The Summer House

Writing was the last thing in my mind yesterday, thus explains the delay. It’s been a while since I have written something sound about a book. And I am eager to do so again. It’s been a hobby and I wish not to lose it.

This entry shall be quite a start, especially now that I am not as eager as I used to be when writing something about a recently read novel.

I must remind everyone that this entry is no review about the novel but purely personal reaction.

THE SUMMER HOUSE
by Rosemay Hoggard

I had the novel since June of last year but it was only two days ago when I bothered to read it. I was almost moved to regret because of the delay but still glad that I had it finally read.

The events in the story, like Prue, had me fooled. I was definitely agog how the writer would bring them redemption. I must’ve read less stories of such genre, for I was not able to think of the possibilities.

The twist and revelations in the story delighted me. I was also amused how each character had his own disposition. It was very personal. The story, set in Sweden, rekindled my desire to visit the country. It also gave me another reason to like Summer, especially if it’s in the northern hemisphere. I also want to stay in a sommerstuga.

When I finished reading the story, I felt a pang of loss. Reading “The End” meant parting with the characters. I even felt separated from a part of Sweden. This pang was one of the reasons I included The Summer House as one of my favourite novels. I have already finished reading the book yet it remains in me, almost hunting me but in a sweet reminiscing way.

Anatomy of a Murder

I love how vivid the case was presented. Even the dialogues in the court room were as clear as the sky. I was able to understand the importance of words spoken in a court room and the gravity they bring on both parties. I don’t only mean in this movie.

Paul Biegler, the country attorney of the defendant Lt. Frederick Manion, reminded me of Atty. Willy Beachum in the movie Fracture. I love that movie. Biegler was like a representative of unconventional lawyers. He was also very keen with details, be it with the statements or with the evidences presented.

The other character I like in the movie was Judge Weaver. I think he was comical without being silly. He, along with Paul Biegler, made the court room alive without the commotion brought about by the prosecutor.

It seemed like I have not thoroughly appreciated the entire movie. Thanks to Laura, Lt. Manion’s wife. She was so annoying. Yes, she was no annoying. I had to say that again because she was really annoying. I had aversion during the first hour of the movie because of her. My only consolation were the court room scenes and those that included Biegler’s sardonic secretary and alcoholic colleague, Parnell Emmett McCarthy.

Overall, I was able to exercise tolerance and patience. I also learned a lot.

Some useful links:
Anatomy of a Murder in Wikipedia.
Quotes that amused me.

Sherlock Holmes

I still haven’t read any Sir Conan Doyle book, albeit being a little obsessed of doing so in the past years, so my opinion is purely about the movie.

As it was an adaptation of an English character, set in the city of London, it was only rightful that the movie should have that English appeal. It wasn’t much of a problem. If there was any slip, which I believe there was, I did not notice. My mind was too occupied how to join Holmes’ voyage of wits while seeing the similarities he shared with House.

It was a very delightful film. I enjoyed it much better as I understood how his punches disarmed his opponents. I may be no medical doctor but my medical knowledge served me well as I sat in amusement inside the theatre.

As for the actors, I was more impressed with Jude Law but I shall speak no further about that.

It was refreshing, indeed, to see a Sherlock Holmes in a way that is unconventional and unfaithful to the time when Sir Conan Doyle penned the adventures of Holmes and troubles of Watson.

The movie reminded me a lot of things and one of them was the political system in our country. It is safer to limit the participants in this land as I am not familiar with those beyond our seas. I noticed that the elder members of the order lacked what a man should have. They, except for one, were fearful of a man because of his so-called power. Those elders lacked the skepticism of young people so it was easy for them to catch panic and fear. They were too selfish and were only concern of their survival that they immediately succumbed to a force they did not know nor disprove.

There was also something that bothered me. Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) wore pants twice, or so. Had it been a practice during the time of Sir Conan Doyle? I’d love to know.

Perhaps that’s all I could say about Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes.

If you are looking for any professional comment, look somewhere else. It has been a while since I’ve written a movie review. I was well entertained and that was enough for me. I shall not argue whether the characters have been faithful to Sir Conan Doyle’s.