Anónimo

Very disappointing subjective course

Revisado: 08-22-23

If someone is seeking out any kind of literary, critical, or modernist take on Pride and Prejudice, you can be pretty confident that they will already be familiar with the plot; therefore, Matthew spends entirely too much time summarizing it and giving her general opinions on it as a 19th century novel with no time spent on how first-time readers today might interpret the original text. When she does finally get to discussing modern adaptations, she spends the most time discussing the most popular movie adaptations and very little on the books adaptations that appear in much higher quantity.

Matthew seems particularly upset by the 2005 movie version, which she deems as horribly inaccurate for various reasons. Dismissing an adaptation for slight inaccuracies is a very tired argument since new writers are obviously going to change certain things for the modern viewers and their own personal preferences; expecting a perfect facsimile of the original novel is unrealistic and quite frankly, boring. About this 2005 version, Matthew says, "I think Keira Knightley is too pretty for the role of Elizabeth, the orchestral music is too intrusive, and the ampersand in the title is grating." First of all, bringing up your annoyance with an ampersand in a title in no way contributes to any meaningful discussion of the story or medium and is therefore completely unnecessary. Also, the orchestral music in no way distracts the viewer from the story, so that is also an incredibly subjective comment. And as for Knightley being too pretty, it is commonly accepted that the heroine of a film is going to be beautiful, so that's entirely to be expected from Hollywood and in no way should reflect poorly on Knightley herself. Matthew also takes umbrage with the proposal scene in this movie because of the shouting and sexual tension. She says that people of this time would never shout at each other; normally I would agree, but I think it can be allowed that people of any century sometimes lose their tempers and a more heated argument is good for the visual medium of film. I also don't find any fault with there being some sexual tension in the scene, as love and hate are both strong feelings that are well-known to bring people together as much as apart, so it's not unreasonable to say that expressing any strong emotion in this scene could result in sexual tension between two grown adults.

Matthew was inconsistent with her critique of tropes in some adaptations but not others; she seems to condemn the wet shirt scene in the 1995 movie and yet lauds a Darcy on horseback in an Atlanta-based adaptation for being hot. Perhaps she thinks sex appeal is only acceptable in contemporary adaptations but not those still set in the Regency? But they're all adaptations at the end of the day, so I think it's hypocritical to allow it for some and not all. And as for contemporary adaptations as a whole, she implied that one should never sacrifice accuracy for diversity and inclusion, which sounds rather close-minded and borderline racist to me. Matthew has a throwaway comment about how the Bennet parents in the book "Pride" love each other much more than in the original, but while that may seem true on the surface, you also have to consider the social conventions of the time period; couples in the Regency were not expected to ever show physical intimacy outside of the marriage bed but cuddles and kisses in front of others are perfectly acceptable today.

In conclusion, this audiobook needed less summary and personal opinion and more objective analysis on what this classic novel means to readers today. Matthew could have used many more examples of adaptations and spent a little more time with each one to really delve into the nuance of various changes. I'm less interested in Matthew's personal preference for accuracy and more interested in how this novel has shaped our society in surprising ways.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 2 personas

Mixed Feelings

Revisado: 10-14-16

This is only the book for you if you want to know literally everything about a murder case and trial. Everything. Even stories of vaguely related criminals. Still, it wasn't totally uninteresting. The writing was great and the performance was excellent. Definitely would read something else by this author and listen to something else by this performer again.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

Great story, disappointing performance

Revisado: 10-06-16

Would you consider the audio edition of The Masked City to be better than the print version?

No. I honestly could not stand the reader. Her different voices in general were ok, although confusing when two men were speaking to each other. But I could not get over how melodramatic her reading was. Every. Single. Sentence. Was. Dramatic. Thus when things were truly heart-wrenching, it wasn't as dramatic as it should have been because it was all on the same level.

What other book might you compare The Masked City to and why?

It would probably be good for lovers of Sherlock Holmes (even though I've never actually read a Holmes story and so can't really compare) because of the good quality, intellectual, clean adventure and mystery. And generally lovers of fantasy/sci-fi.

How did the narrator detract from the book?

See first question.

Was there a moment in the book that particularly moved you?

Can't say much without spoilers, but I would love to see the water scene in a movie. You'll know it when you get there.

Any additional comments?

Great story! But pick up the print version instead.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 3 personas