Plundered to Death

Well, we went and saw Pirates of the Caribean: On Stranger Tides.

Did I like it? Yes. Did I love it? No.

I’d not been too crazy about more “Pirates” movies to begin with, to be honest. But the fact is that I love Jack Sparrow to pieces [of eight]. He’s one of the best characters to come along in quite some time, in my opinion.  I figured if they’re going to send more of him our way, then I’d welcome it.

But the truth is my apprehension proved correct. All the time I’d been watching the movie I’d been wondering why I’d been there. Again, it’s not that the movie is bad in the least. Just that enough is enough. It felt nearly forced. I mean, I’d not been entirely keen on the last two. It’s also true that I didn’t dislike nor like them. It felt forced then. So to go on and give us yet another tale... well, I just couldn’t be excited about it.

And the general consensus is that they’ll be bringing two more films. I think I’m going to wait until home video for those.

For the record, I did not see it in 3-D. I had sort of wanted to, just to give it that extra edge since the first three movies had not been. But then, there’s these two factors: When 3-D is post production [a la not filmed/shot in 3-D] it shows. Second, some of the people I went with don’t like 3-D at all. I thought perhaps if I loved the movie I’d go check it out again with the enhancement. But sadly, that’s not going to happen.

It has some great F/X and such I’ll give it that.  The mermaids are very cool!  Although I had to roll my eyes at an aspect of them (hint: teeth) but that's just my personal bias - yet it didn't swim right with Bart either, who adores mermaids.

I’d just not been “on board” - and I had desired to be.

Let this, then, serve as a reminder that it’s entirely possible to push a story too far. Sequels must be done when and only when the story is worth telling for sure. And no, that is not a slam against Tim Powers, whose book they plundered to create this movie. Admittedly I have not read his book, but I’m pretty confident that it has its own flair, not mucked up by the nearly-not-quite-rehashed characters in the Disney movies. For it’s a fine story, to be fair. But coupled with MORE of the SAME, well, it ceases to be a treasure.

Clocking Back in to Time Bandits

A short while back, after I complained of there being a remake of Time Bandits, my regular circle of friends here in Chicago gathered to watch it.  Needless to say, they enjoyed it very much.
 

But something occurred to me upon this viewing.  I still don’t think there should be a remake... but a sequel!

If you know the film, hear me out.  There are spoilers ahead, so if you haven’t seen Time Bandits, you might want to stop reading now.

At the end of the movie, despite the typical blur of fantasy and reality prevalent in Gilliam flicks, we do know that Kevin has his Polaroid pictures from his adventure.  And one of those depicts the Map.  We also know that it IS possible to read/use the Map even on this small scale.  As well as the fact that Kevin gleans how to read/use it, too.  For it’s precisely his examining of the photo that causes them to find the “Biggest Hole in the Universe” and allows them to attack the Evil Genius.

Right.  We also know that Kevin is rather, shall we say, disgruntled with the Supreme Being for his blasé attitude toward the “unnecessary” killing of so many people just to test out “evil.”  Isn’t that, too, well, evil?  From a certain point of view yes but then again maybe not from a larger-scope view such as a god-like character’s perspective.  Not to mention that Kevin’s parents are now destroyed in a puff by a raw chunk of evil left over from (shall we say) their negligence (Kevin & the Supreme Being included)?

If you ask me, Kevin is ripe for revenge.  It makes sense that the Supreme Being testing “evil” would result in Kevin being infected by it, burning with animosity toward the “uncaring” god-figure.  Also, he’s got the Map.  Thus he has access to all of the time holes in the universe.  (He probably even had the Map enlarged!)  He knows the how and the WHEN of gathering tools to attempt a showdown with the Supreme Being... and maybe even against Randall and his other friends who abandoned him at the last moment.  What exactly his vengeance entails remains to be seen... and we’d of course use Time to our advantage in that Kevin would be 20 years older now...  that’s a long time to plan an elaborate & sweet settling of scores!  Doesn’t it seem like it would make a good story?

And there you have it.

I don’t want a REMAKE of Time Bandits...
I want the sequel! 

We Dream of What Now?

So the other day I sort of caught an episode of I Dream of Jeannie.  I say sort of because I had it on in the background while doing other things.

In the show, Major Tony Nelson learned that Jeannie had not been a genie for very long, as she said she'd been imprisoned at a young age into the bottle.  So to try and help her get over her apprehension of doing it right, Major Roger Healy suggests to Tony that he give her 1001 Nights: A Middle Eastern Folktale Collection (a.k.a Arabian Nights) so she can see how a genie behaves.

Tony likes the idea and buys it for her.  He tells her to read it cover to cover and he wants her to do all the things the genies do in the book.  Well... Jeannie reads it and gets very upset.  For she does not want to act like the genies in the tales.  For the genies are often cruel, manipulative and deceiving.  She begs Tony not to have to obey his command.  But he insists she follow it to the letter.

Distaught, Jeannie goes to Roger.  But Roger says she better do it, as it had been one of Tony's favorite books as a kid and he wants to see it just as it appears.  She reluctantly agrees.  And before we know it, Tony's hanging from his wrists above his head in a dank dungeon over a pit of snakes.

You see, Tony didn't quite remember the book for its actual content, rather his glorified recollection of specific parts.

I just found it interesting.  For isn't it the truth?  How often have we gone back to something and had a very different perspective on it, or been surprised at what we somehow forgot beyond our own picking and choosing of cherished sections?

I bet there are plenty of people for whom this is the case with Peter Pan!

Cloudy, with a Chance of Fun

This article from The Onion blew my way from some site or another and it made me think of Peter Pan.  Imagine that.

Scientists Theorize What Would Happen If They Touched A Cloud

The line that brought to mind Pan is: While Foote claimed that a person would likely attain instantaneous unconsciousness if laid horizontally atop a cumulus cloud, opposing scientists argued that a person would fall right through.

For me, it brought to mind Peter Pan and the Darlings atop the clouds.  But you know what?  That's another movie creation.  Disney it seems.  But not entirely.  There is a case to be made for the practice of alighting on clouds in Barrie.  ...see how we bump against clouds... says Wendy, and the Narrator informs us slightly afterward: but if they saw a cloud in front of them, the more they tried to avoid it, the more certainly did they bump into it. But that's all he says.

It's quite probable that a stage production featured the children resting atop clouds prior to Disney.  Though perusing through The Peter Pan Chronicles by Bruce K. Hanson (which is devoted to the stage and screen) turns up nothing in the picture-laden book.

Though the silent movie is filled with marvelous and many F/X, clouds don't factor in at all.

It's one of the additions to Peter Pan that I do enjoy.  And not just slightly tying in to Barrie's text.  Just in general, it fits well with the mythos.

Interacting with clouds had a wonderful twist in Fox's Peter Pan & the Pirates.  Captain Hook is peering at Pan, the Lost Boys and the Darlings flying admist the fluffy white in the sky through a telescope.  He's appalled, and as I recall, says they are molesting clouds.  [Yes, he uses that word.]  Rather than looking at clouds and deciding what they look like, the kids are treating the clouds like clay and sculpting them to their whim.

In my own tales of Pan?  In Peter Pan's NeverWorld I have Amy skidding into a cloud.  In Peter Pan: Betwixt-and-Between a character brushes off a bit of cloud.  I also use clouds thematically.

It's just a fun concept, played out beautifully in Hogan's film of Pan.  Have a gander at a short couple of clips.

(P.S. - A commerical for the ThreeSixy Peter Pan aired while writing this post!)

HAD BEEN Working On It, Am Again

Well, today Andrea Jones asked about the progress on Peter Pan: Betwixt-and-Between.  She also typed to me that she's been "talking it up."  How very wonderful of her!  Thanks, Andrea!

I've recently been emailing with a fan who's delighted to have found someone so obsessed with Peter Pan.   The eagerness to read the interquel leaps from the typing.

Anon* has been curious about the progress, too, I believe.
Well then!  I suppose I should really get on that, eh?  I've checked a little into how best to make it available... and decided I needed to have a concrete page count and such.  And there's no way of knowing that until I finish with the revisions.  Which, I admit, I put on a backburner.

Well, I'm firing it up again.  In fact, I began this very night.  I chose to tackle the easier of the suggestions made by Andrea.  She noticed an over-use of the word combination "had been."  So  I looked.  I figured it would be a good way to wade back into it.  She'd been right.  63 instances.  Some places just needed a good tweaking, some written over with extra Barriesque comedy and some just plain thrown out.  Well, it's now down to 14.

So it's on to the other reworking...
I'll of course keep you posted.
For it seems as if there are some people waiting to read this novel!

*Barrie enthusiast and my faithful reader and #1 fan

Peter's a Twit?

Well, as much as I am loathe to admit it, I have become one of those tweetin’ people.  Yes, (eye roll), I’m using Twitter.

I “reserved my name” back in October of last year and poked around a little bit.  But to be honest I couldn’t get past the “What on earth do I need this for?” factor.  I mean, seriously... do I really have to be updated on how delicious a person’s blueberry muffin tasted or hear some random thought that occurred to someone?  It’s ‘hard enough’ keeping track of what people say on Facebook.  [Yes, I’m one of those people who goes back to the last read point and reads through all the Status Updates.  I mean, hey, I don’t want to miss a cool video  someone posted or something...]  Anyway, seriously.  Who has TIME to read Tweets?

A little later on I went back to it and putzed around
- I still didn’t “get it."

Then down the road, Banky & Clara mentioned that I should try Twitter to help get the word out about Peter Pan’s NeverWorld and such.  For the record, both of them thought it as inane as I did, but both had heard from their own clients that Twitter is an invaluable tool, yada yada... So I poked around yet again.  But still, I didn’t see how this stream of “useless info” could be beneficial.  Same issues came up... time, silliness, just: Why?  And at the time I didn’t think I needed to be one someone who “stalks” celebrities - and no offense to anyone, why should I care?

And then, just last week, I’d been watching Steve Martin on Ellen.  He’s on Twitter and explained how he got on it and how he didn’t “get it” either - but continued with it and eventually decided to use it to tweet out comedic quips.  I perked up.  Free funny from Steve Martin?  Yes, please!  Factor this also into the mix - Bart and I just recently upgraded our phones to one of those that has “Apps” and such, a grand ol’ smartphone experience.  (We’d had something that pretended to be a smartphone prior to this acquisition.)  Well, couple the new phone with the prospect of Martin’s tweets and I picked up the phone and I thought I’d give it another shot.

Let me tell you... it makes much more sense on a phone.  Not just the “convenience” of having it in the palm of your hand “at the ready,” but the entire interface.   A small degree might be chalked up to the ‘fun’ of using the new phone, but this time the fussing around actually yielded desirable results.   I also learned that it is indeed fun to hear from celebrities.  Pick those who sincerely interest you and voila - interesting or funny stuff to read.  And when does one have time for it?  Easy - waiting for (or even riding on) the train for instance.  And the feed [at least mine, for at the time I’m writing this I only follow 58 (only 58?!?) people] isn’t as horrifically constant and insurmountable as it first appeared.  So it's not monopolizing your time but rarther filling in the gaps, with plenty of time left in them for other tasks like reading or such.

Forgetting the “adoring fan” concept for a moment, there are other reasons to be a Twit.  How cool is it that giants of the publishing industry tweet as well?  Simon & Schuster, Random House & Penguin Group... it’s great to have a direct insight into the latest publications, contests, trends, etc. with each of them.  There’s also other resources like Writer’s Digest.  Or even ‘following’ other authors like the amazing Neil Gaiman.

A third marvelous ‘thing’ on Twitter is the fact that it can be used as “edutainment.”  There are tweets from Samuel Pepys.  Yep, Pepys as in that  17th Century English naval administrator and Member of Parliament.  Someone takes his famous journal and sends it out in tweet-sized chunks... so it appears as if you’re privy to the day-to-day life (like that tasty blueberry muffin) of this famous historical man.  It’s hilarious, in its own way.  I also enjoy "Tweets of Old" - featuring clips from 1800's and 1900's newspapers.

Who knew Twitter could be this fun?  Most people, except me and anyone like me who had a narrow view of its potential scope.  I had once thought the same of Facebook.  Glad to have been wrong on both accounts.

Also, I’d been wondering how one obtains followers.  (Outside of posting on here and even having read the explanation.)  Somehow, from the little I tweeted out and then a tweet to Steve Martin (thanking him for his comedy and letting him know he prompted my usage) and Seth MacFarlane (Had to tell him that his latest Family Guy time travel adventure had been one of the best in the genre...didn’t I?)  I somehow already gained about 7 followers in as little as 2 days.  And I don’t know who any of them are.  It’s possible that they’re friends and/or followers of the handful of actual friends I’m connected to... I’m not really sure.  But it’s fascinating and delightfully frightening.  But now that I have a better handle on how this all works, I can see how it did happen.   Thanks to all of you out there who picked me up... I hope I’m entertaining or something.

One of but MANY looks of Melissa

Also interesting to note is that I noticed Fran Drescher is following a friend of mine who is a wildly talented singer/supercool lounge act type of performer.  Much more to her art than just that but anyway I asked her if she knew this... and she didn’t.  She’s thrilled.  See... tweeting does get super-connectivity going.  [Check her out!  Melissa Young]

Of course, this all brings up the very subject of this post - but it seems as if the fun of this “birdie” doohickey outweighs the “privacy invasion.”  Besides, I’m in control of what I tweet out about me... and any fans can decide whether or not to follow.   It’s also nice that deleting tweets is now an option (when it hadn’t been before.)

If you want to follow me, I’m @PeterVonBrown, but of course.

For right now, I am still wading in the experience and not tweeting all that much.   But whenever I deem something appropriate, you can be sure it will go out.

Perhaps one day I’ll have a blueberry muffin that I must rave about...

So, yeah, okay, there you have it.  I tweet.  May the gods help me.

* This post did not go up right away, so #'s went up.  Jeepers!

THOR is MIGHTY Indeed!

Another movie review that I just haven’t typed in yet until now...

THOR

I’d mentioned an interest in the film a few times before. A little recap: Despite my now “dislike” of superheroes (due to over-saturation in the film industry for my tastes) I wanted to see THOR on account of its connection to Norse mythology. I think Norse myths are way underused in cinema. Thus, again despite the fact that it’s the Marvel Comics version of the mythos, my starving for those characters and places on screen brought me to the theater.

I’m quite glad, too. If you know me or read a lot of my posts, you’ll know that I usually have a bone or two to pick with something even if I like it. Well, not this time. I loved all of it, as is. I bet there are die-hard Marvel THOR fans out there put off by this or that change and I certainly do sympathize with them. But two factors must be considered:  First, I’m not a Marvel THOR fan. As in, I didn’t know terribly much about their recreation of him. Second, comic book heroes are a special case, in many ways. Their origins and storyline details (unlike original screen characters and novels/stories) are reconfigured, reinvented and tweaked all the time, it seems. Especially when changing the medium from the comic pages to the screen.

That all said, I reiterate: I really liked this one. It had a perfect blend of the preposterous and the plausible. They knew when to make fun of the ridiculous set-up and when to be utterly serious. And those serious times didn’t feel as if they were preachy.  Instead they're integrated nicely into the tale. A good example (which is only a minor spoiler - don’t worry, it’s not going to “ruin” the film) of the bridging of comic book-ness and ‘real science’ comes in the way of a bridge, actually. Perhaps (I hope!) you’re aware of the Norse mythology Rainbow Bridge to Asgard, the home of the gods. Well, this movie has that bridge - but they turned it into science’s infamous “wormhole.” [A tube-like gateway shortcut of sorts across two different and vastly far away regions of space.]  And here, when you go through a wormhole it’s all colorfully zipping by...hence, the Rainbow Bridge!  Makes almost too much sense, doesn’t it? That kind of logic and coolness is jam packed into the film.

I also really liked that Thor didn’t come to Earth with amnesia. As I looked into the original Marvel, it turns out that he did forget his identity until he once again found his hammer. Well, let me tell you, if the film had mucked about with “Who/where am I?” on his part it would have become quickly tiresome. Having the other characters fuss about trying to figure out the deal with him proved much more interesting. Since Thor knew himself the whole time, he’d been all that much cooler and “bad ass.” It left more time for the action and the development of situations. Can’t see that happening if we’d spent half the film trying to get to him being Thor again.

It’s paced well, too. It knows when to “slow down” and have tender moments between characters and when to ram into "mega battles." I also have to hand it to the costumes. No offense to anyone, but some of the outfits in the original comics are just...well, they’re pretty awful. The film version managed to keep what is good about them and enhance that into something fabulous without loosing the integrity of the original designs. In that way, it matches the myth/science match-up prevalent in the flick. That also applies to the set designs for Asgard.

Oh - the legendary Stan Lee has the best cameo!

If you need a good escape into a realm of fantasy that packs a punch, treat yourself to THOR. It’s a heck of a ride... and yes, I want the sequel. (Though having perused through the later escapades of the comics, I suspect that it will rise to a level of silly that will put me off...) But for now, it delivered exactly what I wanted.

BRAVO!

A Malady Might Be Magnificent for Maleficent

Over a year ago news (is it now 'news' or is it 'old news' - oxymoron alert!) came out that a turnabout story of Sleeping Beauty focusing on Maleficent would be coming to the silver screen.

Well, it still is... but it's now lost Tim Burton as its visionary and director.  His other projects have him tied up.  I would imagine so!  Sometimes it seems every time you turn around, Depp and Burton are involved with a new project and often together.  It's no wonder he doesn't have time for it.

When I read it, I called out "Oh no!"  But the more I think on it, this turn of events could be good for the bad fairy.  Maleficent is the kind of material that Burton's fun nightmarish style might oversaturate.  Maybe so hot off the heels of Alice in Wonderland he himself would loose steam with the fairy tale genre.  Maybe not.  Either way, I am welcoming another visionary.  The word is that David Yates who helmed the last three famed boy wizard movies will take the reigns.  The spell is not yet cast, though.

I also felt much better when Bart reminded me that the script is still by Linda Woolverton.  And that's what sold me on the movie in the first place.  It's a chance to bring a fantastic fresh look at her work, which I've come to love.  I'm looking forward to seeing her strong, powerful yet feminine touch brought to the Mistress of All Evil.

No Foolin' - Hood is Still Good

You might remember Josiecat showed us Hoodwinked and I adored it.  I said you could be sure we’d be seeing the sequel, Hoodwinked Too: Hood vs. Evil.  We did.  And for one reason or another, this review slipped me by… but it’s here now.

Josiecat, Bart and I all really enjoyed it.  I’d been especially excited since Amy Poehler played one of the characters - Gretal.  Heidi Klum, too!  She plays, well, Heidi, of course.

It’s comprised of the same delightful silly wit that made the first one a joy.  However, I’d give the original movie an 11 out of 10 [yes really] and this one receives an 8 out 10.  Not too shabby for a sequel, though!

Perhaps it’s because part of what wowed me in the first movie had been the structure of interlocking stories.  But then, to simply repeat that would feel quite rehashed.  So I didn’t expect them to do it.  That said, it did have great writing this time around as well.  Same blend of slapstick and heady humor.

In fact, each of us were…well, okay, I’ll say it:  hoodwinked.  It’s true.  They managed to fool us with a twist that not one of us saw coming.  A turn which boosted the tale with new vigor, just when it started to become complacent.  Never bad, just otherwise ‘standard’ for this kind of setup.  But no, they wound up keeping us laughing and guessing.

Loads of fun to see them work with other fairy tales, too.  Well-known folktales of old made fresh with references, both subtle and obvious.  The new characters had been just as fun and great as the ones we’d met before.

I would venture out for a third.  But quite frankly, I see it working better as a television series.  Done with the same caliber, of course.  And I’d suggest not wrapping up the whole dilemma in one episode.  A contiguous string of related episodes would be ideal.  That way they could get the complexity and depth found in the movies.

I’m a fan.

Mario Decoded

Every so often, when done right, I enjoy a good over-analysis.  But when the endeavor of an in-depth look at the subject matter also uses factual elements and the real sources for the creativity that ensued, then I'm really interested.

How many of us haven't wondered what on EARTH is going on in Nintendo's Super Mario franchise?  I mean, really.  Raccoon suits that make you fly?  Piranha plants?  Mushroom people?  Coin boxes? Giant pipes and Starmen?  Menacing turtles?  All revolving around a Japanese company's mascot who is an Italian plumber?  It's downright wacky.

Well, fortunately, the folks at IGN have cleared most of it up for us.  They provide the answers to where/what it comes from... to quite satisfactory results.  You can't argue with facts and logic (most of the time.)

One that they didn't cover, which I happen to know the backstory on is the origins of Bowser, the Koopa King.  A dragon-turle guy?  Yeah, sure whatever.  But it does make 'sense.'  In Japanese folklore there is a creature called a Kappa.  Kappa>Koopa, hmm, given the spellings are translations between languages that looks about right.  But it's locked in when one considers that Kappa is a half-man half-turtle beastie that lurks in the waters... and water flows through, yes, pipes.  Kappa is also notoriously mischievous and ravages women, both traits of Bowser.

Go on and find out the "truth" behind the crazy for much of the rest of Mario in
Making Sense of Super Mario Bros.

Rules? Well, Maybe to START with...

I came across this on the world wide web. 

V.S. Naipaul’s Rules of Writing for Beginners

1. Do not write long sentences. A sentence should not have more than ten or twelve words.

2. Each sentence should make a clear statement. It should add to the statement that went before. A good paragraph is a series of clear, linked statements.

3. Do not use big words. If your computer tells you that your average word is more than five letters long, there is something wrong. The use of small words compels you to think about what you are writing. Even difficult ideas can be broken down into small words.

4. Never use words whose meaning you are not sure of. If you break this rule you should look for other work.

5. The beginner should avoid using adjectives, except those of colour, size and number. Use as few adverbs as possible.

6. Avoid the abstract. Always go for the concrete.

7. Every day, for six months at least, practice writing in this way. Small words; short, clear, concrete sentences. It may be awkward, but it’s training you in the use of language. It may even be getting rid of the bad language habits you picked up at the university. You may go beyond these rules after you have thoroughly understood and mastered them.

Much of it IS good advice.  But then, I can't get behind all of it fully.
For instance, what about #3?  See this post for more.

As for #4, does anyone actually do that?

I must disagree with #5.  Yes, I've encountered this rule/suggestion before.  But I don't think they need to be eliminated entirely.  Just curtailed.  Every actor will tell you that there's more than one way to read a line.  So in specific instances, writers may want to make sure the reader knows how the character delivered that line.  After all, it's not meant to be interpreted.  It's the author's story and s/he's the one "hearing" it, so naturally an author can/needs to let the reader know how it had been spoken when it's important to the story.

And #6 - avoid the abstract always?  I'm sorry, but for me as both writer and reader I like it when the text makes you use a little effort to figure out what's going on or has been said.  Not to any extreme, of course.  But I don't think every bit needs to be spoon fed without mixing flavors.

And how many times have we heard of a success that broke the rules?

I suppose it all comes down to it being for beginners?  Along with the line in it:  'You may go beyond these rules after...' But still, it seems as if writing produced under these strict laws would be very dry, dull and boring.  It might be effective in getting the point across quickly... but that's not always desirable in storycraft.  Or at least I don't think so.  A good tale needs to be spiced, tasted, savored and digested.

Thus, I prefer to think of them the way the rules are spoken of in the Pirates of the Caribbean series.  They're more like guidelines.

Pan Through a Spyglass...

More information has come out on one of the slew of Peter Pan films from Hollywood.

It's one of those that doesn't seem like a bad idea.  A re-imagining of the story, looking at it through a different lens.  I'm all for that.  I just gets my goat when it's supposed to be Barrie's tale and it becomes distorted in a "damaging" way or when it's supposed to be a contiguous part of the timeline when it's structurally unsound.

Well, this new info comes for the one where Hook is a modern day troubled former detective, pursuing a childlike kidnapper, yes, Peter Pan.  Here's what we now know in addition:  Wendy is the lone survivor, a victim of Pan, who leaves an asylum to help Hook in the hunt for him.  Smee is the only one Hook can trust on the force.

In terms of the cast and crew, we've got Aaron Eckhart as Hook, Sean Bean  is Smee and AnnaSophia Robb portrays the disturbed Wendy.  Rather interesting note:  She's now starring as the incredibly inspiring Bethany Hamilton in the biopic Soul Surfer, which Jeremy Sumpter, the silver screen's Peter Pan also has a role.  Director Ben Hibon will bring his vision to Ben Magid's script.  It's being brought to us by at New Line/Warner Bros.

I think it sounds like it could work out well.  What better way to bring out the darkest notions of Barrie than to push the envelope and name what Pan actually does:  Kidnap.  And given Hook's affiliation with good form and respectability in that weird sense of the dual nature of things - ruthless invader or righteous crusader (depends on how the actions are perceived.)  Maybe Hook is the hero?  There's certainly much trauma throughout the tale of Pan, it might be fun to see the depths of it emerge from another angle.

Here's hoping!

100 Deux in Print

Today Andrea Jones, the illustrious author of Hook & Jill, brought an upcoming book to my attention.

For all those who are not as obsessive as we tend to be and would thus already know, this year is the Centennial of the novel form of Peter Pan.  Yep.  The second 100 year date of The Boy Who Wouldn't Grow Up.

To be precise, it's October 11.

And to commemorate this grand date, W. W. Norton & Company is publishing The Centennial Edition on the very same day of the calendar.  Even better, it's annotated!

The painstaking task of annotation fell to Maria Tatar, who chairs the Program in Folklore and Mythology at Harvard University.  An author and editor quite familiar with the folklore and mythology akin to Peter Pan, it seems as if we are in for a treat by very capable hands.

I've already got my copy reserved.  But that probably goes without saying.  Here's a direct link.

Thank you, Andrea, for passing this along!  Quite the pleasure to have your pop-up plunder.

Born Into the World...

It's that day again...

the anniversary of the one on which the man who created the world's most well know addition to the 'puer aeternus' mythology entered the world!

Thank you, Mr. Barrie - now, then and always.

Is One Day REALLY Enough?

“If you knew how great is a mother’s love,” Wendy told them triumphantly, “you would have no fear.”

HAPPY MOTHER's DAY
to all the wonderful ladies out there,

without whom we would be nothing.

Clap! Clap for JEOPARDY!

Well, I guess we all knew this would happen again...

Jeopardy! featured our cherished boy anti-hero in another "answer."  I mean, who wouldn't think of Tinker Bell's daring rescue in a category called 'Dead Lines,' right?  :)

 

Yes, the contestant asked the correct question, "Who is Peter Pan?" as indicated with a quick "Ya" from Alex Trebek.


* For more Peter Pan mentions, click the word Jeopardy in the Subjects below.

For Nearly a Century Now!

It's that date again -

the one on which the statue of Peter Pan 'magically' appeared in Kensington Gardens.

99 years ago.

My how time flies!

To think that I stood next to it, in person, nearly two years ago!  Honestly, where DOES the time go?

This image of it is from our personal collection of London photos, taken by Bart.  As you might expect, he took many shots of it.  To be honest, I requested he do so.  I wanted every aspect captured.  And there sure is a lot packed into it (critters and fairies and such.) 

You can read more about it
(including my 2 cents in other posts):

96 Years Ago Today...

Still Standing...

It's Still There