![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Sep. 20th, 2009 11:15 pmsome howl's moving castle rambling
Howl’s Moving Castle. This is fickle for me. Over time I had grown a little bored of the movie, because of its war references. Yes, I immensely dislike that aspect of it. I am a teenage girl. I can appreciate the themes of love and vanity far more than I can appreciate war, because I have always been someone more drawn to stories about love. But when I watched the movie as opposed to reading the book I felt like maybe the story of love had been sacrificed for the story of pacifistic ideals. When I read the book, I was proven wrong.
Don’t get me wrong, I love the book. It has some things that for the first 150 pages made me believe would set the book ahead for me. I figured a book would establish the long term love Howl and Sophie would need to have to sell it for me. No, the book in my opinion did a bad job of it. Vanity was the books main theme and yet it felt like even when love finally occurred out of a selfless act that it was not meaningful. I also had some issues with book!Sophie. I don’t tend to be cheering for the meek characters, I’m usually cheering for the adorable ones who act happy and cheerful, not meek. Sophie in the movie is meek and hard on herself. But Sophie in the book? I’m never sure. One minute she’s thinking she’s strong willed, and then she’s not. I was more sold by Sophie in the movie- who I could tell honestly did say things more snarky or strong willed because she felt she didn’t have to worry about who she was. The book actually had me convinced for awhile that that’s where it wanted to go too. But then suddenly around page 260 Sophie was strong headed and argumentative the whole time?
I think it’s because book Sophie comes off to me as more of a mary sue. She is more or less like Bella from Twilight. She has a special gift she slowly discovers, is beautiful but doomed for some reason or other to some unfortunate fate that shows not to be true, and she is credited on things from both ends of the personality spectrum. Sophie in the movie is not someone you can easily imprint yourself onto. We all have confidence issues and whatnot, but she sets herself aside as someone most girls will not. Most girls in our day and age even with personality issues allow issues like vanity and age that movie!sophie (and book sophie) uses to bring herself out as a handicap in which they lose themselves in. Book Sophie however, you can argue whatever you want for her. She’s nosy and yet she is a pushover. She’s beautiful yet she’s flawed. She is talented but she has her ditsy moments, like believing Howl really eats girls hearts, yet being a witch and supposedly smart. With movie Sophie you’re almost always certain of what it is her character stands for, but I was never sure what book!Sophie stood for. I wasn’t even able to tell she was falling in love with Howl until it was at a point in the book where it felt rushed. It’s very odd for me to come across a character where I’m never sure about, but for Sophie in the book it really felt like she was never established until the later books. It’s like she was made to super impose yourself on, like Bella from twilight again. Howl is, afterall, this desirable hunk who every girl wants. And it seems like Sophie was given such a personality in order for Howl to seem more forgivable. Reading the later books and the author’s comments, I can tell she didn’t mean for it to come out that way. If I ever criticize her writing that would be why- Sophie is too fickle in the books for me to like, whereas while I disliked her meekness in the movie I knew where she stood, what her issues were, and she grew as a character.
I think that despite the war theme, I was more sold on the reality of love in the movie. For one, Howl was no one near as cruel in the movie. But to me, it was because Howl was portrayed as a more of an almost unattainable vapid character. It was almost like his relationships were so unimportant to him he never mentioned them. He was a known womanizer and yet he never womanized, suggesting women to him weren’t even worth mentioning or being concerned about.- and continuing and even furthering the suggestion that Sophie is so out of his world and his league that she stands no chance. It's just....more fitting. Deeper. Better.
Howl’s Moving Castle. This is fickle for me. Over time I had grown a little bored of the movie, because of its war references. Yes, I immensely dislike that aspect of it. I am a teenage girl. I can appreciate the themes of love and vanity far more than I can appreciate war, because I have always been someone more drawn to stories about love. But when I watched the movie as opposed to reading the book I felt like maybe the story of love had been sacrificed for the story of pacifistic ideals. When I read the book, I was proven wrong.
Don’t get me wrong, I love the book. It has some things that for the first 150 pages made me believe would set the book ahead for me. I figured a book would establish the long term love Howl and Sophie would need to have to sell it for me. No, the book in my opinion did a bad job of it. Vanity was the books main theme and yet it felt like even when love finally occurred out of a selfless act that it was not meaningful. I also had some issues with book!Sophie. I don’t tend to be cheering for the meek characters, I’m usually cheering for the adorable ones who act happy and cheerful, not meek. Sophie in the movie is meek and hard on herself. But Sophie in the book? I’m never sure. One minute she’s thinking she’s strong willed, and then she’s not. I was more sold by Sophie in the movie- who I could tell honestly did say things more snarky or strong willed because she felt she didn’t have to worry about who she was. The book actually had me convinced for awhile that that’s where it wanted to go too. But then suddenly around page 260 Sophie was strong headed and argumentative the whole time?
I think it’s because book Sophie comes off to me as more of a mary sue. She is more or less like Bella from Twilight. She has a special gift she slowly discovers, is beautiful but doomed for some reason or other to some unfortunate fate that shows not to be true, and she is credited on things from both ends of the personality spectrum. Sophie in the movie is not someone you can easily imprint yourself onto. We all have confidence issues and whatnot, but she sets herself aside as someone most girls will not. Most girls in our day and age even with personality issues allow issues like vanity and age that movie!sophie (and book sophie) uses to bring herself out as a handicap in which they lose themselves in. Book Sophie however, you can argue whatever you want for her. She’s nosy and yet she is a pushover. She’s beautiful yet she’s flawed. She is talented but she has her ditsy moments, like believing Howl really eats girls hearts, yet being a witch and supposedly smart. With movie Sophie you’re almost always certain of what it is her character stands for, but I was never sure what book!Sophie stood for. I wasn’t even able to tell she was falling in love with Howl until it was at a point in the book where it felt rushed. It’s very odd for me to come across a character where I’m never sure about, but for Sophie in the book it really felt like she was never established until the later books. It’s like she was made to super impose yourself on, like Bella from twilight again. Howl is, afterall, this desirable hunk who every girl wants. And it seems like Sophie was given such a personality in order for Howl to seem more forgivable. Reading the later books and the author’s comments, I can tell she didn’t mean for it to come out that way. If I ever criticize her writing that would be why- Sophie is too fickle in the books for me to like, whereas while I disliked her meekness in the movie I knew where she stood, what her issues were, and she grew as a character.
I think that despite the war theme, I was more sold on the reality of love in the movie. For one, Howl was no one near as cruel in the movie. But to me, it was because Howl was portrayed as a more of an almost unattainable vapid character. It was almost like his relationships were so unimportant to him he never mentioned them. He was a known womanizer and yet he never womanized, suggesting women to him weren’t even worth mentioning or being concerned about.- and continuing and even furthering the suggestion that Sophie is so out of his world and his league that she stands no chance. It's just....more fitting. Deeper. Better.