Some of the Best Books This Season

So one of the benefits of working in a bookstore is that I get to see what some of the most popular books of the season are.

Now, I'll let you know in advance, I haven't read all of these.  But they have been bought in HOARDS and people have been telling me nothing but good things about them.  So that that for what you will when buying your last minute book gifting.

Yes, ok the movie is coming out, but I sell no less than five of these a day, sometimes more.  And for every five I sell, I get asked five more times where the book is.  It's a story of a man, surviving the wreckage of his plane in WWII and his journey through life, along with his journey of survival.

Boys in the boat is about the 1936 Berlin Olympics team.  It shows you a bunch of ragmatag guys who manage to come together and go for the gold for the rowing.  Another one that has passed through my hands more than a few times this Christmas season.

To be honest with you, I didn't even know what this one was about till I read the synopsis (which you can go read here.  It sounds really good.)  It sold really well this summer, but when Christmas time came, we couldn't even keep the book on the shelf.

Ok, so Miss Peregrine's is a little weird, and it's a little different, but I have yet to meet a person who didn't enjoy this book.  There's mystery and there is a little bit of super powers and there is some definite danger and it's a good transition book.  Not SO hard to read that a high 11-12 year old couldn't pick it up, but still interesting enough that your teens are going to want to read it.

Alright, this one comes with a lot of conditions, but also, a lot of ideas if you need them last minute for the Christmas season.  This is book five in a series.  And, what's more, it's book five in a SEQUEL series.  Do you remember The Percy Jackson Series?  It's pretty much fabulous.  In fact, it was SO fabulous, Riordan took those characters and started a SECOND series with them!  Cue The Heroes of Olympus series (see above).  So if the person you're buying for has never read Percy Jackson, Ta-Da!  If they have, but haven't gotten into this second companion series, there are five whole new books for them to pick up.  And, the best part, is that this is the last book, so they don't even have to wait for the end.

Author Bio: Janet Dailey

Janet Dailey was a romance author who wrote several series and dozens of single-title romance novels before she passed away last December. This week, we'll be reading A Cowboy Under My Christmas Tree because sometimes I tell Cassy a title as a joke and we wind up deciding to read the book after all.

Dailey became an author when she told her husband she could write better romance novels than what she was reading, and he challenged her to do so. She became the first American author for Harlequin. They actually turned Nora Roberts away because they already had an American author in Dailey. Another fun fact about Roberts and Dailey: in 1997, Roberts accused Dailey of plagiarizing her work, which Dailey admitted and said was caused by a psychological disorder. Dailey's books in question were pulled from print and the issue was settled out of court.

The Guinness Book of World Records recognized her achievement of setting a novel in every state in America.

Review Me Twice - My True Love Gave To Me by Multiple Authors

I am actually a big fan of anthologies.  I have the theory that, by sheer odds, you're eventually going to hit ONE story that you like in it.  And I did.  In fact, there were a number of stories that I liked in it.  I really liked the one by Rainbow Rowell, though probably more so because when I went to see her at Politics and Prose, she read it.

If you ever get the chance to hear an author read their own work, do it.  It's SO MUCH BETTER than what happens in my head (and what happened there was pretty good.)

Some were definitely better than others, because you have twelve authors and while some are great authors, not all of them are meant to be short story writers.  David Levithan's was not one of my favorites.  I love him, and I liked his better when I heard him read it out loud, but I still didn't enjoy his story as much as I have enjoyed his books.

But probably my favorite out of the whole batch was Gayle Foreman's.  It was funny and poignant and sweet and just a great story.  I thought it was well done and one of those stories that was satisfying where it ended but still full of potential.

The book was a good anthology, and definitely worth reading, especially if you're just looking for a nice Christmas book.

I promise, one of my New Year's resolutions is to read every single Review Me Twice book beginning to end. But it's still 2014, so I didn't finish this one. What I did read, though, I really loved. My favorite thing about anthologies (other than what Cassy mentioned above, finding at least ONE you like) is how different authors take different approaches to the same theme or topic. I think a major reason why I didn't manage to finish this book on time was that I had to put it down between stories (and there are a lot of stories... twelve, so sayeth the subtitle). I don't read different authors' short stories back to back. When the anthology is all the same author, I can read straight through, but I have to do that thing where you put it down and digest what you read before I can pick it back up in the multi-author situation.

From Page To Screen

So, at work, we constantly have these tables called "from page to screen" and on it we pile all of the books that have been turned into movies (or are about to be.)  Since we're talking so much about books that result from video games this week, I thought it only appropriate to give you a list of books that have movie companions.

I've listed this book on here more than a few times, and of course, we reviewed it awhile back, but I think it bears being repeated.  The book is amazing and, I can tell you, that the second book holds up to the first one.  I might even like it better than I did the first one.  This is definitely something you should read before the movie comes out in September.

This book is probably on my top 10 favorite of all time.  It's sweet and it's moving and it's so incredibly and beautifully written, it's impossible not to fall in love with it each time that you read it.  Narrated by Death, it's the perfect third person view.  It does have a movie already out on DVD, which I can really tell you if it's good or bad, seeing as I've never seen it, but definitely get your hands on the book first.

This is a great alien superpower book (and another that fell onto our review radar).  It's interesting and fun and really well done, but not so over the top that you can't take it seriously.  Apparently, it's also a movie, that came out in 2011.  Who knew?  So after you read the book (which you will love), take a look at the movie (which looks like it might not be terrible.)

This is one of the VERY few books that I actually enjoyed the movie better (though, how could you not with Renee Zellweger and Nicole Kidman.)  However, the book is well written and tells a wonderful story of two women, making their own way while the Civil War is going on. (and you can read our review here!!)

There are SO many books to movies.  So, tell me what movies you preferred over the books?

Favorite Book with Amnesia

This week, we're reading Unremembered by Jessica Brody.  The whole book is about a girl who can't remember anything that's happened to her.  So today, we're going to tell you our favorite book where the characters lose their memory (I know; it's another one of those oddly specific days here at Review Me Twice.)

So, when I first saw this suggestion for favorites this week, I thought, "I have no freakin' clue!" and then two seconds later I thought, "Oh, wait, I know exactly what book I want."

We reviewed The Maze Runner not that long ago on here, so I won't go into it too much, but I just loved how Dashner used amnesia in this book.  It was a great way to get the reader to learn about things, because we were learning them at the exact same pace as our hero.  I loved that no one could remember who they were.  It wasn't just our main character: no one could remember anything about their lives before they came there, except for their names.

Also, it's SUPER EXCITING this book.  I mean, I blew through this book and loved it every step of the way.  There are very few books that Alex and I both absolutely rave about, but I definitely think this is one of them.

Dang, Cassy beat me to it. This is absolutely my favorite instance of amnesia in a book. Cassy even summed up my reasons perfectly: you get exposition without feeling like the author is giving you exposition, because the protagonist needs it too. He's just dropped into the middle of things (like you, the reader) and has no idea what's going on... he knows nothing beyond his own name.

I've read the trilogy (and still slogging my way through the prequel) and - I don't think this is spoilery, personally - the memory thing keeps going for a while, and doesn't get old. It progresses at a good pace in conjunction with the story. So the whole thing just works really well.

Review Me Twice - The Maze Runner by James Dashner

I liked this book, I really did.  I liked it because it was fast paced from start to finish.  Some books can't pull that off well, but Dashner knows just how to keep you turning the pages.  He does very well with problems and situations popping up without them being TOO outrages: they were just enough.

I liked all the characters, enough that if something happened to them, I got upset.  I like how hard to read some of them were.  By the end, I STILL didn't know if I liked Alby or not.  And, what's more, my favorite characters weren't the main ones (I feel that a book is doing its job when my favorite character is someone other than the main character.  It's EASY to make a reader fall in love with the lead, but it's hard to make a reader fall in love with a character that you may not get to know as well.)

BUT (and there's a always a but), this was very much a special snowflake kind of book.  Thomas is the character we follow, and it's clear from second one that he's different.  He "remembers" more than the other characters (by which I mean he has really strong feelings of deja vu.)  He does stuff immediately that all the other characters have been afraid to do.  He wins almost everyone over, except of course, the one guy who is meant to be his Sworn Enemy and cause him all sorts of problems.  And, despite breaking all the rules, he gets rewarded.

I understand why the trope is done, I didn't even necessarily think it was badly written, but sometimes, it just gets to be a bit much.  It's a bit much if I can't totally buy into the special snowflake scenario.  Thomas's snowflake was just a little too unique for my taste.

I still really LIKED the book though.  I blew through it in just a few days (like I mentioned: Dashner is REALLY good and making me turn the pages.  I kind of couldn't stop.)  I liked the characters and how it ended (though, if you're like me, you probably figured it out.  However, I don't consider that a negative to the book.  I almost always figure it out.)  I already have gotten my hands on a copy of the second book.  I think you should pick this one up.  It's worth it, and if nothing else, you'll have read the book before the movie comes out this year.

Cassy's right... she does always figure it out. (It's why we love her.) I, however, almost never do. Sometimes I manage to forget the ending to something I've read a couple times before! (It's how I managed to really enjoy And Then There Were None several separate times.) I got kind of close on this one, but still not quite right, and I definitely didn't see what I would consider an epilogue (but I appreciate that it was really just the last part of the book). Knowing that this book was part of a series made me wonder if I would even get to find out any of the big secrets in this book, so I didn't try too hard. (Having requested the sequel from the library and then getting snowed in for five days will make you less anxious to get to the end so you can get to the next book, let me tell you.)

I like the characters. They felt like real people. You don't know a lot about them, because - let's face it - they don't know all that much about themselves, because they enter the Glade with no memories. (Can I just point out for a second what a great writing mechanism that is? All exposition feels natural and necessary because your hero has no idea who he is, where he is, who anyone else is... and we own up to it at the beginning. It's really just brilliant in its simplicity.)

I don't, however, much care for our visible, tangible villains, by which I mean the Grievers: pulsating masses with mechanical-type arms and tools and some kind of wheels that make horrible whirring, clanking noises. If they sting you, you have a hell of a week or so to look forward to. If some other circumstance befalls you, you die. (I don't remember getting a clear picture of how a Griever kills you, but I do know it's supposed to be gruesome.) I'm a very visual person, and I sometimes gloss over descriptions while I'm reading, and I rely heavily on the mentions of parts of tangible nouns to keep up with what I'm supposed to be seeing. I still haven't got a clue what I think a Griever really looks like. It got a little more solid by the end, but they're really abstract in my mind. I don't know if that's James Dashner's problem or mine, but I'm inclined to say it's mine. But if you're like me in that way, look out for that issue.

I already mentioned that I've requested the sequel from the library (and I have the prequel and the third book already checked out) so that should give you a hint that I really liked this book and Dashner's writing in general.

Author Bio: James Dashner

This week, we're reading The Maze Runner by James Dashner.

This may sound like a cop-out, but I'm not going to write an author bio for him... he (or his webmaster, or somebody) has done an incredible job on his website, so you might as well go read it there.

He seems to write exclusively in YA series, with five under his belt so far (some still in progress, like Eye of Minds).

By Its Cover: A Study in Scarlet

The copy I read had a faintly patterned beige cover, and I cannot find an image of it - not that it was interesting enough to say much about, anyway. It made the book look like the classic that it is, tells you nothing about the story except the title and author, and was very boring.

This cover, by Oxford's World Classics, is more intriguing. You can actually see one of the clues (or, as my version called them, "clews") to the crime: a bloody handprint on a wall. Plus, there's Holmes, in his unusually bathrobe-looking coat.

This one evokes the sense of mystery appropriately, I think. A shadowy road (exactly the way I pictured the road in the book, with the carriage and everything), the silhouette of Holmes looking for all the world like he knows exactly what's going on and when to divulge it to everyone else... it's just right. Like the previous one, we get to see one of the details of the mystery (the carriage plays its part).

Yawn. This could be any of the Holmes stories, as far as I can tell. We see Holmes bent over some sort of study, probably involving chemicals, and Watson standing nearby, waiting to be told what Holmes is doing. This isn't specific enough to the mystery in this book, for my taste.

I don't really have a lot to add to this post.  I read an eBook, so I didn't really SEE a cover that often.  Also, I read an anthology of all the Holmes books/short stories.  So, the cover of it was just the door of 221 B Baker St.  Which, while effective as a cover for an anthology (really, what else would you use to represent all of the Holmes work?), it didn't tell me much about A Study in Scarlet.

Review Me Twice - A Study In Scarlet by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

I have never read a Sherlock Holmes book before this.  And, to be honest, I'm not sure that I'm going to read one after it.  

That's not to say that it was a terrible book; it wasn't.  Doyle writes very well, keeps the pace moving.  His characters are interesting and, Holmes especially, is very mysterious (and he's a conceited Jack Ass.  But I like that about him.)  Watson is a perfect juxtaposition to Holmes.  

But, like a lot of books written over 100 years ago, it is very much a product of it's time.  The plot, going along nicely, suddenly stopped mid-story for about 50 pages of Mormon bashing (Well, maybe less.  It's about half the book that this happens.)  And, ok yes, the story line was relevant to the story, but... still, pages of religion bashing.  I mean, it doesn't make me that mad, I understand WHY it shows up.  In 1887 everyone hated the Mormons and constantly forced them out of their homes and basically had no idea what they were and figured them for an occult and murderers (which is what Doyle basically says they are.)  Ergo, book is a product of its time.

Also, the transition into this back story was kind of terrible.  One second Holmes was telling me he had solved the case, and the next it was back story.  There was a Part II title, but I think the problem arose because I was in an anthology.  I have all of the Holmes work, so I wasn't sure if I was starting a new story or I was still in the old one (it's honestly that different.)

I might read one of the short stories, but the book wasn't exactly a page turner.

My Bottom Line 2.5 out of 5

I've always found it to be an unusual feeling to actually read something that is so ingrained in our culture. Sherlock Holmes is such a classic, people parody him without even realizing it. So it's weird to read the original text.

I liked Holmes more than I thought I would. He's a genius at observation and deduction, to the exclusion of other characteristics considered important by his peers, like knowledge of politics, and some basic social interaction skills. He has eclectic habits, but he's straightforward, about them and everything else (except when he's still piecing together the mystery).

It is very strange to find yourself, in the middle of a book and immediately after being told that hey, we found the guy whodunnit, here he is, reading an entirely different story. It was fairly obvious that we were dropped into a different narrative line that would lead to the same point, more or less, but it's still a jarring experience. I don't know if the rest of the Holmes books do this, but once you're familiar with the technique, and you expect it, it wouldn't be quite so bad.

All in all, I liked the book more than I thought I would, and I was compelled to find out the solution to the mystery, but I won't be running out to find the rest of the Holmes books.

Author Bio: Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle lived from 1859-1930. He was a Scottish physician and writer, with the Sherlock Holmes books being his most notable works.  Holmes was actually modeled after a friend of Doyle's, Professor Joseph Bell.  The likeness was so exact that Kipling recognized who Holmes was really supposed to be.

That mustache comes in a close second, though.

Though some people use "Conan Doyle" as a compound surname for him, and his second wife took "Conan Doyle" as her new name when they married, his baptism records state that his first and middle names are "Arthur Ignatius Conan" and his surname is simply "Doyle."  The "Sir" was added in 1902 by King Edward VII.  He was knighted not for his Sherlock Holmes stories, but for propaganda he wrote on the Boer War.

His English father and Irish mother had several children who were scattered across Edinburgh when the family dissolved due to his father's alcoholism, but they were reunited in 1867, when Arthur was 8.

He had wealthy uncles who funded his education. Despite attending a Jesuit school, he renounced Catholicism and later became an agnostic. He studied medicine at University of Edinburgh.

When he set up a private practice, he was at first not very successful.  He also ran for Parliament twice, and lost both times.  However, he did win a significant portion of the vote both times.  He wrote short stories to pass the time while he waited for patients to arrive. He had a difficult time finding a willing publisher, but his first published novel - A Study in Scarlet, the first Sherlock Holmes book and our review book this week - was picked up in 1886. He was given 25 pounds for it.

He also played as goalkeeper for the Portsmouth Association Football Club, under a pseudonym (A. C. Smith).

He married Louisa Hawkins - the sister of one of his patients - in 1885, and she died of tuberculosis in 1906. He remarried, to Jean Elizabeth Leckie, in 1907; she died in 1940 (ten years after Doyle). He fathered five children (two with Hawkins, three with Leckie).

After the death of his first wife, and that of one of his sons near the end of WWI, Doyle became depressed. Spiritualism gave him some comfort, and there is evidence that he believed in fairies as well. He became friends with Harry Houdini, who he believed - despite Houdini's protestations - had supernatural powers, which eventually led to a terrible falling out between them.

At age 71, Doyle was found in his home after a heart attack. The epitaph on his gravestone reads, "Steel true / Blade straight / Arthur Conan Doyle / Knight / Patriot, Physician, and man of letters."

Reclusive Writers

The author of our book for this week, Perfume: The Story of a Murderer, is Patrick Suskind. When I first began researching him, intending to write a short biographical post about him for today, I discovered that he was born in 1947 and his list of works stopped in the late 1990s. I assumed he had died. But I read further and found that no, he's still kicking; he's just doing it very privately.

Suskind has become a reclusive writer, withdrawing from the literary world and the public eye.


This is not uncommon, even when the writer is still active, even at the peak of his/her career. Some of the greatest writers ever were recluses.

Harper Lee (1926-) The author of To Kill a Mockingbird (1961) and dear friend of renowned bombastic center-of-attention Truman Capote is sort of a "recluse lite." She has been very involved in the literary community, accepting honorary degrees (but turning down the opportunity to give speeches) and attending conferences, ceremonies, and festivals. She was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2007, which is the highest civilian award in the United States.  I remember hearing some time ago that a journalist had written her a letter, begging her to do an interview, to which Harper Lee (who does not do interviews), responded with something along the lines of "Go away, Bitch!" The journalist was appalled, but later realized that she was infringing on Lee's well known wishes; no interviews and to be left in peace.  The journalist wrote a second time, telling Lee how she enjoyed her work and was glad that she (the journalist) was able to partake in it, but didn't mention any sort of interview.  Lee responded favorably to the letter, talking to the woman about the book and what had led to it.

J. D. Salinger (1919-2010) We love a banned author here at Review Me Twice, and Salinger is no exception. His Catcher in the Rye (1951) has its fair share of profanity, and many parents have protested its use in school curricula. In September of 1961, Time magazine devoted an issue to Salinger, with his photo gracing the cover, discussing his life isolated from the public.

Thomas Pynchon (1937-) I'm not terribly familiar with Pynchon's work, but I do know that it's very complex and intense, like Gravity's Rainbow (1973). Pynchon has avoided divulging details of his private life for over four decades, and even with the internet, photos of him are rare. He did have a bit of fun, doing voice work for The Simpsons on a few separate occasions. (My favorite is the episode "All's Fair in Oven War" where his lines all contain puns of his titles, referring to a "Gravity's Rainbow cookbook" that contains a recipe for "The Frying of Latke 49.")

Bill Watterson (1958-) Yes, even comic artist/writers can be reclusive. The "Calvin & Hobbes" creator refuses to give signatures or even license his characters (feeling it would devalue them). He is all but untraceable now that the beloved cartoon's run is ended, and spends much time painting.

Emily Dickinson (1830-1886) What list of reclusive authors would be complete without this notably introverted poetess? When her mother became ill, she was relied upon more and more to see to the domestic duties, which suited her, because she was happy when she was inside, with books. It has been theorized that she suffered from agoraphobia, and her most productive years (in a literary sense) were also her most withdrawn from society. The majority of her work was published posthumously, because she did not offer it up for publishing. (She had left instructions to have her correspondence burned upon her death, but said nothing of her notebooks and other writings.  And from what I understand, there were a few correspondence that made it through, but not a lot.  This is only what I've heard, however, so don't take it for fact.)

ReviewMeTwice- The Man Who Invented Christmas by Les Standiford

As we've mentioned once or twice this week, this book is largely a biography on Dickens.  It mostly focuses on A Christmas Carol, so a lot of the things that Standiford talks about has to do in reference to A Christmas Carol, but that still includes a lot of biographical information.

To be honest, this book was extremely hard to become interested in.  And, even when it did become a little more fascinating, it wasn't spectacular.  Standiford really isn't very good at story telling with non-fiction.  Some authors are great at making non-fiction seem like fiction.  They tell you a story and so it's interesting.  Standiford doesn't really have that talent, so you get a lot of information at once, not all of it interesting.

Probably the biggest flaw about this book is that Standiford tells you a lot of things you don't really care about.  There's a ton of people that are hard to keep track of, and frankly, pretty inconsequential.  He also, at one point, spends almost an entire chapter just quoting reviews of A Christmas Carol.  Considering almost all of them were positive, this gets ridiculously redundant, really quickly.

He also repeats himself a lot.  I mean, I understand that certain things let Dickens to his current situation, but there was so much repetitive material, I just didn't care when I reached something that was new information.

However, it wasn't all bad.  I really enjoyed knowing the effect other authors of the time had on Dickens' work and vice versa.  I also really like learning about, historically, where a lot of our Christmas traditions came from.  Not all of them came from Dickens' novel.  But it was interesting to see what traditions did correspond.

Overall, not the best biography.  At the end of the day, this post would probably be a better read.

My Bottom Line 2 out of 5

I agree with Cassy: this book was not interesting. We would have been better off reading the actual A Christmas Carol instead of this.

It was easy to be distracted from the "story" and I often was. It was easy to put down, and hard to pick back up again.

In writing the post for Monday, I realized that it really is difficult to sum up anything about Dickens' life, so I feel for Mr. Standiford; it's a really enormous undertaking to write a book about this man, his life, and his work. But I believe it could be - and probably has been - done better.

I also agree with Cassy that the parts about Christmas traditions were more interesting, but we have a book at our library that is essentially an encyclopedia of Christmas traditions that makes a more informative, more interesting read.

Film Adaptations of A Christmas Carol

Christmas movies. Am I right? I won't name them by name, but a lot of the new Christmas movies that - to their credit - attempt to tell an original story fall flat on their figurative faces. But there's always the old default: remake a familiar story. And A Christmas Carol has been retold dozens of times in film (and at least a hundred in television specials, to say nothing of the stage and radio adaptations). Here are some of the highlights of its history as a big-screen story.

Scrooge; or, Marley's Ghost (1901)
This is the earliest surviving screen adaptation of A Christmas Carol. It was a silent film, and very short, summing up an 80-page novel in the space of five minutes. It employed a number of the cinematographic tricks of its time, such as superimposing one film reel over another to give the impression of Marley's face appearing in the door. A popular practice at the time was to make film versions of old, familiar stories, which eliminated the need for too many intertitles (which are those frames with text in them to describe what's happening in silent films). Only a little under three and a half minutes of the entire film remains. You can watch it here on YouTube.


Still from Scrooge, or, Marley's Ghost (1901)

Scrooge (1935)
This was the first film version of A Christmas Carol that had sound. It starred Seymour Hicks as Scrooge. He had played the same role in a silent black-and-white by the same title in 1913, which had also been released in America in 1926 as Old Scrooge. This film was never copyrighted, and therefore exists in the public domain. It wasn't popular in recent times because of the poor quality of what remained, but it has been remastered.

A Christmas Carol (1938)
MGM made this version of the story, and cut out many of the more gruesome aspects in order to market a "family friendly" adaptation. (Example: Upon Marley's ghost's arrival, there are supposed to be phantoms wailing outside the window and creating quite a ruckus, but they are absent fromt this version - and many others.) This was the most famous version of the film until the 1951 version arrived on the scene. A colorized version was made available on VHS for its 50th anniversary, and is now on DVD (released in 2005) in a box set.


Theater poster for the 1938 version

Scrooge (1951)
This version was a flop in America (it was turned down for a screening at Radio City Music Hall for being "too grim") but it was one of the best films of the year in Britain. In the 1970s, it began to get play on PBS-before-they-were-PBS stations around the holidays, and is now considered a classic.



Theater poster for the 1951 version

Scrooge (1970)
A musical version (starring Alec Guiness, who you may know better as Obi-Wan Kenobi) that was the only film adaptation - so far! - of this story to be nominated for any Oscars (it got four nods), this film features eleven songs. Due to complications, Columbia Records has never released the soundtrack on CD, but an album was released in 1970.



Theater poster for the 1970 musical version

A Christmas Carol (1971)
I've actually seen this one (which is more than I can say for everything since the first one). You may recognize it, too: it was made for television and broadcast on ABC. It won an Academy Award for Best Animated Short Film. Chuck Jones (who you know and love if you're a fan of Looney Tunes and Merry Melodies, or the television animated version of How the Grinch Stole Christmas) was an executive producer. It was such a huge hit, after it was broadcast as a TV special, it was released in theaters as well.

Still from the animated 1971 version

Mickey's Christmas Carol (1983)
Another one I've seen. This was the first original Mickey Mouse theatrical release in over three decades. It was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Animated Short Film, but lost to Sundae in New York. Scrooge McDuck was an existing Disney character (since "Christmas on Bear Mountain" in 1947) when this film was made (though he was, of course, named after the part he played in this adaptation).

The Muppet Christmas Carol (1992)
By our old buddy Jim Henson's company, the Muppet version of A Christmas Carol starred Michael Caine as Scrooge. This was the first Muppet project after Henson's death, and was directed by his son, Brian. It didn't do as well in theaters as Disney had hoped, considering it was up against Home Alone 2 and Disney's own Aladdin.

A Christmas Carol (1997)

If you're familiar with this version, then you probably know it as "the animated one that stars Tim Curry as Scrooge and Whoopi Goldberg as the Ghost of Christmas Present." It, too, was a musical, with eight new songs.

From the DVD cover of the 1997 version

Christmas Carol: The Movie (2001)
This version is part animation, part live-action, and stars Nicolas Cage as Jacob Marley and Kate Winslet as Belle. (If you're thinking, "Who's Belle?" she's the fiancee that leaves Scrooge in the original story.) It was not well received.

A Christmas Carol (2006)
Anthropomorphic CGI animals take over all the roles in this adaptation that was extra-cleaned-up for young audiences. (Examples: Tiny Tim doesn't die in the future possibility Scrooge sees; he just becomes as miserly as Scrooge is.)



The 2006 animated animals version

A Christmas Carol (2009)
And here it is... the most recent film adaptation of the 1843 tale, this one starring Jim Carrey (or, his voice, anyway) and featuring motion-capture CGI animation.

So, there you have it, friends. More than 150 years after the story was originally written, and we're still retelling it (more or less faithfully to the original text) through a medium that didn't even exist when it was conceived of. Grab your favorite version, some hot chocolate, and enjoy.

Charles Dickens

To put you solidly in the Christmas spirit, we will be reviewing a book titled The Man Who Invented Christmas: How Charles Dickens's A Christmas Carol Rescued His Career and Revived Our Holiday Spirits by Les Standiford.

Charles Dickens is widely considered the best novelist of the Victorian period. In order to avoid encroaching on the content sure to be waiting for us on Friday, we will only discuss basics today.

Dickens lived from February 7, 1812 to June 9, 1870, in England. He looked like this:

Dickens grew up in a poor family (pretty common for every writer ever) and had to work jobs like bottling boot black to make enough money to release his parents and siblings from debtor's prison. This was not something that was widely known during his life (or, indeed, until John Forster published a Dickens biography six years after his death). With the benefit of hindsight, we can see how obvious this is, given that the most common theme in all his works was poverty and the trials of working class life.  Also, by the length of his books.  Dickens was paid by the word.

He went on to be a journalist, and a good one, but found that brief written observations about who and what he saw on his travels were popular reading, so he published them as a series of short stories titled Sketches by Boz (1836). Boz was an old family nickname he used often as a pseudonym.

Many of his novels and collections were originally published as serials, meaning he wrote them a piece at a time, and they were published in a newspaper or journal. This was a popular tactic at the time for many reasons. First, an author could assess public opinion about a certain character or plot point, and adjust their writing accordingly, to keep the story popular. Also, it cut down on costs all around. Publishers didn't want to pay up front to publish a large run of an entire novel without knowing how well it would sell. The audience didn't want to spend money for an entire novel without knowing how good it would be. They would rather pay for their reading a shilling at a time, and if you didn't like that chapter, you've only wasted a shilling. Later, when novels and large books became more popular (thanks  in large part to improvements in printing press technology) the serials were published in single volumes like the ones we read for English classes today.

If you're anything like me, you haven't read the vast majority of Dickens' works.  I know I haven't. In fact, you probably can't even name more than three or four off the top of your head. Below the cut, we'll outline a few of the more important/popular titles in his catalog (in chronological order).

Review Me Twice- Seriously... I'm Kidding by Ellen DeGeneres

This week, Alex and I decided to read Seriously... I'm Kidding by Ellen DeGeneres.  While this is technically another non-fiction book, it's really very different than what we covered last week.  Obviously, it's a lot more humorous.  Ellen is a comedian (which, unless you've been living under a rock, I'm sure you already knew.)  Really, this book is an insight into her life and thoughts, things she does everyday and what she really feels about life.

During certain parts of the book, she talks about some really serious things.  She discusses how she and Portia like kids but don't intend to have any of their own.  She has a chapter that she devotes to manners and how a lot of people don't have them anymore (which, is really my favorite chapter because I completely agree.  People don't even give you simple thank you for things these days.)  She talks about how we don't get out of the house and do things and our attentions span has been shortened.

However, it still has that Ellen wit.  She makes jokes (even the inside flap is funny.)  She has an entire chapter for the audio book where she writes out weird noises and we only have to guess as to what they would sound like on CD.  If you've ever watched her show (like the hilarious clip below), you will see that she is just a funny person.

However, here is my major criticism of the book.  If you are a comedian, someone who I know and love and I think is hilarious, then your book better be, well, hilarious.  I'm not saying the whole thing was dull, but I expecting so much MORE from her.  I expected my sides to be in stitches from laughing so hard.  I expected every chapter to have more jokes than I could handle and, to be honest, I just didn't get that.  Ellen is the type of comedian that she's funny because of her delivery and she isn't a strong enough writer for that delivery to come across the page.  It wasn't that the material wasn't funny, it was that it just wasn't funny on a page without anyone delivering it to me.

That being said, I think this book could have been a lot better if I got the audio version.  I hardly EVER advocate an audio book over the actual book, but Ellen actually reads her audio version and I think the book would just be better with all of the jokes being told as they were meant to be.

My Bottom Line 2 1/2 out of 5

I love Ellen DeGeneres. I don't watch her show and I haven't read her other two books but I do like her quite a bit. I think she's funny, smart, witty, and stands for some very positive things.

I really liked this book. I won't say I loved it because that's something I say about books I'll read over and over again, which I wouldn't do with this book. It was great, and I enjoyed it very much, but once through was enough.

My favorite chapter was "The Chapter for Audiobook Listeners" (even though I was reading a regular print copy). It was very funny, but I won't tell you why, because you should read it yourself.

The best part of the book is that it feels very much like Ellen is talking to you from the page. She wrote it to be that way (writing like she talks, addressing you - the reader - directly) and it works, and I liked it.

Short story: I like it, it's not for reading over and over, and I like the author more than I liked the book (but that isn't saying much because I really like the author).