Tuesday, 27 April 2010
FAN FEST - My Review
FAN FEST – London, April 24th-25th, 2010
Fan Fest was a James Bond based convention, held at the National Film Museum in London over two days.
The celebs present were Alkis Kritikos, Andreas Wisniewski, Bettine LeBeau, Bill Pearson, Blanche Ravalec, Bob Keen, Brian Johnson, Britt Ekland, Burt Kwouk, Carole Ashby, Caroline Bliss, Caroline Munro, Caron Gardner, Christopher Muncke, Deborah Moore, Edward De Souza, Eunice Gayson, George Lazenby, Harry Myers, Helene Hunt, Honor Blackman, Jack Klaff, Jenny Hanley, Jeremy Bulloch, Jesper Christensen, John Wyman, Ken Wallis, Lewis Gilbert, Madeline Smith, Maryam D’Abo, Martine Beswick, Maud Adams, The Meyer Twins, Ray Harryhausen, Richard Kiel, Richard LeParmentier, Sir Roger Moore, Sebastian Foucan, Shane Rimmer, Shirley Eaton, Stephen Lang, Steve Begg, Sylvana Henriques, Tania Mallet, Terry English and Valerie Leon.
SATURDAY
When we arrived at Fan Fest, we had a look round first of all. There were two signing rooms with tables around the sides, where the celebs sat, with their photos to sell.
My main interests in coming to Fan Fest were to meet Margaret Nolan (who I love from the Carry On films) and Madeline Smith – both of whom I have never managed to get an autograph from. I also wanted to meet Valerie Leon (another Carry On beauty) and Albert Moses (from Mind Your Language and many other roles). I have autographs from these two already, but hadn’t met them.
Sadly, I was disappointed to discover that Margaret Nolan and Albert Moses were unable to attend. In fact, Margaret had injured her back so badly, she had been in hospital a week!
My other favourite Madeline Smith was our first port of call and we were her first customer of the day. As her steward wasn’t there yet, she had to give us the change from a £20 from her own purse! Almost all the celebs were charging £15 for one 10x8 signed photo and this usually included being able to get a photo of yourself with the celeb too. (George Lazenby and Richard Kiel were charging £20.)
Madeline was lovely; she has a great personality and a wonderful strength about her. When I asked if I could pose for a photo with her, she crawled under the table to stand alongside me, commenting that she was “still quite spry” and she certainly is! While admittedly not looking exactly how she did in her prime, she has aged well and is naturally pretty.
I asked if she had received the letter I sent her last year and she said she hadn’t had any fan mail for about a year. She was angry not to have got it and asked which address I had used. The inference was certainly that if she’d received it, she would have replied.
So I got a 10x8 signed by her, had two photos taken with her and found her a real delight – warm, friendly, candid and definitely someone I would love to meet again.
After that, I decided to meet Britt Ekland, who was on the opposite side of the same room. There were hardly any queues for the signings all weekend (though Honor Blackman, George Lazenby, Richard Kiel and Valerie Leon seemed particularly popular), so we had quite a bit of time with everyone and never felt rushed.
I took some time choosing which photo of Britt I wanted to buy and she was suggesting I might like the ones of her with Roger Moore, as he was there that weekend too. I knew Roger wasn’t signing though, so chose a 10x8 b/w photo of her and she signed it to me, asking how to spell ‘Karen’ and when I told her, she commented it was the Swedish spelling.
She happily posed for a photo with me too and was friendly enough, but I felt she was a bit more pushy than the others with selling her photos and I felt she wasn’t as warm or genuine as many of the other girls. Still, she was nice enough.
She was the only actress there that had really obvious cosmetic surgery done though and I felt that detracted from her natural looks a bit.
After Britt, we went over to meet Jenny Hanley. I told her I knew Francoise Pascal through Facebook and we talked about that a bit and she said for me to send Francoise her love. She said she didn’t understand Facebook, Twitter and the like and checked I wouldn’t be putting her photo up on there, which I said was fine. Apparently, she’d been at a party recently and someone had put her photo up on Facebook and she wasn’t happy with it.
We talked about her photos and I picked one from Scars of Dracula. I told her I loved the film and that I had mentioned how good it was (and Jenny) on my Facebook status, which was how Francoise and I had come to talk about her.
I also said I loved her presenting Magpie during my childhood. At this point, we were standing together for a photo and I commented how tall she is. (Almost all the girls were way taller than me, except little Blanche Ravalec!) She said in Magpie, this was an issue as Mick Robertson was very tall too, but Douglas Rae was small.
She was very nice, chatty, friendly and I liked her. I got the impression she didn’t suffer fools gladly and would tell you if she didn’t like something, but she came across very well and someone else I’d like to see again.
Well, after spending £45 in the first twenty minutes or something, we decided to go and listen to some of the Question and Answer sessions – especially as these were included in the ticket price! They were held in the impressive Debating Chamber, where the Greater London Council had held meetings up to 1990 or so. Huge ceilings, big high-backed chairs - and bad lighting to take photos!
We first saw Bill Pearson’s Q&A. He works in visual effects and had a hand in many films and TV series, including Alien vs. Predator, Thunderbirds, Moon, Demons, Alien, Red Dwarf and Die Another Day.
He was charming, honest and interesting. He had a show reel of some of the props and effects he had been involved in and did a commentary over it, which was fascinating. He was openly critical of some of the projects he had been involved in, but obviously proud of his achievements too and he was great to listen to, with a wonderful Scottish accent and witty sense of humour.
After this, it was the Q&A with Britt Ekland and Maud Adams. This was interesting and they said they had a bond (pun intended!) with each other, both being Swedish. They came across well and discussed working together on The Man with the Golden Gun amongst other things.
After this, there were three Q&As we weren’t interested in (Harry Myers, Steve Begg, Terry English) so we went back to the signing rooms and met Valerie Leon. She had a special deal on her photos (one for £15, two for £20 or if you spent £30, you got three 10x8 signed photos and a signed photo book), so we chose the £30 deal and she warmly signed them for me, each with different inscriptions.
I talked to her about being a fan of the Carry Ons and the Hammer films and how I had recently bought The Hammer Collection and seen Blood From The Mummy’s Tomb. I told her I hoped to see her one-woman show sometime and she asked where we were from, so I said Bristol. She said she was going to be doing her show at the Jermyn Street theatre in London on November 7th and I said I would try to get to see it. She said details would be up on her website – www.valerieleon.com – and she said to keep an eye on it for more info about the show.
She happily posed for a photo with me and is another tall lady and naturally beautiful. She is glamorous and obviously takes care to dress well, to do her hair and make up carefully and really makes the best of herself. I had thought she might be slightly intimidating, but she wasn’t at all. She was lovely and I hope to meet her again in November.
We went back to the Debating Chamber just in time to catch the end of Terry English’s Q&A. (He creates film armour.)
Then it was Bob Keen, who immediately endeared himself to me by unveiling a stunning werewolf head, which sat next to him throughout! He is a special effects and make up expert and has worked on many projects. He showed clips from them, including Dog Soldiers (which the werewolf head was from), Hellraiser, Candyman, Event Horizon and the Star Wars films.
He was another fascinating man, witty, endearing and very interesting to listen to. He explained how some of the effects were achieved and talked about the bee effect in Candyman, Pinhead’s ‘birth’ in Hellraiser and other classic horror moments. (Not that I have seen either film!)
This was followed by a Q&A by George Lazenby. What a character! He was frank and self-critical of his younger self, explaining how he was arrogant at the time and happy to bed a string of women, simply because he could! (Leading to the vocal disapproval of his co-star Diana Rigg!)
He explained how he pretty much blagged his way into the film On His Majesty’s Secret Service, despite never having acted before. He was full of interesting anecdotes and his Australian accent was nice too, but there was something about him I disliked a bit. I didn’t like him swearing (which he did quite a lot) and I guess I didn’t “approve of” a lot of the behaviour he talked about doing in his past, but he was fascinating to listen to.
I had planned to meet him, but the £20 put me off a bit and he obviously didn’t charm me, or I would have thought he was worth the extra £5 to meet – yet I didn’t. He is still good looking (and aged 70 too!), although I suspect he might have had some work done there. I wasn’t sure the flat cap was very flattering though.
After this, it was back to the signing rooms and this time, I met Caroline Munro. She is another glamorous lady who dresses beautifully and looks much younger than she is. She was very sweet – gracious, friendly, just lovely in every way.
Once again, I had problems picking which photo to buy and she was saying which films some of them were from. I said I especially loved the Hammer films, but the one of her from that was with her throat dropping with blood, so I didn’t like that one. Instead, I picked one of her which she said was from the Sinbad film.
She asked where we were from and how our journey had been. She posed for a photo with me too and generally, I felt I had “connected” with her and that we got on well. She didn’t seem to be putting up any front, she came across as genuine and warm and another I would try to meet again.
Having pretty much spent up for the day (Hubby gave me a daily limit, very wisely!), we spent the rest of the time in the Debating Chamber. We caught the end of the For Your Eyes Only panel (John Wyman, Alkis Kritikos and Jack Klaff), then it was the Ray Harryhausen Q&A. We had to leave the Debating Chamber and queue for this, as priority was given to the Press and it was very popular, but we got in okay.
I am an admirer of Ray’s work, as I loved the films he made like Jason and the Argonauts, Clash of the Titans and The Golden Voyage of Sinbad. I loved those skeletons with the swords and shields – and he had one of those models in front of him!
Ray will be 90 in June and the National Film Museum is opening a special exhibition of his work to celebrate this, which was why he was over here and it explained the press interest. He is a fascinating man too, though he had his biographer with him to prompt him when he forgot something.
After he had finished talking, one of the audience went up and asked if he would sign something. The organisers had a quick discussion and announced that as he was tired, he would only sign for five people. I was second in the queue! I only had a lined notebook with me, so he signed that and the steward took a photo of us together. So a wonderful autograph for my collection – and for free too!!
The evening had originally been due to end with an appearance by Sir Christopher Lee, but sadly, he had been unable to make it. Instead, we had Sir Roger Moore (who was there with most of his family) and although he didn’t meet the public, he was an amazing speaker and we really enjoyed this section, which lasted about an hour. He was very funny and witty, charming, engaging and just full of hilarious anecdotes. A wonderful way to end the evening!
SUNDAY
The second day of Fan Fest saw another combination of signings alongside the (free) Question and Answer sessions. By now, we were quite short of money, so I had to make some tough decisions as to who I wanted to meet. With Margaret Nolan and Albert Moses absent, I had a couple of spaces to fill…
Due to a complicated train journey from Wembley to Central London (The whole of Bakerloo line was down!), we got to the London Film Museum a bit late, so we didn’t manage to catch the whole of Honor Blackman’s talk, but what we heard was interesting.
I have enjoyed watching Honor in lots of things over the years and Hubby and I were both interested to hear her say that she comes across hardly anyone who remembers the title of The Upper Hand, so they usually have to describe the set up to her instead!
This Q&A was followed by the Goldfinger panel with Shirley Eaton and Tania Mallet. Both are intelligent, articulate and well-spoken women. I wasn’t very aware of Tania Mallet before this weekend, but have loved Shirley Eaton for years, through her performances in the Carry On films.
Therefore, the most interesting part for me was when Shirley was asked about working with the Carry On team. She said her favourite was Kenneth Connor, that Kenneth Williams was “a scream” and she loved ‘Joanie’ (Sims) as well.
After this, we returned to the signings rooms and met Maud Adams. Though beautiful, tall and agreeable, I found she was slightly cold like Britt Ekland and I didn’t warm to her as much as some of the others. She was pleasant enough though and happy to sign for me, then pose for a photo.
We then met Honor Blackman, who was friendly and happy to talk. She noticed the Hollywood T-shirt I was wearing and asked if it came from Universal Studios. I said it did, but I hadn’t been there, it had been a gift. We also talked about The Upper Hand, telling her that we did actually remember the title! (She realised we were referring to her talk, as she said something like “Oh, you were there then?”)
I chose a photo of her and she commented that it was only taken at Pinewood, yet the sky behind her looks a stunning blue! She signed it and posed for a photo with me, sitting on the table so we could be together for the picture.
She seemed lovely, very gracious and ladylike, though she did seem quite small and frail – though she is looking amazing for her age and still very pretty.
We had intentionally missed the Q&A of Wing Commander Ken Wallis, but returned to the Debating Chamber to see Lewis Gilbert, the director of three James Bond films, plus other excellent movies – Alfie, Shirley Valentine, Educating Rita and Stepping Out amongst others! Wow! Some pedigree.
He is 90 now and did need some help with hearing things, but what a personality and what a life he has led! Fascinating man and very witty too. He came across as pretty sharp for his age and when he said at the end that the saddest thing about ageing was that he “may not ever” do another movie and we both thought it was great that he hadn’t completely ruled it out, despite being 90. We could happily have listened to him for another hour!
He’s just had his autobiography published, but sadly we couldn’t afford to buy it. He did stay to sign copies of it though and amongst those queuing to get his autograph was Blanche Ravalec, who had worked with him in Moonraker. I loved her demeanour when she met him and took some photos of them together. She came across as very sweet, so I decided I would probably try to meet her afterwards, if I had the money left.
I went back to the signing room then and almost literally bumped into Caroline Munro, who was wearing a lovely sparkly green scarf and looked lovely – which I told her. We were chatting (I think she remembered me from Saturday) and I told her that I’d been trying to get Margaret Nolan’s autograph for twenty years, to no avail. I said how I had recently tried writing to her c/o Equity, but the letter had come back ‘Return To Sender’ but I had it with me and had been planning to give it to Margaret personally over the weekend.
Caroline said she thought she knew someone who could help and took me over to a woman called Jane, who was near Caroline and Valerie Leon’s signing tables. As it was, Jane wasn’t sure if she could help, but Valerie said she knew a way to get the letter to Margaret and would be happy to help. She said Margaret was in hospital with her back, so she couldn’t promise I’d get a response, but she would try. I thanked Valerie and gave her the letter, but explained that I didn’t have a stamp on me, but she was fine about that too! How kind of her!
Then I saw Blanche Ravalec and asked her how long she would be signing. (I’d left the money with Hubby, but had noticed quite a few of the celebs had already gone home, including Maryam D’Abo, who I had been planning to meet.) She was very nice, has a beautiful smile and was pleased when I spoke a few words of French to her.
So I went back to Hubby to collect the money, then went back to meet Blanche. We chatted more – including quite a lot in French. Despite feeling my French was rather rusty (I studied it at school for seven years, but haven’t used it much since the late 1980s!), she insisted it was good and asked if I had much opportunity to use it. I said no and explained I had learnt it at school, but it was a long time ago now.
She signed a photo of herself from Moonraker and the steward took two photos of me with her. I commented that it was nice to find another small woman like me (I’m about 5’ 4”) as all the other actresses were very tall. Anyway, she was wonderful, very sweet and pretty and easy to chat to.
It was then back to the Q&As, as I caught the end of the talk with Brian Johnson, who has worked on Alien, Hammer films, Bladerunner, Empire Strikes Back and many more. He was a bit dull though, so I went off for another wander round the museum with my camera.
As I walked past the signing rooms, I saw an American man talking to Shirley Eaton, so I waited round until they had finished talking and I told her I had enjoyed her talk and had admired her work for many years. She seemed very happy and thanked me for waiting to talk to her. I had always thought she would be a little scary in person, but she wasn’t, she was very nice and I hope to meet her for longer sometime.
Then it was the Q&A with Stephen Lang. He arrived early and sat in the back row wearing a flat cap and a few people (maybe five) went up to him to ask for autographs, which he happily gave. I didn’t ask, because I wasn’t sure who he was, but in hindsight, I wish I had done! I haven’t seen Avatar (in which he plays the Marine Chief) but he was over in the UK to promote the DVD release (and subsequently turned up on the BBC Breakfast News and Loose Women on Monday!). I have seen him in Manhunter though and probably several other things over the years.
He’s another interesting bloke, good looking and great to listen to. He has a nice American accent and I was impressed with how much thought he gave to the characters he played and their motivations, how he sees the ‘human’ side of villains and so on.
This was followed by the Moonraker panel with Richard Kiel and Blanche Ravalec, who played Jaws and Dolly in the film. Richard is in a mobility scooter all the time now, so he came in the room via the back doors so as to avoid the stairs.
He had a lot of interesting stories to tell, including how he first got into acting and how they filmed two endings to his first film as Jaws, as he hoped to return. He said at the time, he was 7’2” and weighed over 300 pounds. They had tried to cast a 7’ 7” actress as his girlfriend in Moonraker, but he insisted she should be small, commenting that his wife in real life was only 5’ 1” tall, so that is how Blanche got the part.
I would have liked to hear more from Blanche, but the attention was on Richard most of the time. She did explain how she had blagged her way in to be seen for her first part though and her perseverance had paid off. (This was a recurring theme. Quite a few cast and crew said they had turned up at studios or lied to get into auditions and so on!)
Richard said his next project is voicing the character of Vlad in a modern day interpretation of Rapunzel called Tangle, which will be out towards the end of the year.
The final Q&A of the day was Eunice Gayson (one of the oldest Bond girls in her eighties) and Madeline Smith. This was also one of the most entertaining, as both ladies are brilliant at telling stories and held my interest throughout. They both have strong personalities and are not afraid of being candid or critical, so it was a fascinating panel.
Eunice is very funny, a bit eccentric in that wonderfully British way. She was dressed quite flamboyantly too, with a sparkly black hat and glamorous outfit. She was great to listen to.
There was a lovely story about the red dress she wore in James Bond. She originally had a specially made brown and gold dress, but once they were on set, it blended in too much, so Eunice was hard to see in it, so they needed to find a different outfit. They went down to the village and the only thing they could find was a size 20 red dress, when Eunice was a “size 7 or 8” at the time. So they bought it and it was so big on her, she had to be clothes-pegged into it! But she said it looked great and was very flattering, although she could only walk stiffly sideways in it or the pegs would come off!
Madeline Smith was probably my favourite guest and I took quite a few notes about what she said. She admitted to “not being thrilled” about her look in The Vampire Lovers, believing it “borders on the obscene” though she doesn’t mind it so much now. She prefers her look in the Bond film (though hates the blue dress!) as she believes that leaving something unseen is sexy and therefore, Bond girls look sexier than in The Vampire Lovers.
Maddy said her favourite Bond was Roger Moore, who she described as a “genuine lovely guy” (I don’t think we heard a bad word said about him all weekend!). We had a show of hands in the room, which showed support for every Bond and no clear winner. (I voted for Roger too.)
She criticised her outfit in the Bond film, saying it was the wrong colour (a blue dress for her green eyes), it was unflattering, made of heavy fabric and was a “trick dress” picked for its unzipping. She also emphasised her part in the film was only a small one.
Asked for her career highlights, she said she loved The Amazing Mr. Blunden with Lionel Jeffries and recommended we try to see it. (Apparently, it’s hard to get hold of, but the interviewer said it is being reissued soon.) She said she loved the film and Lionel and that Diana Dors was her “favourite”.
She then listed her other highlights as working with Arthur Lowe (in Doctor At Large and the “wonderful cult film” Theatre of Blood) and working with Ronnie Barker in Hampton Wick.
After the talk, Maddy stayed behind to talk a bit and pose for photos, so I took one of her, which came out very nicely.
On our way out, I had a last walk around the signings rooms and saw Richard Kiel was still there. As I hadn’t been able to take a good photo of him during his Q&A session, I asked the stewards if it would be possible to take a photo of him at the table. They said it would probably be okay, but to wait, so I queued to ask him politely if I could take a quick photo of him (not with him even, just of him) but he said no. I had to pay £20 for a signed photo and only then would he let me take a photo. So sod that! I was out of money anyway, but he won’t get any of my money at future events. I thought it was rather rude to charge just for a quick snap like that!
That did slightly tinge the end of what had been a great weekend, but hopefully I will forget that soon and just remember all the happy bits. I especially loved Madeline Smith, Caroline Munro, Jenny Hanley, Blanche Ravalec and Valerie Leon and hope to see them again.
Labels:
autograph,
Caroline Munro,
Carry On,
convention,
cult,
Fan Fest,
Hammer,
Honor Blackman,
James Bond,
Madeline Smith,
Valerie Leon
Thursday, 15 April 2010
Perfect Match by Jodi Picoult - BOOK REVIEW
I first read a Jodi Picoult book back in 2008, when I devoured the brilliant Nineteen Minutes in not much longer! Following that excellent read, I began buying her other novels and quickly finished Plain Truth straight after I had read Nineteen Minutes. But then I had a long gap and it was around eighteen months until I read another of her novels, though I’m not sure why!
But after reading a disappointing novel by my beloved Tess Gerritsen (Bloodstream), I wanted to have a great book to compensate – so I turned once again to Jodi Picoult and picked out a book from my collection – Perfect Match. I picked it up to begin reading – and only stopped some 200 pages later! Wow!
How reassuring to find another book I want to engross myself in for hours, to carry around with me, to creep off to bed early to read… Being the Easter holidays, I was happily offering computer time to my surprised children, as I disappeared off somewhere with my next hundred pages calling me…
So, what’s Perfect Match all about then? As any fans of Jodi Picoult will know, there’s bound to be some legal trial coming up and yes, you’re right, that’s central to this one too.
We meet our leading lady early on – Nina Frost, assistant district attorney in Maine, USA. (Incidentally, Gerritsen’s Bloodstream was set in Maine too.) She’s professional, efficient, confident and competent – what you might expect from her choice of career. But there’s another side to her too, her home life and here, we meet her husband Caleb and her son Nathaniel.
Caleb is self-employed and works outdoors, building walls and other stonework. He comes across as nice enough, but a bit uncharismatic. However, Nina loves him and they’re happily married, both successful and living a pretty good life really.
They both love little Nathaniel, who’s just five years old. A real sweetheart, he seems to have a great life too and everything seems fine. Then one day, he just stops talking. They take him for some medical tests, culminating in a meeting with Dr. Robichaud, who is a psychiatrist. While he’s there, Nathaniel’s actions lead the psychiatrist to believe the little boy has been sexually abused.
Further physical examinations prove an assault has taken place, which sends Nina and Caleb’s life into instant turmoil. Of course, any parent in that situation must feel awful, we can all sympathise with that. But for Nina, it is arguably even worse. Part of her job is working with abused children whose parents are hoping for a conviction. She knows how traumatic it can be for young children to face a scary courtroom and tell strangers there all about the abuse they have suffered. There is no way she wants Nathaniel to go through that – but how can she prevent it?
I don’t want to go into too much of the plot from here, as it is full of twists and turns, shocks and surprises. The novel does start with a brief court scene, then the story goes back in time to explain how the first scene took place.
There are many themes covered in Perfect Match and the main one is – How far would a parent go to protect their child? And how far SHOULD they go? As a mother myself, it is something I have thought of before and I’m sure we have all considered similar topics. I see myself as quite a calm, peaceful and non-aggressive woman, yet I know I would fight to protect my kids, if I really had to.
We’ve all watched the News and heard about the nursery school teacher sexually abusing young children in her care, or the Catholic priests accused of sexual abuse, or the care home workers. It’s all around us. Each time, we feel anger. We understand when people shout at the accused in the dock or if they break the windows of their homes. But no-one really knows how you would react, until it happens to you – and hopefully, it won’t.
But it happens to the Frosts - and Nina’s actions have a big affect on both Caleb and Nathaniel. This is fascinating to watch how their relationships change and it seems very realistic and believable. It is easy to picture the characters and you get to know them well.
Although some reviewers have suggested Nina is rather a cold character, I found her easy to relate to, simply as a mother and I did like her. Nathaniel seems very accurate too. It is hard to write a voice for a five year old, but Picoult does a great job.
The slight problem I had was with Caleb, who never seemed to develop into anything more than a grey shadow. It might just be because I didn’t like him. I really wanted Nina to leave him and go off with Patrick Ducharme, the policeman who has loved her for years. He comes across as much warmer than Caleb and I felt I knew Patrick better and liked him much more too.
But this is only a slight criticism and didn’t detract from my overall enjoyment of the novel. It really is a great read. It is well-paced and exciting, but also quite deep, as it throws up lots of issues and situations that make you think and wonder what you would do in that position.
It is definitely the sort of book that could be read in a couple of hours – or a couple of days in my case, as real life kept getting in the way! The novel itself is around 400 pages long, but each page seemed to fly by and I thoroughly enjoyed the whole story. I rated it 9 out of 10 and would definitely recommend it.
The paperback edition of Perfect Match is currently selling for £4.97 on Amazon UK, but I was lucky enough to pick my copy up for 50p from the local charity shop.
The Jodi Picoult books I have read, with my ratings -
Nineteen Minutes, 9.5/10
Plain Truth, 9/10
Perfect Match, 9/10
But after reading a disappointing novel by my beloved Tess Gerritsen (Bloodstream), I wanted to have a great book to compensate – so I turned once again to Jodi Picoult and picked out a book from my collection – Perfect Match. I picked it up to begin reading – and only stopped some 200 pages later! Wow!
How reassuring to find another book I want to engross myself in for hours, to carry around with me, to creep off to bed early to read… Being the Easter holidays, I was happily offering computer time to my surprised children, as I disappeared off somewhere with my next hundred pages calling me…
So, what’s Perfect Match all about then? As any fans of Jodi Picoult will know, there’s bound to be some legal trial coming up and yes, you’re right, that’s central to this one too.
We meet our leading lady early on – Nina Frost, assistant district attorney in Maine, USA. (Incidentally, Gerritsen’s Bloodstream was set in Maine too.) She’s professional, efficient, confident and competent – what you might expect from her choice of career. But there’s another side to her too, her home life and here, we meet her husband Caleb and her son Nathaniel.
Caleb is self-employed and works outdoors, building walls and other stonework. He comes across as nice enough, but a bit uncharismatic. However, Nina loves him and they’re happily married, both successful and living a pretty good life really.
They both love little Nathaniel, who’s just five years old. A real sweetheart, he seems to have a great life too and everything seems fine. Then one day, he just stops talking. They take him for some medical tests, culminating in a meeting with Dr. Robichaud, who is a psychiatrist. While he’s there, Nathaniel’s actions lead the psychiatrist to believe the little boy has been sexually abused.
Further physical examinations prove an assault has taken place, which sends Nina and Caleb’s life into instant turmoil. Of course, any parent in that situation must feel awful, we can all sympathise with that. But for Nina, it is arguably even worse. Part of her job is working with abused children whose parents are hoping for a conviction. She knows how traumatic it can be for young children to face a scary courtroom and tell strangers there all about the abuse they have suffered. There is no way she wants Nathaniel to go through that – but how can she prevent it?
I don’t want to go into too much of the plot from here, as it is full of twists and turns, shocks and surprises. The novel does start with a brief court scene, then the story goes back in time to explain how the first scene took place.
There are many themes covered in Perfect Match and the main one is – How far would a parent go to protect their child? And how far SHOULD they go? As a mother myself, it is something I have thought of before and I’m sure we have all considered similar topics. I see myself as quite a calm, peaceful and non-aggressive woman, yet I know I would fight to protect my kids, if I really had to.
We’ve all watched the News and heard about the nursery school teacher sexually abusing young children in her care, or the Catholic priests accused of sexual abuse, or the care home workers. It’s all around us. Each time, we feel anger. We understand when people shout at the accused in the dock or if they break the windows of their homes. But no-one really knows how you would react, until it happens to you – and hopefully, it won’t.
But it happens to the Frosts - and Nina’s actions have a big affect on both Caleb and Nathaniel. This is fascinating to watch how their relationships change and it seems very realistic and believable. It is easy to picture the characters and you get to know them well.
Although some reviewers have suggested Nina is rather a cold character, I found her easy to relate to, simply as a mother and I did like her. Nathaniel seems very accurate too. It is hard to write a voice for a five year old, but Picoult does a great job.
The slight problem I had was with Caleb, who never seemed to develop into anything more than a grey shadow. It might just be because I didn’t like him. I really wanted Nina to leave him and go off with Patrick Ducharme, the policeman who has loved her for years. He comes across as much warmer than Caleb and I felt I knew Patrick better and liked him much more too.
But this is only a slight criticism and didn’t detract from my overall enjoyment of the novel. It really is a great read. It is well-paced and exciting, but also quite deep, as it throws up lots of issues and situations that make you think and wonder what you would do in that position.
It is definitely the sort of book that could be read in a couple of hours – or a couple of days in my case, as real life kept getting in the way! The novel itself is around 400 pages long, but each page seemed to fly by and I thoroughly enjoyed the whole story. I rated it 9 out of 10 and would definitely recommend it.
The paperback edition of Perfect Match is currently selling for £4.97 on Amazon UK, but I was lucky enough to pick my copy up for 50p from the local charity shop.
The Jodi Picoult books I have read, with my ratings -
Nineteen Minutes, 9.5/10
Plain Truth, 9/10
Perfect Match, 9/10
Shadow of the Vampire - FILM REVIEW
"The Script Girl? I'll Eat Her Later!"
A few weeks ago, Hubby and I watched Nosferatu for the first time. This amazing silent film from the 1920s impressed both of us and we thought Max Schreck was outstanding as Count Orlok. We started doing some research on the Internet about any other film roles he had done and the background to Nosferatu, which led to Hubby discovering Shadow of the Vampire - a film released in 2000, which is set during the filming of Nosferatu. It sounded an interesting idea and the cast sounded good (I especially like John Malkovich), so I bought the DVD from Amazon UK. (I also bought the Masters of Cinema remastered version of Nosferatu with extra features and a special booklet.)
Nosferatu itself is really the story of Dracula, but when the film was made, the Stoker family refused to give permission for the story to be filmed. This led to the changing of names and places, so Count Dracula became Count Orlok - but essentially, Nosferatu is the same story as Bram Stoker's Dracula.
Shadow of the Vampire is set during the filming of Nosferatu in the early 1920s. We follow the cast and crew throughout the filming process, with all its crises - funding problems, illness, disagreements, drug abuse and the complications of having a real vampire on board. Oh yes, this is where Shadow of the Vampire alters history somewhat. The audience is left to wonder - What would have happened if Max Schreck had really been a genuine vampire?
This explains the mystery surrounding Max Schreck. He appears late into filming, rarely socialises with the cast, appears to have come from nowhere career-wise and he is allowed to only film his scenes in the dark. The director F. W. Murnau tells the cast and crew this is due to Schreck's Method acting techniques, as he needs to fully immerse himself in the role. But really, Murnau has done a deal with Schreck that in return for a great performance, Murnau will give him what he desires....
I really enjoyed this film and thought it was a great original twist on the old vampire story. It has elements of several genres in it -horror, thriller, drama and black comedy - and I felt this worked very well, as you soon become involved in the unfolding story and care about the characters.
John Malkovich plays F. W. Murnau and puts in an excellent performance, as usual. I first saw Malkovich in Dangerous Liaisons back in 1988 and he has never disappointed me yet. Here he plays Murnau as an ever-increasingly mad director. As the filming progresses, he becomes more and more driven and obsessive, until he will stop at nothing to get his vision onto film. I found I still sympathised with him, as having seen the original Nosferatu film, I believe it is one of the best films ever made, so if it was my "baby", I think I would be pretty ruthless too. (Would I hire a real vampire? I don't know.)
While Malkovich is excellent, Willem Defoe is outstanding as Max Schreck. Wow! He is unrecognisable under the amazing make up and delivers a truly great performance. His Schreck is very creepy with a huge presence and he has some wonderful spooky little mannerisms - sniffs, twitches and tapping his long fingernails together. He was nominated for an Oscar for this performance, but sadly didn't win.
The audience has sympathy for Schreck, even as an aged vampire. There is one wonderful scene where he talks about the sadness of the Dracula novel, how the Count has to prepare food and a bed for Jonathan Harker, as he has no servants and has to do everything himself. This demonstrates how both vampires - Dracula and Schreck - are at a nadir in their life, of low status, isolated and alone.
This kind of scene also shows how blurred the lines are between "good" and "bad". Who is the real monster here - the old vampire doing what comes naturally, or the director Murnau who is ruthless and willing to sacrifice lives for his art?
I think it helps if you have seen Nosferatu before watching this, as you will appreciate all the nuances of Shadow of the Vampire if you can compare it to the original film. It is amazing how the old black and white silent film is recreated too. The sets are beautiful too and the actors are close to the original stars as well. I also liked the use of title cards (inter-titles) for some scenes, keeping in well with the theme of the original silent film.
It was fascinating to see how the silent films worked behind the scenes too. While appreciating this is a fictional account, I felt it was educational, demonstrating how silent films were made in the 1920s, such as the use of heavy make up for the actors, to bring out their features on film. It was also interesting to hear the characters talking as that wouldn't be in the final shot and how the director Murnau would talk them through their motivation for each scene. This gave another dimension to the film, as it made me think of the original movie in a slightly different way and appreciate how difficult it must have been to make a silent film.
The rest of the cast fade into the background somewhat, compared to the outstanding portrayals by Malkovich and Dafoe. I was impressed by Eddie Izzard though, who I have found can be very good in straight roles. He plays Gustav von Wangerhein here (who plays the Jonathan Harker role) and does shine in the role, though I wish he had been on screen for longer. I find he often raises the level of any material he is given and is eminently watchable.
Catherine McCormack plays Greta Schroeder, which is the only main part for a woman in the entire film. She is rather an annoying character, as she is self-centred and seems to have few positive character traits. Personally, I didn't care whether she ended up as vampire fodder or not, as I really didn't like her.
Cary Elwes was in Bram Stoker's Dracula (the 1992 film) so is no stranger to the story. Here he is Fritz Wagner, but despite being one of the starring names, I admit to hardly noticing him. A lot of the cast and crew seem to merge together a bit - not because they are inadequate, but because Malkovich and Defoe are so amazing!
The film is quite dark (as in 'lack of light') at times, but it works in context. The filming of Nosferatu is shown chronologically, so you can follow that story too, from beginning to end. I thought it was very clever how the "new" story (Schreck being really a vampire) combines with the facts of the film being shot in the 1920s. It becomes easy to believe the plot, as the acting is so good and Dafoe is incredibly convincing - you really would be scared of him in real life and could well believe he was a genuine vampire!
I was very impressed by the witty script, as there are some really funny and clever lines in this, like the title ("The script girl? I'll eat her later!") and some laugh out loud moments. Malkovich gets to deliver lots of great lines too, in that wonderfully mean, dark, brooding, and sinister voice of his. (Hubby said if Malkovich recorded an audio book of Dracula, it would be the creepiest thing ever!)
There is a good pace and built-up of tension and I never became bored or distracted - though it is relatively short anyway, at only 91 minutes. It is a thoughtful film - atmospheric, compelling and involving - but not an action movie by any means!
The main criticisms of other reviewers seems to be about the ending being disappointing, but I thought it was fine and I felt satisfied with it. I liked how it fitted in with the original Nosferatu, but with an added twist or two.
The film is rated 15, as there is some swearing (but not too much), drug use, a topless scene of a woman, horror themes, creepiness, drinking blood and so on. However, my daughter watched it and she's nearly fourteen and was perfectly fine with it. I would suggest a 12 rating might be more accurate.
Overall, both my husband and I thoroughly enjoyed Shadow of the Vampire. It is an interesting story, a clever twist on the Nosferatu theme and the performances of John Malkovich and especially Willem Dafoe are outstanding. If you're a fan of Nosferatu, you will get even more out of the film - and I would recommend you see both.
DVD INFORMATION
Shadow of the Vampire is currently available from Amazon UK for just £3.98. It does not have any extras though, not even subtitles, which would have been handy, as sometimes the words are hard to make out, due to rather quiet dialogue or being a bit too heavily accented. The Masters of Cinema remastered version of the original Nosferatu is £9.56 from Amazon UK and I would definitely recommend buying both.
A few weeks ago, Hubby and I watched Nosferatu for the first time. This amazing silent film from the 1920s impressed both of us and we thought Max Schreck was outstanding as Count Orlok. We started doing some research on the Internet about any other film roles he had done and the background to Nosferatu, which led to Hubby discovering Shadow of the Vampire - a film released in 2000, which is set during the filming of Nosferatu. It sounded an interesting idea and the cast sounded good (I especially like John Malkovich), so I bought the DVD from Amazon UK. (I also bought the Masters of Cinema remastered version of Nosferatu with extra features and a special booklet.)
Nosferatu itself is really the story of Dracula, but when the film was made, the Stoker family refused to give permission for the story to be filmed. This led to the changing of names and places, so Count Dracula became Count Orlok - but essentially, Nosferatu is the same story as Bram Stoker's Dracula.
Shadow of the Vampire is set during the filming of Nosferatu in the early 1920s. We follow the cast and crew throughout the filming process, with all its crises - funding problems, illness, disagreements, drug abuse and the complications of having a real vampire on board. Oh yes, this is where Shadow of the Vampire alters history somewhat. The audience is left to wonder - What would have happened if Max Schreck had really been a genuine vampire?
This explains the mystery surrounding Max Schreck. He appears late into filming, rarely socialises with the cast, appears to have come from nowhere career-wise and he is allowed to only film his scenes in the dark. The director F. W. Murnau tells the cast and crew this is due to Schreck's Method acting techniques, as he needs to fully immerse himself in the role. But really, Murnau has done a deal with Schreck that in return for a great performance, Murnau will give him what he desires....
I really enjoyed this film and thought it was a great original twist on the old vampire story. It has elements of several genres in it -horror, thriller, drama and black comedy - and I felt this worked very well, as you soon become involved in the unfolding story and care about the characters.
John Malkovich plays F. W. Murnau and puts in an excellent performance, as usual. I first saw Malkovich in Dangerous Liaisons back in 1988 and he has never disappointed me yet. Here he plays Murnau as an ever-increasingly mad director. As the filming progresses, he becomes more and more driven and obsessive, until he will stop at nothing to get his vision onto film. I found I still sympathised with him, as having seen the original Nosferatu film, I believe it is one of the best films ever made, so if it was my "baby", I think I would be pretty ruthless too. (Would I hire a real vampire? I don't know.)
While Malkovich is excellent, Willem Defoe is outstanding as Max Schreck. Wow! He is unrecognisable under the amazing make up and delivers a truly great performance. His Schreck is very creepy with a huge presence and he has some wonderful spooky little mannerisms - sniffs, twitches and tapping his long fingernails together. He was nominated for an Oscar for this performance, but sadly didn't win.
The audience has sympathy for Schreck, even as an aged vampire. There is one wonderful scene where he talks about the sadness of the Dracula novel, how the Count has to prepare food and a bed for Jonathan Harker, as he has no servants and has to do everything himself. This demonstrates how both vampires - Dracula and Schreck - are at a nadir in their life, of low status, isolated and alone.
This kind of scene also shows how blurred the lines are between "good" and "bad". Who is the real monster here - the old vampire doing what comes naturally, or the director Murnau who is ruthless and willing to sacrifice lives for his art?
I think it helps if you have seen Nosferatu before watching this, as you will appreciate all the nuances of Shadow of the Vampire if you can compare it to the original film. It is amazing how the old black and white silent film is recreated too. The sets are beautiful too and the actors are close to the original stars as well. I also liked the use of title cards (inter-titles) for some scenes, keeping in well with the theme of the original silent film.
It was fascinating to see how the silent films worked behind the scenes too. While appreciating this is a fictional account, I felt it was educational, demonstrating how silent films were made in the 1920s, such as the use of heavy make up for the actors, to bring out their features on film. It was also interesting to hear the characters talking as that wouldn't be in the final shot and how the director Murnau would talk them through their motivation for each scene. This gave another dimension to the film, as it made me think of the original movie in a slightly different way and appreciate how difficult it must have been to make a silent film.
The rest of the cast fade into the background somewhat, compared to the outstanding portrayals by Malkovich and Dafoe. I was impressed by Eddie Izzard though, who I have found can be very good in straight roles. He plays Gustav von Wangerhein here (who plays the Jonathan Harker role) and does shine in the role, though I wish he had been on screen for longer. I find he often raises the level of any material he is given and is eminently watchable.
Catherine McCormack plays Greta Schroeder, which is the only main part for a woman in the entire film. She is rather an annoying character, as she is self-centred and seems to have few positive character traits. Personally, I didn't care whether she ended up as vampire fodder or not, as I really didn't like her.
Cary Elwes was in Bram Stoker's Dracula (the 1992 film) so is no stranger to the story. Here he is Fritz Wagner, but despite being one of the starring names, I admit to hardly noticing him. A lot of the cast and crew seem to merge together a bit - not because they are inadequate, but because Malkovich and Defoe are so amazing!
The film is quite dark (as in 'lack of light') at times, but it works in context. The filming of Nosferatu is shown chronologically, so you can follow that story too, from beginning to end. I thought it was very clever how the "new" story (Schreck being really a vampire) combines with the facts of the film being shot in the 1920s. It becomes easy to believe the plot, as the acting is so good and Dafoe is incredibly convincing - you really would be scared of him in real life and could well believe he was a genuine vampire!
I was very impressed by the witty script, as there are some really funny and clever lines in this, like the title ("The script girl? I'll eat her later!") and some laugh out loud moments. Malkovich gets to deliver lots of great lines too, in that wonderfully mean, dark, brooding, and sinister voice of his. (Hubby said if Malkovich recorded an audio book of Dracula, it would be the creepiest thing ever!)
There is a good pace and built-up of tension and I never became bored or distracted - though it is relatively short anyway, at only 91 minutes. It is a thoughtful film - atmospheric, compelling and involving - but not an action movie by any means!
The main criticisms of other reviewers seems to be about the ending being disappointing, but I thought it was fine and I felt satisfied with it. I liked how it fitted in with the original Nosferatu, but with an added twist or two.
The film is rated 15, as there is some swearing (but not too much), drug use, a topless scene of a woman, horror themes, creepiness, drinking blood and so on. However, my daughter watched it and she's nearly fourteen and was perfectly fine with it. I would suggest a 12 rating might be more accurate.
Overall, both my husband and I thoroughly enjoyed Shadow of the Vampire. It is an interesting story, a clever twist on the Nosferatu theme and the performances of John Malkovich and especially Willem Dafoe are outstanding. If you're a fan of Nosferatu, you will get even more out of the film - and I would recommend you see both.
DVD INFORMATION
Shadow of the Vampire is currently available from Amazon UK for just £3.98. It does not have any extras though, not even subtitles, which would have been handy, as sometimes the words are hard to make out, due to rather quiet dialogue or being a bit too heavily accented. The Masters of Cinema remastered version of the original Nosferatu is £9.56 from Amazon UK and I would definitely recommend buying both.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)