thisbluespirit (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
thisbluespirit) wrote2014-03-13 05:21 pm
thisbluespirit) wrote2014-03-13 05:21 pm
Entry tags:
One more thing
I knew there was something else: and I bought (as a reward for doing hard stuff, including some money-saving/gaining things) the TV tie-in book of Enemy at the Door for 1p on Amazon. I was worried, because TV novelisations do tend to be a special kind of terrible. Anyway, it arrived today! And I will say more some other time (now, I have my parents up here - almost a rl again! Also I should answer comments), because it took a sudden lurch into making me wonder if it was being novelised by Ben Steed (and nobody wants that), but I got my money's worth by about p3 when the author had an go at describing Alfred Burke's face (as Major Richter):
"He [a random Police Inspector] sensed at once that Richter had a capacity to charm that might cloud a man's judgement... Richter was too quiet, too urbane, with a face of that ascetic cast which is acquired by saints, librarians and aristocratic confidence tricksters... Perhaps aware of this himself, Richter had grown a beard, but it did little to hide his saintly expression..."
Alfred Burke grew a beard to spare us all his face, because it was Too Much, trufax, people. Well, there's one mystery of life solved.
(It is very odd about this. It lovingly describes some of the characters as played by the particular actors, down to funny little quirks of how they played a scene and then others not, or he seems to have decided to make up his own version.)
Anyway, "saints, librarians and aristocratic confidence tricksters" :lol: :lol: :lol:. Gosh. I don't know why I went for being a librarian myself, then.
"He [a random Police Inspector] sensed at once that Richter had a capacity to charm that might cloud a man's judgement... Richter was too quiet, too urbane, with a face of that ascetic cast which is acquired by saints, librarians and aristocratic confidence tricksters... Perhaps aware of this himself, Richter had grown a beard, but it did little to hide his saintly expression..."
Alfred Burke grew a beard to spare us all his face, because it was Too Much, trufax, people. Well, there's one mystery of life solved.
(It is very odd about this. It lovingly describes some of the characters as played by the particular actors, down to funny little quirks of how they played a scene and then others not, or he seems to have decided to make up his own version.)
Anyway, "saints, librarians and aristocratic confidence tricksters" :lol: :lol: :lol:. Gosh. I don't know why I went for being a librarian myself, then.
no subject
Also, Alfred Burke's faaaace lol. :D
no subject
dance floorhotel room. It is the start of something important, yes. Mind, the author doesn't bother describing Bernard Horsfall, who's only the main character. He's just "haggard" that day. Poor Bernard Horsfall.)And thanks. :-D
♥
no subject
no subject
So, on balance, yes. And librarians, saints and aristocratic confidence tricksters... Ha. *adds it to the long list of Dumb THings People Say About Librarians*
:-)
no subject
So long as you're amused!
no subject
no subject
But I now have the extra knowledge what I paid for.
;-)
no subject
Some novelisations are great, though. 'Desperately Seeking Susan', that one is unhinged and pretty hilarious, goes off on tangents the filmmakers never thought of. The 'Angels' (80's nursey thing?) ones are also good: bleak and grim in the extreme, but good. Also I was going to say 'Johnny Jarvis', but checked and it's a novel adaptation rather than the other way around.
Maybe he just has favourite characters? Then comes to others, goes, 'You, I hate you, your scene is getting cut right down. You're goin' daaahhn!'
no subject
But do you have that kind of face? Do people also mistake you for a saint or a librarian? :-D
This is not a great novelisation, sad to say. Four episodes of a well-written, balanced and thoughtful TV series compressed into a one dimensional novelisation with bonus missing sexism. Still, the author like describing Alfred Burke, and he did supply the extra info I hoped it might have, so I'm not complaining too hard.
Maybe he just has favourite characters? Then comes to others, goes, 'You, I hate you, your scene is getting cut right down. You're goin' daaahhn!'
It doesn't even seem to be that logical. He describes several people in loving detail at the start, and nearly has a fit over how beautiful he thinks Clare and Peter are, and then the only people he describes using actors' little quirks are Alfred Burke's character, and John Malcolm's (and he doesn't seem to like Kluge, he also says he has "little piggy eyes" and, yes, I do quote.) But then I kind of gave up expecting sense or good stuff after the early bout of extreme sexism.
no subject
no subject
(It's not a good novelisation at all. I don't know what the author was thinking, or why somebody let him write an episode after this. There's even a whole bout of unwarranted sexism towards some of the female characters that the show is pretty free of, thank goodness.)
no subject
no subject
I'm glad you're enjoying your 1970's TV tie-in. I suppose it helps it's not set in the 1970's and thus avoiding collecting all your favourite racist, sexist & homophobic stereotypes(!). Next stop PE bks for more facial descriptions.
I bought an XYY Man book (now a successful Granda TV series), from a charity shop, the other day - it may be going back!
no subject
He can't seem to make up his mind whether it's also possibly sly, but he comes down on saintly twice. In the same paragraph as being sly and foxy. So, er... :lol:
I'm glad you're enjoying your 1970's TV tie-in. I suppose it helps it's not set in the 1970's and thus avoiding collecting all your favourite racist, sexist & homophobic stereotypes(!).
No, no, it has completely unwanted and unwarranted surprise!sexism, especially in its version of Ep 1. It went so abruptly Ben-Steed like, I might need to make a further post sometime about the whole thing. So, I am amused at some stuff, and it did answer the questions I wanted answering, but I am not okay with the horrible sexist crap it went and threw in. urgh.
I don't need PE books for facial descriptions! PE has Roger Marshall who has characters tell Frank he has a soulful look, or the right sort of face for a priest, or that he looks like a funny old hen, pecking around. (Mind, there IS a book, but I kind of resent it for existing - I'd like to swap it for the actual episode it's based on instead. I don't think I trust anyone who isn't Roger Marshall or Michael Chapman to novelise PE. And, look what a mess this bloke made of Enemy at the Door, so I suspect I am right to be wary.)
TV novelisations are a very special category of disappointment vs occasional delight. But mostly disappointment. I knew that, though. I went in with my eyes open, in the hope they'd tell me exactly what Major Richter's subject was and if he is or isn't a doctor. And they did, among other things. Just with bonus horrible sexism that I could have lived without. *shakes head*
no subject
Oh dear, keep flick reading. I might watch Ben Steed's Crown Court now or not.
TV novelisations suck you in by having a nice picture on the front so I'm afraid you will have to buy the book - Henry VII's monkey needs company(!). TV tie-ins can be quite interesting as the authors original work is described as avant-garde fic and TV ties aren't.
no subject
No old TV tie-in has as nice a pic as Henry VII and the monkey! And that one was a nice little non-fiction book that made me happy. Mind, I was a little hard on this one about the sexism, because it did calm down a bit, but it was rather a shock, because I really wasn't expecting it in
:lol: No, don't watch the Ben Steed episode!! Save yourself now! Or, er, possibly, do, and then tell us whether it was as dreadful as his B7 eps, or he's better when he's not writing SF.
no subject
I shall watch Ben Steed's CC as I feel I have a civic duty to see how terrible it is! Eventually! It does sound like it has the potential to be awful.
no subject
The rest of us salute you from a safe distance...
no subject
That is awesome, and makes that book well worth the whole penny you paid for it. :oD
Hope you and your parents have a lovely visit!
no subject
And thank you - we did! (They left yesterday morning.)
no subject
That description of Richter is priceless. I'm a bit disappointed that he's a philosopher, though - the ones I've met while working in a university bookshop have been combative rather than saintly! :( Also, I know nothing of the subject...
However, I'm still giggling at my rewatch of "Committee Man". Like, no-one questions why the other doctors, the dentists and the vet have been rejected by "the authorities" for the position. EVERYONE KNOWS WHY.
no subject
The description of Richter is the reason why I kept the book afterwards. It is particularly excellent, and I think I read it after watching Public Eye and I'd been floundering about hear trying to explain how awesome Alfred Burke's face was and failing and then there was that. :lol:
As to the Philosophy, I got this when trying to write Outcomes of War because it bugged me that I didn't know what Richter's subject was. He was hardly likely to be a scientist, and Lit. of some kind didn't seem quite right, so I was assuming one of the social sciences but couldn't think which one, until Philosophy finally occurred to me. I can't remember now why, but I did some obviously not too dusty internet and episode rewatching detecting. But, yeah, I don't know much about it. And Richter is always up for a debate anyway!
However, I'm still giggling at my rewatch of "Committee Man". Like, no-one questions why the other doctors, the dentists and the vet have been rejected by "the authorities" for the position. EVERYONE KNOWS WHY.
Indeed. Though, to be fair, the dentists, doctors and vet had turned it down on grounds of being too busy, but the chemists etc. were not deemed good enough because there was only one man for the job. :-D