Old vs. New: Moses Edition

One of cinema’s favorite stories to keep retelling is the story of Moses in Egypt. How many adaptions have there been? (me: *checks*) At least twelve. That’s not including all the short religious films and stuff; just major length films with a theatrical release. That’s a lot for a bible story. The only thing to beat it out are stories of Christ. 

The two major films that everybody seems to know though are The Ten Commandments and The Prince of Egypt. (Now, technically, The Prince of Egypt is almost 20 years old, making it not all that new; but it is new by comparison to The Ten Commandments which is over 60 years old.) I have seen both numerous times and have a great fondness for both. But is one better than the other? I want to take a look at both and decide if either is better. (Note: while writing this right now, I have no idea what the outcome is going to be. I love both these movies and I am proceeding with this in order to determine what my true opinion is. There may be some rambling.)

Let’s start off with the TITLE CHARACTER

In The Ten Commandments, Moses is played by the legendary Charlton Heston. This man is seriously a master at his craft (not to mention a total stud). Even for being a old-time actor, he is still excellent at what he does. Like everything is this movie, he is a little over-the-top sometimes, but because everything in the movie is a bit over-dramatic, he doesn’t stand out as silly or anything. He has a very commanding presence whether he’s a prince of Egypt taking control of unpleasant situations, or the mighty prophet everyone knows ordering Pharaoh to “let my people go!”

In Prince of Egypt, Moses is voiced by Val Kilmer (you know, Batman). This version of Moses makes him more human and relatable. As a prince, he is portrayed as a young, reckless troublemaker who enjoys laughing and having a good time, but he is still noble and good-hearted. I kind of enjoyed his self-doubt too. I mean, who wouldn’t feel a little downtrodden with all he goes through? Would you expect an actual human to remain perfectly stoic the entire time? However, I think there was a bit of a clunky transition from the goofy teenager to the mighty prophet everyone knows.

In the end, I think I’m going to give this point to The Ten Commandments. I do love The Prince of Egypt’s Moses, but I think The Ten Commandment’s Moses captured the essence of the character better and sucked you in with his power. 

STORY
Both movies tell the same story obviously, but in very different ways.

 

The Ten Commandments has a longer, more epic take on the tale. Many more characters and side stories are added. A love triangle is created, a rivalry between Moses and Ramses is formed when they are young, intrigue about Moses's past, many details about the Hebrew religion are included, practically nothing is cut out from those chapters in Exodus (including the golden calf). The movie was created back in the day when making four-hour-long movies was acceptable; just slap an intermission in the middle and it’s all good. (I wish we still did that, movies could include so much more detail). The drama of this movie is fantastic! 

The Prince of Egypt is an average hour and a half movie. It manages to condense everything you need into that time frame. Plus, it’s a musical which I always appreciate. Something I really like about this version compared to pretty much all other versions I have seen is that it shows the plagues of Egypt (I mean, it’s in a montage, but still). Even in The Ten Commandments, it just shows the characters discussing most of them. In this version, a lot of creative license is taken on historical accuracy (for example: Moses is not drawn from the water by Pharaoh’s daughter, but his wife.)

This one is a little tougher, but I think I’m going to give the point to The Prince of Egypt for managing to condense such an intense story into a short time frame and still making it amazing and interesting. Also, its storytelling style is more creative and less straightforward than The Ten Commandments. 

ANTAGONIST: RAMSES

In The Ten Commandments, Moses and Ramses are portrayed as rivals right from the beginning. Ramses is jealous of Moses’s success and how liked he is by everyone; he sees him as a threat to his throne. This makes the expectancy of Moses’s return into Egypt all the more intense because you know there’s no way that Ramses is going to grant his request. You already know how stubborn and cruel he is. You wonder how on earth Moses is going to accomplish this task (of course, with God, anything is possible, but STILL! Intensity!) This movie makes Ramses a power-hungry, greedy, manipulative, stubborn, mustache-twirling villain. 

In The Prince of Egypt it is the exact opposite. Moses and Ramses grow up as brothers and the best of friends. Their relationship as loving brothers is so spot on. So when Moses runs away, it’s quite heartbreaking. This take on it makes the audience wonder what will happen. It’s all up in the air (of course we know. Who watches a Moses story without already knowing it?). But then this movie adds an extra layer where Ramses believed that he would let down his ancestors’ legacy (be the “weak link” in the chain) and bring down the dynasty. 

I think I’ll give this point to The Prince of Egypt for Ramses’s complexity as a villain. While I do like The Ten Commandments’s Ramses’s sheer evilness, point to The Prince of Egypt because you actually feel bad for the deteriorating relationship between Moses and Ramses. You feel his anguish as everything falls apart around him. You don’t want him to win, but you feel bad. It’s very complex. Props!

SECONDARY CHARACTERS

There are a lot of characters in The Ten Commandments. To name a few: Joshua (the stonecutter and Moses’s successor), Bithia (Moses’s adoptive mother), Lilia (the water girl that EVERYBODY lusts after), Dathan (the creepy Hebrew overseer), Memnet (Bithia’s grumpy handmaid), Baka (the master builder [or "master butcher"] aka Vincent Price), and I must address Nefretiri. Nefretiri is the princess who will marry the next pharaoh, who is in love with Moses and hates Ramses. She is quite the character and such an interesting addition to the story. She’s there for the majority of the movie and her character goes through such drastic changes. If you ever hear anyone in my family saying "Moses! Moses!" dramatically, we're quoting her. I think she adds extra points on this movie. 

There’s not as many characters in The Prince of Egypt. The main focus is on Moses and Ramses. But there are a few: Miriam, Aaron, Tzipporah, Jethro, etc. It’s funny, all the characters in this movie (the characters that get emphasis in Exodus in the bible) don’t really get emphasis in The Ten Commandments. To be perfectly honest, I don’t care much for the secondary characters in this film. Probably Tzipporah is my favorite, but other than that, they just aren’t that great or are flat out annoying (and there are obvious celebrity placements where their voices don’t match). 

So, I’m going to give this point to The Ten Commandments for its diversity and more interesting characters.

SPECIAL EFFECTS/STYLISTIC CHOICES

Obviously, The Ten Commandments was made in a time before CGI and great improvements in special effects, so I will be taking that into account. However, even without taking that into account, this movie is still extremely impressive. I think nowadays, sometimes with the easy access of CGI, moviemakers forget the use of practical effects which often have more powerful an impact. This movie is just so BIG! The scope of things is incredible! Whether you’re looking out over Egypt, parting the Red Sea, watching thousands of Hebrews migrate, watching the entire Nile turn to blood, seeing the “angel of death” kill people off one by one, and so on, you are blown away. 

Now, you can do pretty much anything you want to with animation, so I’ll be judging The Prince of Egypt slightly differently. Instead of looking at special effects, I’ll be looking at stylistic choices the movie made. This movie is extremely beautiful, there’s no denying it. I love when the Red Sea parts and they can see fish swimming. Also, the burning bush scene is extremely unique with white fire. I mentioned before with the plagues of Egypt, I love seeing them all in progress and the anguish of the Egyptians. The Nile River actually looked like blood. And the “angel of death” was super scary. 

I really can’t pick! I have to make this one a tie. They’re both so amazing! Point to both.

MUSIC

The Ten Commandments was scored by Elmer Bernstein. I’ll bet most people have heard the theme at some point in their lives before. It is one of those iconic epic pieces of music. That main theme is particular is just so spectacular, there’s nothing else that could match the grandness of Moses parting the Red Sea. I couldn’t imagine the scene without that music (It’s like watching the end of Star Wars: A New Hope without John Williams). Of course, there are other themes, gentler music, more romantic themes. All also very good. 

The Prince of Egypt is a musical, so already there’s points. But then the music is SO GOOD! The music makes it that much more epic! I don’t think the movie would be nearly as grand without those musical numbers; they just display the characters’ inner struggles/thoughts/feelings. Just the opening number “Deliver Us” really sets the tone. It’s not just the musical numbers though, the score is beautiful as well. Hans Zimmer is amazing.

I’m giving this point to The Prince of Egypt because I get all the feels (also, I actually go out of my way to listen to this soundtrack). 

* * *

Alright, is everyone ready for the final count? Like I said before, I had no idea what the outcome would be at the start. I honestly just wanted to figure out which one I liked better/which I thought was a better movie. I wasn’t keeping track of which had more points as I went along, I was trying to remain as unbiased as possible and just said what I thought.

So without further ado... 

The Ten Commandments: 3

The Prince of Egypt: 4

Man, that was tough. A very close call. I honestly wouldn’t have called that. There’s probably a lot more to take into account, but I don’t have all day. This doesn’t mean that I don’t like The Ten Commandments because believe me, I do; it just means that there were a couple more things I appreciated slightly more about The Prince of Egypt. 

They’re both very different movies and I highly recommend checking both of them out!

Top 10 Movies Scenes That Got Me to Cry

I enjoy movies a lot (shocker). They are filled with so much art and emotion (most of them). I consider it a great movie if it really gets me to feel something whether it be joy, sadness, fear, disgust (hey, Inside Out reference!) One big emotion often included in movies is sadness. Even if it’s not a sad movie, per say, the main character and/or side characters always have a moment of despair/self doubt that serves as a turning point for the movie. Of course, then there are movies filled with sad moments where you’re just continually crying. Crying can be attributed to happiness too, of course. Those moments where you’re filled with so much happiness and joy that the tears break. 

Here, I have compiled a list of my top 10 movie scenes that got me to cry (and will every time). This is purely opinion based. I am basing it on how hard they got me to cry, how much emotion it stirs up in me, and if it manages to impact me as hard with each viewing.

I should give out a SPOILER WARNING since I will be discussing a lot of key plot moments from these movies.

There are links on each of these if you feel like crying ;)

FORREST GUMP- Jenny’s death

Forrest Gump is filled with all these little tear-jerking moments (right before this scene when he asks Jenny if their son is smart or not. Gah!), but I think the kicker for me is right at the end after Jenny dies and he stands over her grave talking to her. When he talks about how smart their son is, how he wished people didn’t have to die, and “I miss you Jenny.” It really gets you.

BAMBI- Bambi’s mother’s death

Of course this was on the list. One of the most famous cinema deaths of all time. It was pretty brave for Disney to put in such a shocking death like that. The suspense that builds up, the gunshot, then how Bambi wanders around calling for her. “Your mother can’t be with you any longer.”

LAND BEFORE TIME- Littlefoot’s mother’s death

I almost forgot about this film until I was reviewing clips on YouTube and this came up in “related videos” for Bambi’s mother’s death. Holy cow, I forgot how sad this scene is! I remember crying as a kid. Imagine having your mother die right in front of you like that. Geez! At least Bambi never actually saw it happen and didn’t talk to her as the life drained out of her. 

HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS PART 1- Dobby’s death

To be honest, there are other deaths in Harry Potter that were more impactful and sadder to me while reading the books, but I think that this movie pulled this death off so well and really got the tears rolling. Dobby is such an innocent and caring character; and to be murdered like that is so horrible. Then he dies in Harry’s arms like that. Aaaahhhh!

UP- Married life

Oh, Pixar. They really know how to sock you right in the feels. There is so much in those five minutes of montage. There are three parts in particular that stand out to me: Ellie’s infertility, Ellie not being able to make it up the hill just as Carl bought tickets to South America, and Carl at Ellie’s funeral. But there is SO much more! They just love each other so much. It’s not like Ellie had an untimely death or that they were unhappy or anything. They had an average happy life, but they were unable to live their dream of going to South America and it was just sad to see Carl lose Ellie. Waaaah!

IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE- Ending

I think this is the only true “happy tears” I’ve got on this list. Holy cow, if you want to feel good about yourself, your life, family, friends, people, humanity, and everything in general, watch this movie. I love how the entire town comes to help George out when he thinks he’s going under. He was going to accept that there was nothing he could do, but then EVERYBODY comes and helps him because he was such a good guy his whole life. It just shows that being a good person eventually pays off. I love it so much!

DEAD POET’S SOCIETY- O Captain My Captain!

This movie is amazing and is also filled with moments that really pull at your heartstrings. But I think this moment really takes the cake; so many emotions! The music, the way they all stand up against “the man”, one last hurrah for the teacher who taught them to think outside the box, the way they all stand up one by one. Oh! It’s so good! It’s half happy, half sad. Plus, ROBIN WILLIAMS, man! 

CASTAWAY- Wilson floats away

Tom Hanks again. Did we ever think we would get so attached to an inanimate object? Well, we did in this movie. The loss of Wilson is seriously one of the saddest moments I have ever witnessed on screen. Tom Hanks really sells it. He struggles so hard to get to Wilson, but just can't. Wilson was his only friend for years and then he has to choose between his boat and letting Wilson go. "I’m sorry, Wilson!” Me: *sobs*

TOY STORY 3- Incinerator

Speaking of Tom Hanks, Pixar is back again. This movie really packed in the feels. I was debating between this scene and the ending, but I decided on this because I don’t think I had ever cried so hard in a movie theater than at this part. I was actually terrified they were going to get incinerated; these characters we grew up with, who have been through so much, who have stuck together until the very end. And the way they all hold hands, calming each other, and accepting their fate. STAAAAWP!!! Of course, everything turns out alright, but that doesn't even matter! This was an intense scene!

LION KING- Mufasa’s Death

Of course this was coming. This will never not be sad to me. Lion King was my absolute favorite movie when I was a kid, but I hated this scene; it was too sad. Of course, there was Bambi’s mom’s death which was sad and dramatic, but with this, you actually saw the body; Simba walks up to him and tries to revive him. I find it sadder than Littlefoot’s mom’s death because Simba didn’t get to say goodbye and THEN he thought it was his fault. And the music plays a huge part too. It’s too much! I cannot deal! 

Annotated Bibliography

This semester, I took a Young Adult Literature class. I found it very interesting because I've always kind of had a sort of negative outlook on young adult literature (I think Twilight corrupted me). I've emerged with a whole new outlook on the genre. 

Anyways, I don't have a final test for the class, just a bunch of projects and essays. One thing I had to do was put together an annotated bibliography of some books I read outside of our assigned reading. This is my incomplete list, we were supposed to read eleven novels outside our assigned reading (we read about one book per week, so you must understand that this was quite a feat to take on). 

An annotated bibliography is simply a list of books with some notes about said books. Kind of like a quick review; recommending it to certain age groups, talking about the writing, warning of anything people might find offensive or upsetting, etc. 

I thought people might find it interesting to see what I read and what I had to say. (Also, like I said, this is an incomplete list. I still have three more books to go).

Adams, Douglas. Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. New York: Del Rey Ltd, 2005.

Right before the earth is destroyed, a middle-aged man is saved by his neighbor who is actually an alien who has been studying humans and earth-life for years. The two of them travel throughout the galaxy whilst meeting a plethora of interesting characters and trying to answer all sorts of life’s questions.

This is a very quirky and funny book. The writing is very ironic and almost sarcastic, giving it a very dry sense of humor. It is a rather simple read and could be recommended to middle schoolers. The fact that it is mainly an adventure story might lend itself more towards boys, however girls might just as easily enjoy it because of the comedy.

Aidan, Pamela. An Assembly Such as This. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2003.

This is a behind the scenes look at Mr. Darcy’s point of view on Pride and Prejudice. One of three novels; it gives his inner thoughts and feelings of many famous scenes as well as fill in some gaps to missing scenes.

The writing is a little more advanced than most of the other books I read for this assignment, not Jane Austen-advanced, but I would not recommend it to middle schoolers. It follows Jane Austen’s book well and is on the same level of appropriateness. The same themes are applicable. This book might appeal to high school girls who have read Pride and Prejudice or who enjoy romance novels.

Burpo, Todd. Heaven is for Real. Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, 2010.

A true story of a pastor’s three-year-old son who nearly dies during a surgery, but miraculously survives. For months after the event, the son describes his near-death experience where met Jesus, his miscarried sister, and other extraordinary experiences.

The writing is very casual, but not overly simplistic. It addresses religious themes, but it tells it more as an experience rather than an attempt to convert the world. It is simply telling an extraordinary story which can be taken as truth or fiction. It has one or two more intense scenes where it describes the little boy’s surgery, but beyond that, it is a very safe book. It could appeal to either boys or girls, though the fancifulness of it might appeal slightly more to girls. Middle school and high school recommended.

Flinn, Alex. Beastly. New York: HarperTeen, 2009.

A modern take on the classic fairytale, Beauty and the Beast. A selfish, pompous jerk in high school plays a mean practical joke on a social outcast in his school, but she turns out to be a witch and she curses him to be as ugly on the outside as he is on the inside. He has two years to fall in love and be loved in return in order to break the curse or else be stuck as a beast forever.

The writing is fairly simple in this novel. The romance is fairly traditional for a high school point of view. There are some heavier themes addressed such as drug use, disabilities, abuse, etc. This might be recommended to high school girls for the romance.

Hale, Shannon. Austenland. New York: Bloomsbury, 2007.

This is the story of a young woman who is reaching her thirties and hasn’t found love because she is obsessed with the idea of Jane Austen’s heroes, particularly Mr. Darcy. An old relative dies and pays for her to go to England to an Austen-themed resort where she will role play as an Austen heroine and get her happily ever after.

The writing is pretty simple, almost coarse. It is comedic and romantic in theme with lots of description on the kissing scenes in particular. A good theme to discuss might be “letting go and moving on” or even “distinguishing fantasy from reality.” This is something probably more recommended to middle-aged women rather than young adults, however, teenage girls with an interest in Jane Austen will get a kick out of it.

Johnson, Maureen. The Name of the Star. New York: Penguin Group, 2011.

 A teenage girl attends a boarding school in London just as a copycat murderer of Jack the Ripper strikes. 

A very interesting story. It had more supernatural elements than I expected. The writing is easy to follow and understand, though it sometimes got a bit dry, especially when describing the school. It was a still a pretty entertaining read. It has some dark elements in it, such as descriptions of graphic murders that might disturb younger people. I would recommend it to high school girls. 

Oppel, Kenneth. This Dark Endeavor. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2011.

This book follows the early life of Dr. Victor Frankenstein from Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein as he tries to save his twin brother from certain death. It combines science, science-fiction, mystery, and suspense into one narrative. 

The writing is easy to follow-- fifth and sixth graders could handle it-- but the narrative itself might be recommended to upper middle school to high school. The plot is always moving and non-repetitive with enough surprises to keep things interesting. There’s no vastly inappropriate language or over-the-top violence. Boys might be more interested because of the dark themes and action, however anyone interested in Frankenstein can enjoy it. 

Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. New York: Scholastic Corporation, 1998.

A fantasy book about a young orphan who discovers he is a wizard. He goes to a school for witches and wizards where he makes new friends, learns more about his parents’ death, and the mysteries surrounding the school. 

A well thought-out and engaging story. It is easy to understand and follow, elementary school kids could read this. There is no sexual content, excessive violence, foul language (save some British vernacular), or inappropriate behavior. There are good themes for discussion such as good vs. evil, the loss of parents, bullying, fame, wealth vs. poverty, abuse, and so on. This book would be an excellent read for either middle school boys and girls who enjoy fantasy.

Spider-Man: Homecoming- A REVIEW (SPOILER FREE)

Guess who went and saw Spider-Man: Homecoming? This girl! Yes, finally! For those of you who don’t know, Spider-Man is my favorite superhero, so I was super stoked to see this movie; and after seeing Tom Holland’s portrayal of him in Captain America: Civil War, I was already sold. 

Let’s dive right into it, shall we? 

I LOVED it! It met all of my expectations (which were quite high) and gave me the Spider-Man movie I had been waiting for. Was it perfect? No. But it was extremely good. I have had some grievances with the past two interpretations of Spider-Man on the big screen (whether it be the character himself, the plot, the villains, minor characters, etc.). But this version, I feel, got the most right out of all of them.

I’ll start with the plot: brilliant! It took a new POV on the Spider-Man story that we haven’t really explored that much. It’s not an origin story and it picks up several months after Peter got these powers as he tries to deal with his two lives. However, the film does it SO well and in a different, non-cliched way. It’s interesting because it’s not Spider-Man getting in the way of Peter Parker’s life (so much), it’s more of Peter Parker getting in the way of Spider-Man’s life. Because why would you want to be some loser in high school when you can be Spider-Man? The plot really focuses on the difficulties of being a teenager (with the added pressures of being a superhero). I remember the director saying something about being a teenager that “a Spanish test is just as stressful as talking to a girl which is just as stressful as taking down a supervillain.” That entire essence is totally captured in this film.

The entire plot had me sucked in though, whether it was Peter’s struggle with his high school life or his superhero life. All the stuff with the villains was great.

Speaking of villains, can I just talk about Michael Keaton as the Vulture? *slow claps* He was great! (But I mean, hey, it’s Michael Keaton). I loved his costume design; it was awesome, yet practical. I loved the fur on his jacket (like a homage to the original design of the Vulture). He was really intimidating when he had to be. Like, wow! I won’t go into spoilers, but there’s this one scene where he’s talking to Peter just so calmly about what he’s going to do and the tension is so high, and ooh, you just get the chills. 

And on the topic of great acting... Tom Holland as Peter Parker/Spider-Man. He was so fantastic in Civil War and it just carried over into this movie. He held up this movie all on his own! His Peter Parker is just a funny, awkward, charming, sweet teenager trying to figure himself out. He was a very good balance between Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield. He’s not a complete geek who becomes a total boss like Tobey Maguire nor is he a snarky goofball like Andrew Garfield. His overzealousness, excitement, and slight immaturity makes him a bit awkward and unconventional as a superhero. He is very funny as Spider-Man, but he doesn’t intentionally say goofy and sarcastic things like Garfield, he just kind of says them.

There’s also a good deal of focus on how smart he is. I liked that. I’ll be interested to see how that plays into future movies when he interacts with other Avengers (like Banner and Stark who are also smart). 

Sort of unrelated, but I really liked how much wall crawling there was in this movie. In all previous movies, most of the action focuses on Spider-Man swinging on his webs and he barely crawls on walls at all. It always bothered me a little because 1) Spiders are known more for crawling on walls, 2) Just because it’s more impressive/showy to always have Spider-Man swinging around doesn’t mean you need to, wall crawling is just as iconic when it comes to Spider-Man.

Tom Holland portrays it all perfectly. His goofy side and the dramatic side are on point! 

All the lesser characters are awesome! They just all fit in their environment. Tony Stark’s presence was perfect and it worked much better than I expected. He fit right into the mentor role. That’s all I really have to say about that.

As for the comedy, there is a lot and it’s all great. I’m pretty sure I laughed at all the jokes. This is a very lighthearted and quirky film.

There are some dramatic moments though. There is one scene in particular near the end that really hit me in the gut because it was so emotional. Going back to Tom Holland’s performance, he was so freakin’ amazing in that scene. He just blew me away (until the special effects team kind of ruined it right at the end... but I looked past it).

Onto my criticisms, speaking of that:

The special effects were overall good. The line between CGI and practical effects were pretty seamless. However, some of their effects (even the practical ones) were pretty lame. That one scene I mentioned earlier (that I won’t go into detail about) in particular stood out. It was just SO fake! It really bothered me because it’s a big moment in the movie.

The action was a little shaky at parts and sometimes difficult to follow. The one stand out scene was when Spider-Man first faced off against the Vulture. I was pretty lost and  it kind of hurt my eyes. I think maybe it could have been edited better? I’m not sure how it could have been improved. It wasn’t terrible, just not top notch. 

My biggest criticism though has to do with Spider-Man himself: he was WAY to indestructible. I mean, I know he’s supposed to be pretty indestructible (like he’s got his extra strength and you can throw him through a brick wall and he’s fine and whatever), but in this film, he had some crazy stuff happen to him and he always walked away without a scratch. Literally! Not even a scratch! No black eye or nothing! (Except for one point at the end, he had a cut on his cheek... but that’s it!) You could probably drop an entire building on him and he’d be fine. It was pretty bothersome. He definitely should have had some broken bones or something (even on Spider-Man level tolerance) after all the stuff that happened to him, much less a bloody nose or split lip or something. Even his costume was always perfectly in tact. I know it was Stark Tech so I guess I can let that one slide because who knows what Tony did to that suit, but even when Peter wore his crappy old one, it didn’t tear or burn or anything. 

The writers had better beware because this kind of thing is entering Superman territory. Lots of people don’t like Superman because he’s too indestructible. Peter’s only weakness with his powers (in appears) is that sometimes he has to refill his web cartridges. But that happens rarely.

Anyways, it was an overall really good movie. I found myself actually gasping with surprise, joy, and excitement at numerous parts. I was literally on the edge of my seat at others. Then I was laughing through the rest. I think it deserves an 8.5/10.

TRAILER

Flirting and Relationships- Laying Out Your Coals

Ah, Mormon culture... Don't you just hate it sometimes? Particularly when you're a young adult with so much pressure on you already with trying to figure out what the heck you're trying to do with your life, then there's this added pressure of "you need to get married as soon as possible, preferably before your late 20's." It's a little stressful, because everyone is in that mindset and if you're not in that mindset, you're surrounded by others who are and you're just like "NO! STOP!!!"

I mean, literally, I meet a new guy and I can actually see it in their eyes, they gage me out: "Is this girl dating material?" That is their first question! Not "huh, she's cool, I would like to get to know her." No, it's "she's kinda cute. I MUST ASK HER OUT!!!" It's like a reflex.

For me, personally, there is nothing more stressful than a formal date if I don't already have some background on the person. I know that a date is a way of getting to know someone, but I am just so on edge and super nervous through the whole thing. And you know what I do when I'm nervous? Talk. I talk a lot. I'm pretty sure I've ended up sharing too much on more than one occasion.
My point here is that I think guys should lay at least a little bit of ground work before asking a girl out. Get to know her outside of such a formal, stressful situation. Don't be all dumb and aloof though (because that's the worst kind of flirting), just be nice and friendly. Figure out her interests, ask things you might ask on a first date, so that way when you actually go on a first date, it won't feel as awkward and tense. If you're a guy, you can figure out what she likes to do and take her for a date there (and not end up taking her somewhere she hates by mistake). Yes, I know, people are worried that someone else might ask them out first, but here's the thing, friendship is the foundation of a really good relationship. If you become really close to someone and he/she takes you for granted (aka the "friendzone"... I will cover that in a moment), they may not be worth your time after all.

Now, as for flirting... I despise the entire thing, mostly because I suck at it. A guy flirting typically consists of him showing off, asserting his manliness, and just being overall testosterone-y. A girl, in response, (not to be offensive), typically acts a little dumber and more helpless in an effort to allow the guy to come "help" them and show off their skills and manliness. Don't get me wrong, this is just the flirting part. Flirting is how people meet and start talking to each other before they start dating. Usually, after they start dating, they stop acting so ridiculous and resume normal behavior. Flirting is just an effort to impress and get the attention of someone you're attracted to. AND I HATE IT!!! As I said, girls usually act dumber and allow the guys to "help" them with things. They are impressed by the guys showing off for them (their muscles, their manliness, etc). I am not. Anytime a guy starts showing off for me, I am immediately unimpressed and/or I just don't care. I am a little competitive too, so if a guy starts either physically or mentally showing off, I will respond by doing the same thing and will either try to one-up or even the playing field... This is usually a turn off for guys because they want to be the big strong ones. But I just can't help it! Also, if I ever find someone I think is attractive, I simply cannot make myself all giggly and silly. I have this mental tick where I don't want to look stupid especially if it might not be worth it. Thus, I usually end up doing nothing and the guy has no idea. Even when I'm on a date and I'm not immediately repelled by the guy, I cannot do anything to act interested because I feel like it makes me look stupid. Then the guy thinks I'm not interested and moves on. FLIRTING IS DUMB!!!

Now, the "friendzone." I hear people complaining about this all the time. I recently watched a video that explained that the "friendzone" doesn't exist. It is a state of mind. Not their state of mind, OUR state of mind. We just need to be brave enough to break out of the "zone" and do something about our situation. 1) Act mysterious 2) Go out with other people 3) Cut the perpetrator out of your life (because you don't need that presence holding you back)... If they like you enough, they will come knocking on your door, suddenly seeing you in a new light. If they don't, they're not worth it. I've never tried this myself, but my point is, if you have tried laying some ground work with a person, but then found yourself in the "friendzone," just realize that it's all in your head. You need to step up and do something about it.
I should mention though, if you do something about it and you are rejected, that is okay. Just because you went through all that work to become their friend does not give you the right to date this person. If you are only in the friendship to get the date, you are a shallow human being. I had a guy act super friendly towards me for weeks (it was so obvious what he was trying to do). I was just waiting for him to make his move (but kind of dreading it because I didn't want to date a coworker). He finally (sort of) asked me out and I went, but then I rejected any further advances because, like I said, I didn't want to date a coworker. Ever since then, he's barely talked to me. He's been nice, but definitely not as friendly as he was. DO NOT DO THIS!!! Remember, it is okay to be just friends. Getting to know people is a good thing. It's only if you are stuck on one person and it is preventing you from meeting other people should you try to move on.

A recent revelation of mine is that you don't need to be immediately attracted to someone to go on a date with them, or to even consistently date them. People think they need to feel the sparks and have their tummies flip flop when they meet someone in order to pursue it. THIS IS NOT SO!!!
Attraction often comes later! Yes, a lot of the times it comes right away, but like 70-80% of the immediate attraction is physical (that's a random number I picked, I actually have no idea. But the concept is true). Remember earlier, I was talking about groundwork? This is why. Like I said, the best relationships are founded on friendship. If you have a genuine mental connection with someone, PURSUE IT!!! If you have lots of similar interests, goals, likes/dislikes, etc... don't drop them just because you don't feel those sparks, keep them because you're laying out coals for your eventual fire. A relationship is something you work at. I've heard of people who dated for over a month before they were genuinely attracted to each other (then they ended up getting married). Again, in Mormon culture, the pressure to get married is intense and they think they need to feel attracted right away so that they can get married quickly. We don't all have to be like that. It is possible to take our time. Also, sometimes we date people who obviously like us much more than we like them. Well, what's wrong with that? If you have that mental connection, PURSUE IT!!! The attraction might come later. Lay out your coals and blow on them a little. If after a while, you still feel nothing, yeah, you'll have to break up. I know that's a hard thing, but that's just how life is. But come on, chances are if you really connected with this person, you'll grow to like them more and more until eventually it turns into attraction. You just have to allow yourself to think that way. (This is a recent discovery of mine, as I said. I only recently went on my very first second date.)

So boys, you can keep asking out all kinds of girls and then reject them because it just wasn't right; and girls, you can keep going out with every guy you meet and then reject them for the same reason, but you may have been throwing out perfectly good burning coals just because you didn't see a spark.

We're all just fumbling around trying to find out way in the world. We all seek companionship whether it be an actual relationship or just friendship. A relationship is simply a more intense form of friendship. I don't see why people frown upon relationships. Yes, our lives should not center around "finding a man," like it's literally our only purpose, but it's certainly not a bad thing. Lay out your coals, find your best friend if you can.

BOOK REVIEW: This Dark Endeavor

It’s been a long while since I wrote a book review. This is mostly because any books I read lately are assigned from a class and I just don’t care that much for a lot of them (however, if you hear that I read a certain book that you’re interested in and you want a full scale review, let me know). 

However, now I am in a Young Adult Literature class where I’m required to read, well... a lot of young adult literature. Most of the popular books nowadays are young adult novels, but I’ve never been a huge fan of YA books. This is because a lot of them are a little too simple for me, have obnoxious/cliche characters, are uninventive, and sometimes try too hard. However, since taking this class, I’ve been appreciating the (I guess you can call it a) genre more. YA books are meant to change the world by inspiring the young generation. Not that there aren’t stupid, mind-numbing books out there, but a good YA novel addresses real life issues that teens deal with and writes it in such a way that helps that age group become aware and even change.

Anyways, that is not what this post is about. I’ll not bore you with my class’s teachings. In my class, I have to prepare a presentation either on an author or a genre of my choice and read three books by that author or from that genre (then I have to present it and explain the author/genre). I chose horror for my genre, so I had to choose three books in the YA horror genre. Naturally, I turned to the internet for advice because I had no idea where to begin. I chose my novels based on how interesting they sounded (off a top 50 YA horror novel list). Long story short, the first novel I read was This Dark Endeavor by Kenneth Oppel. 

It’s a prequel to the famous horror novel, Frankenstein by Mary Shelley. It follows Victor Frankenstein as a teenager as he searches for a cure for his dying brother and thinks he may find it through unnatural means. 

I was surprised by how much I liked this book, actually. I’ve read Frankenstein before, so I fully understood the significance of the characters, their connections, and their motivations. I would probably recommend at least familiarizing yourself with the original novel before reading this one to fully appreciate it. I mean, it definitely still makes sense if you don’t know who everybody is and what happens ultimately, but I know that I appreciated it more with my background knowledge.

What I appreciated the most was how developed Victor was. I hadn’t read Frankenstein in a while, but I did remember that in the original book, he said that he regretted how obsessed and overly ambitious he was. This book really set the ground work for that. He didn’t just obsess over finding a cure for his brother, he obsessed over everything. I liked how he slowly gained an interest in science, alchemy, etc. and found he was extremely gifted at it, and his extreme thirst for knowledge, I loved his inner turmoil of wanting to find a cure to save his brother, but also wanting glory. He just wanted to be appreciated. I know what it’s like to feel overshadowed by a sibling sometimes. I can imagine that feeling must be a thousand times worse when that sibling is an identical twin.

Of course, he was a weirdo teenager too with raging hormones. I was literally shouting at the book sometimes, telling him to calm down. He does NOT know how to woo a woman, let me just say that much. 

I guess, I’m getting into criticisms already: the romance was the weirdest part for me. In the original, Victor has a fiancee, but there’s really not a lot of detail about how they got together. It just says they grew up together, fell in love, and then got engaged. That’s literally all it says. Thus, this novel fleshes it out... *sigh* Really, it could have been so sweet, but no. It had to be all weird and awkward and Victor had to be a total dweeb forcing himself upon her. Like, no. Chill, dude! And then her, sending mixed signals all over the place! And what was with the sleepwalking? (I don’t remember if that was in the original novel. If it wasn’t, then it being in this book was so random and weird.) I just felt like their stupidness took away from the tragedy that will befall them in the future.

Anyways, it was still an extremely well-written book (at least for a YA novel). It was a pretty easy read, maybe something a middle-schooler could read. I actually read the entire thing in about four hours. But it was still super well-written, none of this Twilight crap. It really painted a picture for you (without being overly descriptive), even the action scenes were very clear and you knew exactly what was going on. It was also very good at showing and not telling. Right from the get-go, I knew exactly what kind of relationship Victor had with his brother. It was maybe a little predictable, but there were some things that I didn’t see coming at all.

And the tension it builds. I was definitely on the edge of my seat sometimes. I know that’s hard to write without being like “and then this happened. And suddenly this happened.” Action and suspense are two of the hardest things for me, and it was so well executed here. I really enjoyed it.

There are some sort of supernatural elements about it, but nothing too extreme. It’s something you’d expect in a Frankenstein book/movie. The lines between science and witchcraft are blurred. 

In conclusion, I’d recommend it to anybody looking for a quick, fun read, especially if you are familiar with Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. It’s got really good action, adventure, and great suspense. If you’re looking for a fulfilling romance, this is not the place to go. It’s not horrible, but it could definitely be improved upon. It’s well-written and I never found myself upset with any of the wording. The characters are all great, especially the main one, all flawed and interesting. So, give it a read if you’ve got the time.

(And I found out that there's a sequel to this called Such Wicked Intent, but the plot doesn't sound as appealing to me as this one did. But, who knows, maybe it's good. Maybe one day I'll get around to reading it.)