Jon Stewart just had actress Rachel McAdams on his television program "The Daily Show" tonight. I thought he was supposed to be a great interviewer, but he kept asking dumb questions. He ended up both spoiling and mocking the story. I listened to half of the book once (as an audiobook), but stopped when that road trip ended. I hoped to to either finish it some time during another long trip, or see the movie to find out the rest. But Stewart has gone and spoiled it for me. Oh well.
But he did make a mildly amusing observation. The story involves a guy who quantum-leaps all over time. Stewart asked if this could be a good excuse for guys now. "A guy could vanish for 3 weeks, and come back, and say, whoa dude, I was in 1985!"
But he did make a mildly amusing observation. The story involves a guy who quantum-leaps all over time. Stewart asked if this could be a good excuse for guys now. "A guy could vanish for 3 weeks, and come back, and say, whoa dude, I was in 1985!"
16 comments:
I watched that interview. It didn't help that she foolishly gave away all the important plot points. He even told her she didn't need to actually answer, and she just kept right on. Don't they trains actors to keep their mouths shut about new releases?
I was debating whether or not to see the movie. I tend to like chic flicks with happy endings and the last few I've seen have been horrible with the characters always dying in the end. I'm not sure about the "happy ending" with this one, but I don't want to see a spoiler.
I did not think of it as a chick flick thing when reading the book.
But the movie add campaign is heavily "chick flick". Which does not do much for the male audience, does it?
I agree that it was not a "chick" story at all! I guess that demographic brings in the bucks.
It always annoys me when someone spoils the end. That happened to me ten minutes before I saw The Sixth Sense. If I hadn't paid for my ticket, I would have walked out.
I'm not sure anything was actually spoiled in this case. There is a LOT going on in this story and perhaps they figure the book was so widely read that many people are going into it without the element of surprise. That tends not to bother me. What I do hate is when a movie completely pisses on the whole point of the book...yes, I am talking to you, My Sister's Keeper.;
I loved the book, I just hope the movie does it justice, unlike the travesty aka the film of Captain Corelli's Mandolin.
I doubt whether I'll watch the movie but I did read the book. I had mixed feelings about it because I couldn't quite suspend belief enough. Nevertheless I enjoyed it. Like laura b, I was dismayed by the movie of My sister's Keeper and it's put me off adaptations of books for a very long time, if not forever.
John Stewart can be a doofus - agreed!
I loved the book. I would not say that it had a happy ending - but it was certainly bittersweet.
I do not think I will see the movie. Movies are never as good as the book with the possible exception of The Rainmaker - Coppola's version of Grisham's book.
"Who Framed Roger Rabbit" was another one where the movie was definetely better than the book.
So DMarks and seven women read The Time Traveler's Wife, but no one thinks it's a "chick flick" book? Hmm.
Well, I read it too, and I say it is a "chick flick" book. It's basically a romance--an unconventional romance, to be sure, but a romance nonetheless.
I'm surprised you read half and then stopped, DMarks. Didn't you like it enough to finish it?
Since you've read half already, I'm not sure there's a lot the movie can spoil. Besides, in a film like this, the producers are bound to change things. Especially the book's ending. I'd be amazed if they kept that intact.
The reviews have said the movie isn't that good. In particular, they've said Bana and McAdams don't have any chemistry, which is unfortunate in a romance. I've seen the trailer and seen Bana in Hulk and Star Trek, so I can believe it. I don't think he has much of a personality.
Anyway, you should finish the book. I give it an 8.5 of 10. That means it's about as good as Hyperion (but not as good as the ST novel Ishmael).
I would agree that it is a chick book - it speaks to the difficulty of relationships - and that is a topic that interests women more than it interests men. For sure.
Rob: As I said, I listened to it during a long car trip, and stopped when the trip ended. If another such trip comes, I will listen to the rest of it.
At the very least people should put up a spoiler warning. In real life, I just cover my ears and sing, "la la la la la" very loudly when spoilers start spoiling.
OT: I half expected a Christine Baranski post today.
I'm reading the book right now. I'm glad I missed that interview. I don't want to know the end yet.
Churlita: It was the first time I'd seen Stewart's show for a long time. I will avoid it like the plague now.
Post a Comment