have included in the British Literature course I am teaching. I hope that, even if I do not have much time to review books I have read in my free time, I can always turn to the literature courses I am teaching for material.

Title: The Prisoner of Zenda
Author: Anthony Hope Hawkins (commonly just "Anthony Hope")
Release Date: 1894
Genre: action, adventure, drama, fiction, Ruritanian Romance (like The Princess Bride!), politics, romance
My Rating: *****
Students'* Rating: Unanimous "Awesome!"
Official Rating: fiction
Age Group: 12+

Summary
Rudolf Rassendyll has never done anything productive with his life, and his sister-in-law can't take it anymore. Go see the crowning of the king of Ruritania, she says. Go rub elbows with the big shots. Have fun.
Fine. To keep his sister-in-law happy, Rudolf wisely heads off to Ruritania. However, on the way, he finds himself caught up in a political war and impersonating someone, the threat of death always upon him.
Best (worst?) of all? He falls in love with the woman he is courting--while impersonating her real betrothed.
Will Rudolf be caught in his impersonation? And how to rescue the man he is impersonating?
And what is he to do about Princess Flavia?

Word of Warning

• Characters get drunk. We don't see them acting drunk, they just are drunk.
• A character is drugged and kidnapped.
• People get hurt, but nothing graphic and usually not serious.
• A few chaste kisses.
• Sword fights. Guns. Excitement!
• A character impersonates another.
• Someone dies.

My Thoughts
This is possibly one of my favorite books of all time, so you can imagine how thrilled I was when my students liked it too. Maybe I wasn't biased after all!
No, in all seriousness, this is a fantastic tale. It's so good that it established the Ruritanian Romance genre (courtly romance in a fantasy setting). There is danger, impersonation, sword fighting, break-ins, and very interesting moral musings about what is right and what is not.
It's not the easy-going style of more contemporary writing, but it is intriguing enough and not too complex, making it readable, just a bit of work for younger readers less experienced in the classics.
The main character is fun, witty, and a great adventurer. And while he might start of careless and fun, he develops into a self-sacrificing man who ultimately does the right thing, no matter how heartbreaking that ends up being.

Fun Fact(s)
In addition to establishing a whole new literary genre, Hope/Hawkins earned the praise of Robert Louis Stevenson, author of Treasure Island.
Anthony Hope Hawkins is much better known as simply Anthony Hope, it is fun to note that he has the same last name as Stevenson's protagonist Jim Hawkins.
Though he wrote 32 works of fiction in addition to plays, Hope/Hawkins is best known for The Prisoner of Zenda and its sequel Rupert of Hentzau.


*Students in this particular case range from grades 8-12, class contains nearly even number of boys and girls.

Book Review: Johnny Tremain

Title: Johnny Tremain
Author: Ester Forbes
Release Date: 1943
Genre: adventure, war, revolutionary war, romance, coming of age, historical fiction
My Rating: *****
Official Rating: children's fiction
Age Group: 10+
Awards: Newbery Award

Summary
Young Johnny Tremain has it all. He's the star silversmith apprentice at a successful shop in the New World. He's set to inherit the practice, and marry the silversmith's pretty daughter, in a few years' time. And the thing is, he's good at what he does and he loves it. Sure, he's an orphan and still has no idea who his father was, but he did love his mother very dearly before she passed on. And while he still misses her, he's made a great life for himself.
Until he slips. Literally, he slips. Working on a Sunday to get a very important job done, Johnny slips and burns his hand in molten silver. When the bandage comes off, it is discovered that his thumb has grown attached to his palm. He's not useful as a silversmith anymore.
Kicked out on the streets while tensions rise between the colonists and the British, Johnny must find a way to survive.

Word of Warning

• Violence and death. This being a young man's experience with the Revolutionary War, there is violence even though the book is considered children's fiction. None if is particularly graphic, but people do get hurt and die.
• Crime is sometimes glorified. For those who know the history of the Revolutionary War, the rebels who are so often praised acted very much like common criminals at times, stealing, destroying property, and hurting people. Granted, this particular book only hints at these deeds, but it should be noted that our "heroes" do commit criminal acts.
• Guns. A war is fought with guns, and characters get guns and they use them and people die.
• A character who could be considered disabled is shamed and treated poorly. However wrong this is, it was the reality of the time and this is historical fiction.
• Along those lines, this story is also told from a very one-sided point of view: a young white male colonist. This could potentially constrain the story to missing other important things. But on the other hand, a point of view does need to be taken or the author won't be able to get anything done.
• Our good old Johnny Tremain can be a bit of a bully, particularly in the beginning of the book. This should not be taken lightly. The hero is a bully. Once he is on the other side of things, he does change some of his ways.

My Thoughts
Honestly, this is one of my childhood favorites. It's one of those books you read once every two years or so just to remember how great it was. It's the book you buy whenever you see it on sale because you know some young person in your life could use this great adventure (or am I the only one who rescues books from the sales shelf and rehomes them?).
And all the objections up there? This might sound awful, but they don't really matter. I mean yes, they are bad things, and yes, we need to consider the youth we are handing this book to because not everyone should read this. But this is historical fiction, and these problems are treated as such. They are a representation of what life was like, not what it ought to be like. Because that's what fiction in general does: it represents a truth the writers sees in the world, not necessarily the way the world should be. That's the reader's job to figure out based on a well-formed conscience, faith, and the reality the writer is pointing out.

Book Review: Peter Pan

Title: Peter Pan (also known as The Boy Who Wouldn't Grow Up or Peter and Wendy)
Author: Sir James Matthew Barrie (Scottish novelist and playwright)
Release Date: 1911
Genre: adventure, fantasy, family, pirates, children, friendship, motherhood, coming of age, magic
My Rating: ****
Official Rating: children's book
Age Group: 10+

Summary
Peter Pan sneaks into bedroom windows, kidnaps children, and brings them to Neverland--boys though, always boys. Then one fateful night he loses his shadow, and it's a girl (Wendy Darling) who figures out how to reattach it by sewing it back on. Peter is delighted, and decides his Lost Boys need a mother. He, of course, has no need for a mother. But the Lost Boys do, and Wendy's little brothers John and Michael can join them.
So off they fly to Neverland where they have great adventures, don't grow up, start to lose their memory, and quite honestly don't learn anything that will advance their moral development. When an attempt to return home is thwarted by Peter's greatest enemy, Captain Hook (feared even by Long John Silver, who is the only man Flint feared), Peter must save the day. Can he? What happens if he does?

Word of Warning

• Everything is a game to Peter, and games are very real. Sometimes, he imagines that all the boys have eaten, and so no one is allowed a real meal because of this.
• Peter is all about adventure. Killing is just an adventure. Death? "The greatest adventure of them all."
• Peter apparently cut off Hook's hand and fed it to a crocadile.
• Hook kills people ruthlessly.
• The natives of the island are called redskins.
• Everything on the island is very childish. There's nothing wrong with children and childishness, but Barrie shows a world where childishness goes unguided and causes great horrors.
• Tinker Bell has quite the mouth on her! She says the word a** several times, and other times is said to have sworn but we are not given her exact words.
• All sorts of vices. Pride, jealousy, disobedience because it is fun, and so on. Remember, these are children who have no guidance.
• Peter's a bit of a jerk. Ok, a lot of a jerk, but a charming jerk so people tend to forgive him.
• The Lost Boys cannot see women for anything other than their potential to be mothers. While seeing the potential to be a mother is a beautiful thing, it's also short sighted to not look beyond fulfilling the need the boys have for a mother by using whatever woman happens by as such.
• There is a common misconception, probably due to Disney's movie, that Peter is a hero and Hook is a horrible person. In the book, this isn't nearly as clear. In fact, there is an argument to be made that it could be the other way around. Basically, the warning here is not to improperly idolize Peter.

My Thoughts
It's a fun, easy to read book. I don't think it was written as a theological study on the right way of living, facing reality (acceptance), growing up, motherhood, and children. It's too free and disconnected for that.
But it's there anyway. This is a fascinating fun little story that goes much farther than the adventures Disney shows us. It digs deep into the heart of the human being and what is needed in order to live a full life.
But, you know, if you just want some fun reading and not too much thinking, this is still a great book. Because on the surface, that's what it is. Plus, it has a fantastic writing style that's carefree and gives the tone of childish to Neverland. And it's a blast to find all the references to Robert Louis Stevenson's Treasure Island, which, yes, were intentional.
 Below that though, there is something very interesting going on in the story that merits deeper study if one is up to the challenge.

Movie Review: Inside Out

Title: Inside out
Author: Pixar
Release Date: 2015
Genre: family, drama, friendship, fantasy, psychology, animation, adventure, comedy
My Rating: *****
Official Rating: PG for mild thematic elements and some action
Age Group: 6+

Summary: Riley has a great live in Minnesota. She's on an awesome hockey team, has a great best friend, and has parents who love her.
But when Riley's dad moves the family to San Francisco along with his job, this get a little challenging. Then, something goes very wrong. Riley doesn't understand, but her emotions are all out of whack and the poor confused little girl has no idea what to do.
Joy does. Because Joy is an emotion and she lives in Riley's head (along with Sadness, Disgust, Fear, and Anger) and she has always made sure Riley's life is the happiest it can be. That's why Riley has so many happy memories.
But Sadness is feeling left out and suddenly Joy and Sadness find themselves running through Riley's mind trying to get back to the control tower in time to save Riley from making a terrible mistake. Along the way, Joy learns something about Sadness--and about life.

Word of Warning

• A cartoon dog is cut in half. It's funny, but kind of freaky too. And it's meant to wake Riley as a bad dream, so no matter how comical the scene is its intent is to be scary and that's not easy to miss.
• A clown is shown as being scary and causes Riley to have a nightmare.
• Riley runs away.
• Riley's life is monopolized by Joy. Which sounds really nice, but it's not. It turns out that's not a healthy way to live.
• Riley feels as though her parents do not love her as much as they used to (they do, they're just really busy).
• Riley steals a credit card.
• An imaginary Canadian boyfriend says "I would die for Riley," apparently being her ideal. The girl is 11. He (and many copies of him) do die for her--but it's all in her mind and she's not even aware of it happening. So they're not actually dead. But they kind of are. It's complicated.
• Riley's mother is frustrated with her husband, so her emotions settle on a memory of a Brazilian pilot who asked the mother to run away with him instead of marrying Riley's father.
• One character falls into a place in Riley's mind where things are forgotten. We watch this character sacrifice himself to get Joy back to Riley and then he slowly fades into nonexistence (it's really sad and beautiful).
• A dead mouse is seen on the floor. Later, it appears in Riley's dream.
• In abstract thought, Sadness, Joy, and Bing Bong (Riley's imaginary friend) get twisted into strange shapes.
• Anger mentions a few times that he really wants to use the curse word they all know. When he's about to, someone pushes a button that makes a "beep" sound, cleverly hinting at the word being beeped out (even though it was never said)

My Thoughts
At the end, Stacy and I concluded that someone took an academic paper and turned it into a children's movie. Because that's basically what this is. And while that may make the movie sound very unappealing, that's so far from the truth I don't even know where to start.

I mean, where does one start on such a brilliant movie? The insights into how the mind works, how people interact, what emotions do....the list goes on forever. I was blown away. I watch a lot of children's movies, and this is by far in the top ten. Probably in the top five. Because it's a great story with some really great humor for the young 'ins. And for the older folks...no crass humor is hidden there for us to laugh at. No, that's not what keeps us hooked. What keeps us hooked is the beauty of the story and the insights into psychology and the great little jokes.

Why don't we get more movies like this?

I'd watch this one again in an instant. The biggest reason I haven't seen it again since Sunday is because
I have two jobs.

Obviously, I can't seem to speak highly enough of it. And obviously it is not without its faults. But it was good enough that I would recommend it in a heartbeat.