I know, I know, Dan Brown books are just awful. They're like cinema popcorn: you know shouldn't, you know you are going to be sick, but it's FABULOUS!
Anyway, Dan Brown wrote a book that took place in D.C., but apparently rather than actually visit D.C. to write his novel he based all of his research off of google maps. Here's a running tally of things he gets wrong about D.C., AKA why you shouldn't write a novel based on looking at a google map of it:
1. Everybody in the book is super interested in the Redskins. In fact, security is really lax because everybody is focused on the Redskins. That would be super accurate if ANYBODY in this city cared about the Redskins. Most D.C. natives who like football are Cowboys fans just because they hate the Redskins so much. And, since most people in D.C. aren't even from D.C., they even couldn't care less about the Redskins enough to hate them.
2. Someone refers to an address in "Kalorama Heights". That is a real place, but I've never heard it called that. It's just called Kalorama; I didn't even know there was a Heights attached to it. This is a little like writing a book about space and referring to NASA as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Did you know that's what it stood for? Liar.
3. The geography is all weird. Robert Langdon goes down Memorial Bridge from the airport and looks left to see the Tidal Basin. Yeah, good luck with that. Maybe he meant the other left.
4. Robert Langdon catches a cab downtown that has a glass divider and is driven by an Arab. A dispatcher then contacts his cab for a suspect alert. For one thing, I have NEVER seen a glass divider on a cab in D.C. For another thing, I know there is a stereotype of Arab cab drivers, but I honestly don't think I've ever seen one in D.C. Mostly Nigerians and Ethiopians, occasionally Indians, but never an Arab. Also, most cabs in D.C. are independent contractors. Finding one with an organized dispatch unit? Yeah, right.
5. Standing on Freedom Plaza, which Dan Brown claims gets a lot of tourists (anyone?) Robert Langdon spots a light up "subway" sign for metro center and runs there before the CIA can get to him. For one, metro center is several blocks, uphill, from Freedom plaza. And it's not called the subway. And it doesn't have light up signs.
6. The CIA meets him at King Street and asks which way to the Blue Line platform and then they gether as they watch the train come through the tunnel. King Street metro station has ONE platform, so it shouldn't be terribly hard to find, and it's outdoors above ground, so no tunnel in sight.
7. Langdon gets of at Tenleytown in an "upscale neighborhood" where he sees the National Cathedral and walks there, apparently right away. Tenleytown IS in an upscale neighborhood, but you would never guess it from exiting the metro there. The National Cathedral is also at least a 40-minute walk from there and it's definitely not visible from the metro.
By the way, I made the mistake of looking up something about the book before I had finished reading it and someone in the comment section said "Hey, I totally didn't see the plot twist where X did it!" Me, neither. Thanks, asshole. Needless to say, this silly book lost what little allure it had left.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Ever After
"Ever After", starring Drew Barrymore, is a decent movie. At least it would be if it weren't starring Drew Barrymore. Actually, I'm not sure about that statement, since Drew Barrymore is so distracting that I really don't know if the movie is any good or not. In fact, I retract my earlier statement: it's probably a terrible movie.
I mean, the basic premise is okay. An emphysetic old lady (did they mass produce cigarettes back then?) tells a real life Cinderella story, and the cool thing is that Cinderella won the prince not by being pretty (although I think in the movie she's supposed to be pretty...fail!) but by being smart and well-read. Or at least as close to smart and well-read as Drew Barrymore can muster.
Here's the problem: apparently when casting was called, ALL THE ENGLISH PEOPLE EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD DISAPPEARED. At least that's my guess. Despite the fact that the movie is supposed to take place in Renaissance France, which means that presumably everyone would be speaking, you know, French, the director decided that everyone should have an English accent. Apparently he decided this independently of the casting director, who only hired non-English people whose billing is inversely proportional to their ability to speak with an English accent.
Not since Dracula has there been such a bad decision regarding accents, when the chief British-accented people were Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder (kill me now!) and the ACTUALLY British Anthony Hopkins and Gary Oldman put on unconvincing Dutch and Romanian accents, respectively.
But I digress. Ever After stars Drew Barrymore, Anjelica Huston, and some blonde lady who I think I saw on SVU once, all of whom are American. The prince is played by a Scottish actor. The other stepsister is from New Zealand. Other than the prince and the Anjelica Huston, who can pull off the accents fairly well since they seem pretty relaxed about the whole thing, it's painful to listen to.
Worst of all, however, is Drew Barrymore, who sadly has more lines than anyone else. I think her voice coach really hated her and instead of having her listening to tapes of English people talking he gave her tapes of hee-hawing donkeys and Larry the Cable Guy pretending to be Prince Charles. In that case I commend her abilities, as the likeness is spot on.
WHY DID THEY CAST DREW BARRYMORE????? WHY?????? This movie was okay muted with closed captions on. It would probably also be okay dubbed in Spanish.
I mean, the basic premise is okay. An emphysetic old lady (did they mass produce cigarettes back then?) tells a real life Cinderella story, and the cool thing is that Cinderella won the prince not by being pretty (although I think in the movie she's supposed to be pretty...fail!) but by being smart and well-read. Or at least as close to smart and well-read as Drew Barrymore can muster.
Here's the problem: apparently when casting was called, ALL THE ENGLISH PEOPLE EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD DISAPPEARED. At least that's my guess. Despite the fact that the movie is supposed to take place in Renaissance France, which means that presumably everyone would be speaking, you know, French, the director decided that everyone should have an English accent. Apparently he decided this independently of the casting director, who only hired non-English people whose billing is inversely proportional to their ability to speak with an English accent.
Not since Dracula has there been such a bad decision regarding accents, when the chief British-accented people were Keanu Reeves and Winona Ryder (kill me now!) and the ACTUALLY British Anthony Hopkins and Gary Oldman put on unconvincing Dutch and Romanian accents, respectively.
But I digress. Ever After stars Drew Barrymore, Anjelica Huston, and some blonde lady who I think I saw on SVU once, all of whom are American. The prince is played by a Scottish actor. The other stepsister is from New Zealand. Other than the prince and the Anjelica Huston, who can pull off the accents fairly well since they seem pretty relaxed about the whole thing, it's painful to listen to.
Worst of all, however, is Drew Barrymore, who sadly has more lines than anyone else. I think her voice coach really hated her and instead of having her listening to tapes of English people talking he gave her tapes of hee-hawing donkeys and Larry the Cable Guy pretending to be Prince Charles. In that case I commend her abilities, as the likeness is spot on.
WHY DID THEY CAST DREW BARRYMORE????? WHY?????? This movie was okay muted with closed captions on. It would probably also be okay dubbed in Spanish.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)