Noah makes you think — and keep on thinking

Darren Aronofsky’s epic Noah, which opened this weekend, is facing considerable criticism, primarily from Christians who view it as an unfaithful rendering of the biblical story. Rather than worry about whether or not the film uses the word “God,” I prefer to view it as a successful attempt at the Jewish interpretive practice of Midrash — whether Aronofky realizes it or not — and a meditation on our modern-day limited experience with divine intervention.

Midrash is a practice that seeks answers for the questions that remain once we’re finished reading the stories in the Bible. It explores unexplored details, pushing us to think more deeply about the implications of the text.

“The Holy Scriptures abound with gaps, abrupt shifts, and odd syntax,” writes Judith Kunst in The Burning Word. “Jewish Midrash views these troubling irregularities not as accidents or errors or cultural disparities to be passed over, but rather as deliberative invitations to grapple with God’s revealed word — and by extension, to grapple with God.”

Grappling with God is at the heart of Aronofsky’s film, which presents Noah as a man of faith who, in a departure from the biblical narrative, does not hear directly from “the Creator.” The concern about God’s presence in the film is laughable — even the film’s primary antagonist, Tubal-cain, believes in and despises the Creator, for seeming to abandon humanity. Both men are forced to act with a great degree of uncertainty. Noah is compelled to make certain decisions but has no guarantee that they are, indeed, correct.

I’m glad Aronofsky held back from giving Noah a voice from heaven, because it’s not often that we get one to help guide our choices. Oftentimes, all we can do is acknowledge our imperfections, wrestle with the decisions, and move forward in faith.

The story of Noah is often reduced to cute cartoons about paired animals on a boat with a smiling, grandfatherly character taking care of them. The horrific backdrop to that scenery is the divinely-sanctioned genocide of all of humanity. If I believed the story were historically accurate (rather than an adaptation of an even older Babylonian myth), I would be terrified of the deity it reveals and wonder how the main character could allow innocent human beings to perish outside his Ark.

By filling in some of the narrative gaps that exist in the story, this film actually provides a palatable explanation for how Noah could live with himself [mild spoiler alert], positing that, in fact, he thinks God is calling him not to repopulate the earth with humans, but to rid the earth of them — he and his family included. Further, it shows how much of a struggle this is for Noah and how uncertain he is about what he feels he must do. Aronofsky presents his main character as someone who recognizes how flawed he is and is prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice in order to prevent his flaws from destroying creation.

Here, too, the film explores the ambiguity of the biblical text as it relates to the question of what the Creator has directed humans to do with creation. In the first chapter of Genesis, God creates humankind, giving them “dominion” over all the earth and commanding them to “subdue” the creatures and plants within it. The Hebrew word radah (“dominion”) is used to describe the way kings rule over their territories, while kavash (“subdue”) is used in the context of slavery. Does the Creator want humankind to rule the earth as benevolent monarchs or as heartless slaveholders? The film depicts both viewpoints, obviously coming out in favor of Noah and his message of environmental protection.

In fact, Aronofsky’s surprising lack of subtlety is far more objectionable than any liberties he may have taken with the plot. Consider the conversation between Noah and his adopted daughter, Ila, at the end of the film. He explains a choice he made, and his reasoning is exactly what we would’ve assumed it was. (If I were any more specific, it would dampen some of the climactic tension of the film.) Suffice to say: that conversation is completely unnecessary for intelligent film-goers.

Noah is a film, a story — a character — designed for anyone who’s wondered: Should I take this job? Should I marry this woman? Can I keep this baby? Is this the right college? The right city? The right treatment plan? Do I keep moving forward or try to start over?

Still, this is not a perfect film: the performances by Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly, and Emma Watson are great, but the script is at times heavy-handed, the special effects (especially the animals) are nowhere near Life of Pi quality, and the movie overall is weird but “not weird enough.” However, it got me thinking and kept me thinking. For several days, I continued to ponder the moral and ethical questions it posed. This film will bring you face-to-face with questions about humanity’s capacity for good and evil and about the relationship we have with the divine.

Oh, and if you’re hung up on the rock monsters, just know that they’re far from the strangest things found in the Bible.

Peeping Toms and a ripe harvest of old metaphors

Ask anyone who knows me and they’ll tell you I love to use folk sayings at every opportunity. The more, the merrier. Cliches are cliche for a reason, and that’s because good metaphors are like a diligent brain gardener … er … that is, they plant the idea right in your head and give you the context needed for an otherwise potentially obtuse statement. But some metaphors (Greek metaphora, “carry across”) have been around a long time, and the original meanings have been all but lost in favor of the ideas they represent. Here are a few that you may or may not know, arranged by some obscure categorical formula that I came up with myself!

Disclaimer! Folky stuff is not super well-cataloged and tends to be tricky to pin down. Some of these origins might be more recent urban legend than truth. For example, try to look up where the phrase “cold enough to freeze the balls off a brass monkey” comes from.

Bible and ancient times

Doubting Thomas: In John 20:24-27, Thomas is the disciple who doesn’t believe all the others that Jesus came back from the dead, until Jesus shows up and is like, “Hey man, feel my wound-places.”

Good Samaritan: In Luke 10:29-37, Jesus tells the parable of a Jewish guy who gets robbed and beaten up, and the only person who would help him was a Samaritan (Hebrew Samerim, “guardians of the Torah”), a caste of Hebrews who were culturally opposed to the Jews in a manner similar to Protestants and Catholics in Elizabethan times. Bad blood. Of course, if you help somebody on the street today until the ambulance gets there, chances are you won’t be racial enemies with the person you’re helping.

Knock on wood: That’s where the Celtic forest spirits live. In the trees. They can help, maybe, or at least not specifically interfere with your intentions.

Scapegoat: In Leviticus 16:7-10, one goat was sacrificed and another, named Azazel (possibly Hebrew for “goat that departs” or “escape goat”), was used to transfer the people’s sins upon, and it was subsequently driven into the wilderness.

Achilles heel: In Homer’s Iliad, the mortal son of Athena, Achilles, was dipped in a pool of invulnerability water by his heel. Later, during the battle of Troy, Paris managed to shoot him there with a poison arrow to kill him. You all know this one.

Extra mile: In Matthew 5:41, Jesus tells people that if a soldier presses you to carry his crap for a mile (which was permissible under the law), you should take it an extra mile for him.

Farm and market

Fly off the handle: A loose and poorly tended ax head might fly off the handle when used.

Close but no cigar: Cigars were used as carnival prizes in the 19th century. Fun for kids of all ages!

Gift horse in the mouth/From the horse’s mouth: You can tell a horse’s age by its teeth. So while you shouldn’t insult a horse-giver (hence, “gift” horse) by checking out its teeth, you definitely should get the scoop before buying one from a disreputable horse dealer.

Down to brass tacks: A draper might use nose-to arm-length as a rough measure for cloth. You could ask them to get out the brass tacks for more precise cuts.

Cat out of the bag: Some shady people might try to sell you a bag of piglets but hide cats in there instead. If a cat gets out, then you know what’s up.

Dyed in the wool: Wool dyed before it is woven keeps color better than afterward, when it would be dyed “in the piece.”

Go to pot: Animals that outlive their usefulness (via age or stubbornness) go in the pot. To become dinner.

Peeping Tom: An anecdote about Coventry states that while under heavy tax, the governor Leofric’s wife Godiva said “Enough.” He told her he would relent if she went naked through the streets, and she called his bluff. Everybody stayed indoors except some tailor named Tom, who peeped out a window and was struck blind (by God, presumably) for his trouble.

Soldiers and sailors

Cut the mustard: You can cut out having to stand a formal troop assembly, or muster, if your unit is just that awesome all the time. Alternatively, this one might just infer that mustard is awesome.

Know the ropes: If you’re a sailor, you need to know the ropes, or you don’t sail so good.

Cut and run: When sailing, you might cut anchor in an emergency instead of taking the time to haul it back on board.

Flying colors/True colors: “Colors” means flags on a ship. You might proudly fly your colors to port after a victorious battle, and it wasn’t uncommon for ships to display false colors to confuse or fool other ships for various reasons, piratical or otherwise.

Heart on your sleeve: Medieval knights might have worn a token from their lady visible on the sleeve of their armor during a competition or battle.

Bite the bullet: Before anesthetics, biting something helped to shut out the pain of emergency surgery. In a war situation, bullets might be closest to hand for biting.

Sporting and bragging

Chip on your shoulder: In a boys’ dueling convention, circa 1830 New York, a chip was placed on one’s shoulder to instigate the other boy to knock it off and thus start a fight.

Drop of a hat: Some competitions started when the officiant waved his hat downward.

Beating around the bush: An indirect hunting method used to chase the birds out of the bush, where they could be shot by another party.

Break a leg: Yiddish hatslokhe un brokhe (“success and blessing”), awkwardly misinterpreted to German hals und beinbruch (“neck and leg break”), maybe? No other ready origin presents itself.

Pass the buck: You might have used a knife with a buckhorn handle as a poker marker to keep track of who’s dealing.

Hat trick: A cricket bowler, circa 1877, who took three wickets was given a new hat, or was allowed to pass his hat around for collection, by his cricket club.

Lily livered: White colored ichor from your liver meant you were bloodless and, therefore, cowardly.

Hands down: A horse jockey firmly in the lead can put his hands down as he approaches the finish line.

Misplaced meanings

Dog days of summer: Sirius (the dog star) rises and sets with the sun in early July through early September.

Kick the bucket: When slaughtering a pig, you might tie its legs to a wooden beam (French buquet), which it kicks while dying.

Scot free: “Scot” is an Old Norse word (skot) for a local tax.

Spitting image: Spit and image, as in “all the substance”: you’re made of your parents’ spit and look like them, too.

Under the weather: If you can’t stand up straight against the wind, due to being ill or drunk, you are under it.

Blue blood: In the middle ages, Spanish aristocracy had pale skin, so you could see their veins, as opposed to the Arab lower class.

Good-bye: “God be with ye.” I know, right?

Hoist by own petard: Coined by Shakespeare in Hamlet, a petard was a container of gunpowder with a fuse. If it exploded prematurely, it might hoist you into the air, quite fatally.

Pull out all the stops: To help the air flow through a church organ, you need to clean the stops by pulling debris out of them.

Hopefully you’ve enjoyed this little foray into folk wisdom as much as I have. Don’t miss the forest for the trees, now!

Sources include:

HIMYM favorite episodes: ‘Unpause’

After nine seasons, the final episode of How I Met Your Mother airs in the United States on Monday, March 31. Curiata.com is reliving the series this week by looking back at our favorites of the 208 episodes.

Resolution. We heard all about it in English class for years. As the How I Met Your Mother finale approaches, the show’s writers have made sure to get us to the point where we’re all (or mostly) squared away with those back-of-the-mind riddles, ongoing mysteries, and inside jokes that have kept us wondering, yearning, and shouting in frustration because we were, again and again, not given the answers or the action we had wanted.

Television series that are allowed to end on their own terms often aim to come full circle. Each usually has an episode (sometimes a few) that gives us, as viewers, that “AH HA!,” “YES!,” or “FINALLY!” moment. For example, and spoilers here: In The Office, that episode was “A.A.R.M.” We finally see the teapot letter from Jim to Pam after he slipped it away back in season 2, we get a wonderful (and tear-jerking) montage of Jim and Pam when he gives her the DVD, and Jim delivers one of those speeches that will live on for years to Dwight, who finally gets to be with Angela.

In HIMYM, the full circle episode was season 9, episode 15, “Unpause.” We’re finally given the answers to some of the burning questions raised throughout the series, all from the mouth of that king of liars himself, Barney Stinson. He drinks through all his levels of drunkenness, as we’ve seen throughout the series, bypassing “Jabba drunk” (loved the hat tip to Star Wars once again) and going to “truth serum” drunk.

Once Ted and Robin (and I) realized they could now find out the answers to the questions that had plagued them for years, it was go time. And I was giddy, on the edge of my seat for the whole ride. What happened with Ted’s mom? Barney struck out trying to go for second base. Will there be a ring bear at the wedding? Robin rephrasing the question the last time she asked it to finally get an answer was clever on the writers’ part. I also enjoyed how she was continually interrupted when trying to question him about it: Way to build the anticipation guys! (Like you haven’t done it enough this season…) We also found out that Robin’s loaded (sorry, her family is loaded), which was a nice little twist thrown in there. And Barney’s subsequent one-liners as Robin and Ted have their exchange were perfect.

And finally, what I’ve wanted to know since season 1: What does Barney do for a living? And I have to say, that reveal was more glorious than I could’ve imagined. He had been telling us all along: P.L.E.A.S.E. means “Provide Legal Exculpation And Sign Everything.” And he gets an obscene amount of money for setting himself up as a fall guy — to Ted and Robin’s horror. But we should all know by now that you can never assume anything with Barney. And when he reveals his ingenious plan for vengeance, Barney firmly cements his self-appointed title of “AWESOME.”

And I’ll bestow him with another one: ultimate bad-ass. We’ve known Barney to take on elaborate plans and patiently wait for everything to fall into place as if time were of no consequence, but this deception took the longest and had the biggest reward. When we see the flash-forward to two months after the wedding, Barney finally reveals to Greg that he’s been working with the Feds all along, and that, basically, Greg is S.O.L. There was no yelling or screaming, just the calm, cool, collected man who knows he’s won and that’s he’s a genius. Having your own personal theme song playing in the background doesn’t hurt either (another fantastic shout-out moment from season 4).

Now that we’re caught up with the running gags and the secondary mysteries have been solved (except for that damn pineapple), it’s time for Ted to finally meet The Mother. And if the series as a whole is any indication, the writers are going to deliver, and it’s going to be LEGEN- wait for it …

Best line:
Ted: Dude, you’re getting married tomorrow. How are you doing?
Barney: Good. I mean, I’m a little nervous, but I love Robin more than I’ve ever loved anyone, and I’m gonna do everything I can to make her happy. For a long time, deep down, I’ve felt sort of … broken? But I don’t feel that way anymore. Robin, along with the idea that vengeance will soon be mine, has made me 100 percent awesome.

Cutaway: Barney’s Vengeance

Mother Lore: At the Farhampton Inn in 2017, she goes into labor with Luke.

HIMYM favorite episodes: ‘Lucky Penny’

I was late to the How I Met Your Mother game and, in a rare instance for me, I binge-watched the first four seasons over the summer of 2009. The whiplash of those first 88 episodes was perfectly encapsulated in the frenetic tale told in the second season episode “Lucky Penny.”

Ted Mosby, architect, has a job interview in Chicago but but he and Robin are late for their flight. As they try to wrangle their way on a plane, the couple recounts the series of events that led to their late arrival: Ted had a court date because Barney ran a marathon because Marshall broke his toe because Robin startled him because Lily was shopping for a wedding dress because Ted and Robin ate hot dogs because Ted found a lucky penny. Whew.

As I look back on the series, many high point stand out for me, but I was surprised how many were captured in this single episode. Barney’s subway collapse and Robin and Lily’s car-alarm chorus are two of the great moments in HIMYM history. “Lucky Penny” was situated in the middle of the greatest run of the series, the second season that came to form the heart of the show.

If you or someone you know has never seen HIMYM, “Lucky Penny” is a perfect introductory episode. It is a self-contained story that subtly communicates all the background information a new viewer might need to understand the characters and plot. Further, “Lucky Penny” has nearly all the elements that make HIMYM great: character development, intersecting plot lines, non-linear storytelling, and a perspective of how the events of the episode fit into the overarching story arc that led Ted to The Mother. Indeed, we learn at the end of the episode that had Ted made his flight and gotten the job he wanted, he would have had to move to Chicago three months later, taking him away from the future love of his life.

If there is one characteristic of HIMYM missing from this episode, it is a powerful emotional moment. The series knows how to do these especially well, from the blue French horn to the several break-ups throughout the series to the difficult realities of new life and abrupt death. In retrospect, we learn just how emotionally poignant the episode was, though. Ted never forgets how important this series of events was to the course of his life, commemorating that lucky coin by naming his first-born child Penny.

There are two types of sitcoms: those that stuff as many jokes as they can into 30 minutes of television and fade into oblivion, and those that use comedy to construct human stories we connect to. “Lucky Penny” captures the zeitgeist of high-quality, mid-2000s sitcom television.

Best Line: “Here’s how you run a marathon. Step one: you start running … There is no step two.”

Best Cutaway: Marshall’s marathon training

Mother Lore: Ted and The Mother name their daughter Penny. Also, as told by Future Ted in this episode, “But that’s not what happened. They didn’t reschedule. They hired someone else. And as it turned out, three months later, that guy ended up having to relocate to Chicago. Kids, funny thing about destiny, I thought I was destined to get that job. But I was wrong. My destiny was to stay in New York. Because if I hadn’t, I never would have met your mother.”

Growing grapes, tasting climates

Climate has a huge impact on wine. How hot it gets during the growing season, how cold it gets during winter, annual precipitation, humidity, and wind patterns all affect how the grapes grow. The perfect season for a grapevine basically consists of a cool, wet winter that provides the soil with plenty of water; a spring with no late frosts and not too much rain; a warm and dry summer; and dry conditions right before harvest.

Grapevines go through a standard growth cycle every year. In spring, the vines experience “bud break,” when the small buds on the vines swell and open, revealing shoots of new, green growth. This is a delicate time, especially if warm weather brings bud break earlier than average, when the risk of frost is still prevalent. A late frost can decimate the early growth of the vines, setting them back for the entire season. Secondary buds will emerge if the primary ones are killed by frost, but they will not be nearly as strong.

Once daytime temperatures are consistently around 60 degrees Fahrenheit, the vines will begin to flower. The flowers are tiny, green, and tightly packed in clusters. Once bloom begins, pollination can occur. (Most grapevines used for wine grapes are self-pollinating, containing both male and female organs.) This is another point in the growing process that is very susceptible to weather; wind and/or rain can blow the tiny flowers off the vines, lowering fruit yields for the season.

The next stage is called “fruit set,” when the seed(s) and the grape form; this begins almost immediately after fertilization of the flowers. The grapes are green and hard, with little sugar and high acid levels. A month or two later, the grapes enter “veraison” when they change color, soften, and swell in size. Consequently, sugar levels rise and acid levels drop.

Depending on the grape type and conditions in the vineyard, it may be necessary to “thin the crop” in order to get better quality grapes. If too many flowers on the vine are pollinated and fertilized and become grapes, there is a greater risk of not under-ripened fruit come harvest time. The vine may not have the energy or ability to bring all of the grapes to maturity, so some vineyard managers will cut off some of the grapes to ensure the remaining fruit ripens fully.

Come harvest time, day-by-day weather conditions become extremely important. Rain right before planned harvest, for example, can significantly impact the quality of the grapes. The vines will push water into the grapes, and the grapes themselves will absorb moisture through their skins, creating fruit with higher water content and less concentrated flavors. At the same time, a vineyard that experiences a rainy August or September can sometimes be saved by a warm Indian summer at just the right moment. Wine grapes are incredibly finicky.

So how does all of this impact the wine you’re drinking? First, consider where the wine is grown. If it’s from a warm wine-growing region, like the Barossa Valley in South Australia or the around Mediterranean, the vines will probably not suffer from problems like late frosts or excessive rain, and low humidity will help keep fungal diseases and molds from forming. Droughts can be a problem but can be mitigated with irrigation techniques.

As a result of all of this, wine grapes from hot climate regions will:

Likely have lower acidity and higher sugar levels. The grape itself is like an engine burning off acidity and creating sugar. The hotter the climate and the longer the growing season, the more sugar will be created.
Higher alcohol content. Once the grapes are pressed and fermentation begins with the addition of yeast, alcohol is formed, fueled by sugar. More sugar in the juice equals more alcohol when fermentation is complete.
Fuller-bodied, heavier wines. How viscous a wine is, or how heavy or light it feels, is determined by how much sugar and other compounds are in the grape. Warmer, longer growing seasons result in more of those compounds.
More concentrated, fruit-forward flavors. Warm growing seasons with minimal rainfall means the grapes have lower water content. With a lower water-to-sugar ratio, the flavors become much more concentrated.

Obviously, cool-climate wine regions commonly produce the opposite: lighter-bodied wines with higher acidity, lower alcohol content, and more mineral or savory flavors mixed in with the fruit characteristics. Similarly, “Old World” wines tend to lean toward the cool-climate wines, while “New World” wines are commonly of the hot-climate variety. Of course, these are generalizations, and you will no doubt find heavier wines from cool-climate regions or high-acid wines from warm climate regions, but it’s good to keep these “rules” in mind when selecting wine or pairing it with food.

A few examples:

Syrah (or Shiraz) from Australia’s Barossa Valley is very fruit-forward, with flavors so concentrated it sometimes takes on a “candied fruit” or “jammy” flavor, overflowing with fresh blackberry and blueberry components. The wines are high in alcohol and full-bodied. Conversely, Syrah from much of France has the classic fruit backbone but takes on other savory characteristics, like garden herbs, leather, or licorice, and the wines are not as heavy and rarely exhibit the “candied” fruit aspect.

Likewise, Chardonnay from California’s hot-climate areas are famously rich, round, and low in acidity. The flavors are fruit-forward, sometimes tropical, and buttery. Compare these with Chardonnay from areas of France like Chablis or from the Finger Lakes in New York, and you’ll find far less concentrated fruit flavors and a more “steely” or mineral quality, as if chunks of granite or slate were thrown into the tanks during fermentation.

Again, these are generalizations, but they usually prove to be true. Using these “rules” as a guide can be particularly useful when pairing wine with food. Creamy pasta dishes, for example, might call for a white wine with higher acidity to cut through the cloying sauce: you might want something from a cool climate region, or from a grape with naturally high acidity — a topic for another day.

HIMYM favorite episodes: ‘Swarley’

Part of the strength of How I Met Your Mother lies with the character development. Each character has a niche to fill and he or she does so quite perfectly. One of my favorite characters is definitely Barney Stinson. Let’s face it: ladies want to be with him, guys want to have his bro-tacular skills. It also doesn’t hurt that Neil Patrick Harris is extremely easy on the eyes.

Barney is rarely rattled by anything and can always make up stories for why he needs to leave his one-night stand. My personal favorite is the letter Barney leaves behind explaining that he is a ghost who can only materialize once every decade on the anniversary of his death.

As a character, Barney has evolved from a douchebag to a lovable character to Robin’s husband. How did he do this? In my opinion, it all started with the “Swarley” episode in the second season. The episode opens as a nod to Friends. The boys are sitting on a couch, drinking coffee, when they decide that hanging out in a coffee shop is much lamer than hanging out in a bar. Ted notices that Marshall’s cup has a little heart drawn by his name and concludes, with his Mosby Boys detective skills, that that barista must have a crush on Marshall.

Marshall defends the doodle and says that maybe she draws hearts on all of her cups. Ted and Barney glance at their cups and find no hearts, but do notice that Barney’s name has been misspelled as Swarley. Barney starts a rant where he says that Swarley isn’t even a name, and he realizes by the end of said rant that Marshall and Ted are now going to call him Swarley.

Throughout the episode we see Marshall going on a date with a woman who isn’t Lily and we learn the premise of “crazy eyes” and “jerk nails.” At the end of the episode, we even see the return of Marshmallow and Lilypad, the barfiest couple in all of Manhattan. But for me, the crux of the episode is watching Barney freak out every time someone calls him Swarley. (Or really, any variation thereof: paging Swarles Barkley!)

Watching Barney become so unhinged that he can’t finish sentences gives the audience a special glimpse into his insecurities. As the series progresses, we learn more about Barney’s history and why he is the way he is, ranging from the lies about his parentage from his mother to his devastating relationship with college girlfriend Shannon. “Swarley” is the first step in this long line of the evolution of Barney. By the end of the episode, Barney seems to reluctantly accept his fate during a Cheers montage at MacLaren’s Pub.

I know that there are a lot of people out there that detest the Barney Stinson character because he is a womanizer, has one night stands, and lies to get women in bed. In real life, everyone deals with his or her own insecurities any way they can. Furthermore, I think we fall in love with these characters, we invite them into our homes every week, and that we forget they are just that: fictional characters used to carry on the story lines. I have to wonder if Barney’s critics are possibly seeing some small portion of themselves — which they dislike — in his character, and that scares the hell out of them.

One of the things that makes a series finale so sad is that we will no longer get to watch these characters grow and evolve. However, I think we are all excited to see how things will turn out for our favorite five, even if one small portion of the finale will break our hearts.

Best line: “I signed him up for People en Español, but I addressed it to ‘Swarlos.'” — Robin

Best Cutaway: Barney’s one-night stand with a “crazy eyes” girl (Inara!) and her teddy bear

Mother Lore: Still none!

Avoid pitfalls of judging movies by their covers

This week, “Fanning Out” examines the challenges of book adaptations. This is the second entry in an on-going discussion of this topic. When you’ve finished reading this column, check out Kevin Hillman’s analysis, “Catching Fire exemplifies faithful adaptation.” Share your own thoughts in the comments or on our Facebook page.

I’m a book nerd. Ask anyone who knows me and they’ll confirm this fact. I typically read at least 50 books a year. As an English major, I can sometimes be a little snobbish when it comes to books. (I’m sorry, but I refuse to read anything with James Patterson’s name on the cover.) I’m also a big fan of movies and, quite often, those two interests overlap.

Film adaptations are the bane of many book lovers’ existences. There’s always something about the adaptation that hits a nerve: leaving out key scenes, adding in made-up material, changing important elements of the story — die-hard fans of a book can always find something to complain about when it’s made into a film.

One of the movies I’ve heard the most complaints about recently is the latest Hobbit film, The Desolation of Smaug. While the basic framework of the film is taken from the book, the vast majority of the film was written by Peter Jackson. Really hardcore J.R.R. Tolkien fans are extremely offended by the liberties Jackson took with the text. I’m a little more forgiving, mostly because, source material aside, it was a fun movie. It helps that I knew going in that most of the film wasn’t in the book, so I didn’t try to compare the two. Also, a lot of what Jackson added was based on information from the appendices in The Lord of the Rings, and I thought he at least remained true to the spirit of Middle Earth.

Sometimes, I’m more inclined to agree with a films’ critics. I was pretty forgiving through most of the Harry Potter films, but The Goblet of Fire stretched me to my limit. Was it really necessary to add in several minutes of a dragon fight that didn’t take place in the books but cut nearly everything that showed the bond forming between Harry and Sirius? It’s been years, but I’m still having trouble letting that one go.

Hobbits and dragon chases aside, I’ve come to the conclusion that the only possible way to enjoy a book-to-film adaptation is just to accept it will not be an exact duplicate of the book — nor should it be.

The truth of the matter is: some things that work excellently on the page just do not translate well on film. The entirety of Blindness by José Saramago comes to mind. The book was riveting and brilliant, the 2008 film, which was a fairly faithful adaptation, was too slow, and I actually got bored while watching.

I’m the kind of person who, if I hear a movie I want to see is based on a book, I want to read the book first. But I’ve reached the point where I try as much as possible to separate the book and the film in my mind and not sit there comparing them the entire time. The trick is: don’t read the book immediately before seeing the movie. Read the book early — preferably several months before the movie comes out, if possible. That way, you won’t have every little detail fresh in your mind, so you might not be as critical when something has changed.

The same goes for re-reading the book. I used to re-read each Harry Potter book before its respective movie came out. After the fifth book, I realized this was actually hindering my enjoyment of the films, not helping. Thereafter, I stopped re-reading the books right before seeing the movies, and I found I was able to enjoy them much more.

Another thing I’ve learned is that if the movie is based on a book you really love, don’t make up your mind about the movie version after a single viewing. I’ve found that I have a tendency to compare the film to the book on the first viewing, then on a second viewing, I’m more relaxed and able to just watch the film and not think about the book as much. I enjoyed The Hunger Games much more the second time around than I did the first time (though I’m still not a fan of all the shaky cam used in the first movie).

But the real question is: does the movie really have to be an exact adaptation of the book? Is it fair for fans to judge so harshly? Isn’t it better for a film to remain true to the spirit and characters of a book than follow it to the letter, possibly to the detriment of the story and characters? Books and film are two completely different mediums, and they work two very different ways.

Books have the ability to be much more detailed than movies and they can take place over an extended period of time. For the sake of the viewer, screenwriters have to condense events and change timelines in order to keep a coherent story line. There’s no way to avoid that.

Character development is also subject to inevitable reworking. While reading, it’s much easier to keep track of multiple characters, and if you get confused, you can always flip back to refresh your memory. Film doesn’t have that luxury. This leads to cutting some story arcs entirely, or combining characters in a movie. I recently watched Divergent, and while I enjoyed the movie, I really felt like there was a lot missing in the arcs of the secondary characters, primarily Tris‘ friends in the Dauntless faction. I know this was necessary for time, but I love character-driven stories, so that omission was a little disappointing.

However, while Divergent had to cut out some of the secondary arcs with minor characters, I felt it streamlined and focused the story as compared to the novel and did a great job of remaining true to the plot and characters of the book. It’s definitely one of the better young adult adaptations I’ve seen, along with The Hunger Games: Catching Fire.

I’m not saying all book-to-film adaptations are good; some are so terrible even I can’t excuse the decisions they’ve made. However, television shows like The Walking Dead, True Blood, and, to a lesser extent, Game of Thrones have shown us they can exist independently from their source material. (Game of Thrones remains truer to the novels than the other shows, but it’s still made some changes.) The Walking Dead is one of the most popular shows on network television, and I hear very few complaints about how far it’s strayed from the graphic novels. If we can accept these deviations on television, then surely we can cut the movies — which have even less time to tell the story — some slack.

After repeatedly being disappointed by the movie versions of books I’ve loved, I’ve finally decided it’s much better to go into the theater and completely forget everything I already know about the story and just enjoy the film. I’d much rather watch a film that’s well-made, even if it deviates from the book, than never be happy with any movie made from a book. Keep an open-mind, and maybe you’ll learn there’s room in your heart to love the book and the movie.

Facebook buys Oculus Rift: Awesome or not?

I remember walking into an arcade at some theme park or other almost 20 years back and seeing a haphazard rig set up in the middle of the floor. Barely more than a monitor with wires pouring out of it and a cushioned chair, what drew people to stand in line and gawk from afar was the specialized helmet that was hooked up to the electrical system. I watched as people donned the helmet, grasped a controller, and swiveled their heads around while the monitor showed a 16-bit Doom environment swivel in unison. When it got to my turn, I strapped on the helmet with inexpressible joy, took up my controls, and gawked at the images, so close to my eyes that they were all I could see. Then a demon popped out of the hallway and killed me, and my turn was done. For that moment, though, even with the crappy, low-resolution graphics, I was inside the game. And it was glorious.

If you’re tech savvy or into video games at all, you’re probably familiar with Palmer Luckey’s company Oculus VR and its wildly successful Kickstarter campaign for the Oculus Rift a few years back. Unlike every attempt ever over the past two decades to put together a compelling virtual reality system, the Oculus and its prototypes have generated a nearly messianic buzz in the gaming magazines and related circles. “It works,” they say.

Demos, which showcase seemingly simple concepts, like a simple flight simulator, or undersea exploration, or even the guillotine program that makes you feel like your head is being chopped off, are all eliciting haunted responses from everyone who tries them out. The ability of the gizmos to pump out the appropriate resomolutions (I’m not an engineer) are “ready,” they say. A consumer version will be released sometime this year, they say. The time is now.

Then Facebook went and bought it.

Now don’t get me wrong. You won’t catch my ever blaming Luckey and his crew for this. If Facebook offered me two billion freaking dollars for my right eyeball, I’d be like “Uh … sure?” It’s almost more money than there is money. They would have been fools not to sell. It seems entirely likely that the $2 billion number came around because they rejected lower, more reasonable numbers. And his crew is, of course, still in charge of designing and engineering the device. Plans are still very much in the works to keep the video gaming end of the device on track, even bolstered with the influx of new money, though some developers seem to be jumping ship as a result of the sale. The Rift is still their magnum opus, their baby. It’s just that now, if Facebook tells them the baby has to jump, they have to make it jump.

So what the heck does a social media giant want with virtual reality, anyway? Well, there’s a lot of speculation, but the company itself says they’re going to use it to facilitate communication in a way similar to Skype or Google+ Hangouts. You and your friends, who may be in disparate cities, states, countries, all put the headgear on and voila! You’re in a room together, or at the pyramids of Giza, or on the moon. “Sexting” is no more. Say hello to “Oculust.” (Okay, maybe that one won’t catch on.)

Facebook is trying to take an idea to make video gaming more immersive and turn it into something that may very well fundamentally change the way human beings interact with each other. Want to work from home? Put on your headset and sit in on daily meetings with corporate HQ seven states away. Want to sing your kids to sleep but have to be across the country on business? Done.

Video chat lets us do these things as well, but we all know the hassle of dealing with low-resolution cameras, limited view fields, and visual lag. Much like talking on the phone, it’s hard to “just hang out” in video chat. If you don’t have anything in particular to talk about, then it’s like you’re staring at a screen, with your friend or loved one’s distended face taking up three fourths of the viewing area, wondering if things are likely to get less awkward. With VR, maybe it’ll feel more like hanging around your dorm room with your old college friends, just shootin’ it and watching TV, or like you’re really there with your parents in Tulsa, joining them for breakfast.

Facebook evidently thinks these ideas are worth pursuing and put a hefty price tag on it accordingly. The downside to all this, of course, is the idea that they’re going to make it Facebook-y. Put 3D ads flashing obtrusively across your field of view, like in Minority Report. No one wants to see his mother’s forehead plastered with the Maalox logo.

The other thing is that, unlike with our smartphones, the Rift requires a certain separation from the world at large in order to operate. You really need to sit down somewhere without a lot of breakables nearby and try to stay calm, because your nervous system is going to start trying to react to the virtual environment. This means that it’s very hard to be “present” in the world of the headset and also in the actual, real world around you at the same time. Perhaps Facebook has ideas about augmented reality, like Google Glass is attempting to master, where you can see the real world with virtual information overlaid on top of it. Either way, splitting off focus from the real world into a virtual one is already a source of problems, as the incidence of car accidents due to texting while driving can attest.

Ultimately, whether Facebook’s plans for the Rift unfold the way they want, or for that matter, the way we want, remains to be seen. If it lives up to the hype, and the United States starts to make sensible decisions about its telecommunications industry to keep up with demand for service, then we may all be talking about it in Middle Earth in a few years. Or Tatooine. Or Paris or something, for you not-nerds. Cheers.

Lighten up fashion, lifestyle for spring

In the temperate climates of the Northern Hemisphere, spring has arrived. Those of us in the northeastern quadrant of the United States are still stuffing ourselves into winter coats, but the weather is sure to change eventually. When it does, the gentleman must also change his wardrobe to reflect the season.

Winter evokes darkness, heaviness, seriousness: tweed and pipes and leather bound books and rich mahogany. In spring, the gentleman throws off this weight. Spring and fall are the best times for men’s fashion. The variable and mild temperatures allow for a diversity in clothing options. Fall is all about preparing for winter, with darker earth tones and heavier fabrics, but the buzzword of spring is “light.” Everything about the gentleman’s spring appearance should hew to this theme.

Begin by packing away the chunky sweaters and wool overcoats. But don’t just venture out into 50-degree weather as if it were mid-July. Embrace a leather (or faux leather) jacket, or a slick-looking track-style zip-up. When April showers hit, grab a classic trench or harness backwoods garment technology in an urban-styled raincoat. Furthermore, no modern urban gentleman should subject himself to the rain without a manly umbrella.

At the office and high-class dinner parties, lighten up your suit as well. The Modern Urban Gentleman has covered suits extensively already, but remember a few key points. Spring is the time to wear brighter colors, so put away the blacks, navies, and dark grays; opt for light grays, medium blues, and khaki. Be bold — but not overwhelming — in shirt and tie colors and patterns. Maybe this is the year you finally try a pink shirt.

When dressing more casual, jeans are vernally appropriate, but consider relying on chinos in washed-out hues. Classic khakis are still a staple, but make sure they have a modern fit, narrow through the leg — and, of course, no pleats.

The first half of spring is still brisk, so don’t jump straight into polo shirts. Keep wearing long sleeves, especially in waffle-knit fabrics, like Henleys. A blazer or a cardigan keep things warm without weighing you down. The trend in button-downs is for more ornate patterns; let your personal style be your guide, but remember not to overload the senses by mixing more than one statement piece.

The sun’s warming rays also bring out new options for footwear. The trend of the season is suede Oxfords in all colors. Go for it, but remember to check the weather report before heading out the door; rain can cause all sorts of trouble for the delicate leather (suede care to be covered at a later date). The chukka, or desert, boot was huge last year and will be popular this spring, too.

Sometime after Easter, lose the socks in less formal settings. Going sockless is a big deal, and the Modern Urban Gentleman will offer tips as the time draws near. In the meantime, during the early part of spring, swap out the brown and black stockings for pastels and jaunty designs.

Spring is a prefect time to invest in a new pair of sunglasses that you will try not to lose before Memorial Day. Aviators are a timeless classic, but consider pairing your shades to the shape of your face. Another accessory to consider is the fashion scarf. Don’t be afraid — be a confident modern urban gentleman! It’s very European.

Your spring awakening extends beyond the clothing. Consider trimming some of the winter growth from both your head and your face. The next time you visit the barber, ask about trying a toned-down version of the Macklemore; you’ve seen it recently on Brad Pitt, David Beckham, and Justin Timberlake.

Winter is a great time to sport a mountain man beard (if your wife will allow it), and we saw plenty of them during awards season this year. But spring calls for cultivated stubble instead of wild tangles. Pick up a beard trimmer, take it in tight — and get rid of the stuff on your neck altogether.

If you are a cologne-wearing gentleman, it’s time to mix up the scent. As GQ tells us today, go for something lighter, more green or fruity, to match nature’s bounty.

The modern urban gentleman lifestyle is about more than clothing. So extend the “lighten up” philosophy to everything you do: supplement your whiskey with gin, get outside and breathe the fresh air, laugh more. Spring is also a new beginning in so many ways. Seize this opportunity to learn some new skills, such as planting a garden to provide fresh, healthy food for your family.

Spring is a time of rebirth, and if you are ready to throw off the doldrums of winter, like the Modern Urban Gentleman certainly is, let that rebirth manifest in you as well.

HIMYM favorite episodes: ‘Slap Bet’

Chuck Cunningham and Judy Winslow vanished. Cory Matthews aged three years in one season. Jerry and Elaine dated for one episode and it was never mentioned again. Sitcoms are notorious for shaky continuity. Perhaps the writers believe these fictional characters only exist to make us laugh, so continuity should be no issue.

But How I Met Your Mother shows us why continuity is important. Besides creating an amazing narrative story that transcends the simple sitcom formula, it also creates a web of jokes that make the show appreciably better to longtime fans. Many shows make callback jokes, but rarely does a show dedicate an entire episode of its final season to a gag started seven years prior. And no show has done it in a way that feels relevant quite like How I Met Your Mother.

The perfect example of this is the season 2 episode, alternately called “Slap Bet” or “Robin Sparkles,” the second title originally being dropped to withhold the secret reveal. The two different titles give away exactly why the episode is so important. It created two strong running jokes that would be referenced straight through to the finale.

Spoiler alert! Robin Scherbatsky was a Canadian pop star in the 90s. And an awesome one at that. She even rapped.

The Robin Sparkles reveal is one of the funniest moments in any sitcom. “Let’s Go to The Mall” was my ringtone for a time. And who can forget all of the later jokes this reveal spawned? There was the time when Robin Sparkles made mathematics quite erotic. Alan Thicke certainly enjoyed it. Then there was the absolute classic Behind the Music joke about Robin as Alanis Morissette, including, surprisingly, the first Full House reference, when Dave Coulier made his always-awesome “cut it out” joke. None of these late series jokes would have been possible without the foundation laid out in season 2.

Then, of course, there is the Slap Bet. After a series of events involving a wager over Robin’s past, Marshall gained the right to slap Barney five times, any time, for the rest of their lives. After gaining three at a later date, Marshall ended up with eight slaps, often doled out in episodes dedicated entirely to the impending slap. Remember “Slapsgiving”? Or “Slapsgiving 2”? Or “Slappointment in Slapmarra” from the final season? Maybe it’s best we don’t remember much from the final season, except for the final slap, delivered to Barney at the altar on his wedding day.

Even without acknowledging the later impact of this episode on the series, the episode is fantastic in its own right. The episode showcases the comedic gold-mine combination of Marshall and Barney, while going far in establishing who Ted and Robin are as individuals and as a couple. Robin’s reserve conflicts harshly with Ted’s openness about who he is. It’s difficult for Ted to accept the secrets Robin wants to keep, though his goodhearted side ultimately wins out, and he accepts her decision. Robin, too, grows, deciding that her past should be known by the people she loves, no matter how terrible, or bubblegum pop-ish, it is.

Continuity is difficult to maintain, but when done right, it can create a rich history to build upon and add anticipation to the big moments of the show. How I Met Your Mother has mastered this craft and I’m sure the finale will show us why it’s been worth the ride.

Best Line:
Ted: You’re afraid of the seven dwarfs?
Robin: Just Doc. He’s creepy. I mean, he’s got a medical degree. Why is he hanging around a bunch of coal miners?

Best Cutaway:

Mother Lore: None.

curiata

provoke your curiosity