"The Emotionary" book review

relatability + embarrassment

embarrbility

n. a feeling of something being similar in regards to a series of events which triggers self-consciousness and awkwardness; secondhand embarrassment.

I didn’t know what to expect from Eden Sher’s book, The Emotionary.  I was alerted of its existence not even three weeks ago, and the concept intrigued me:  Eden Sher—an actress on the show The Middle, which is a guilty pleasure of mine—decided to create a book of fictional words based on emotions she has, with the book formatted as a dictionary with graphic interpretations throughout.  I was in a Barnes and Noble this afternoon killing time between movies, and I found this book with the intention of flipping through it before requesting it at my local library.  The joke was on me:  within minutes, I found my way to the in-store Starbucks, purchased an iced chai latte, and sat down at one of the few remaining tables and devoured the book within an hour.

I really liked it!  Eden’s emotions aren’t unusual to me—and often times it was a painfully relatable experience.  Perhaps it’s just that I’m also very neurotic.  Like Eden, I could be driving when suddenly my daydreams make me remember the time I was in kindergarten and I got in trouble for knocking over another kid’s block castle (in my defense, the infrastructure of that castle was poorly executed and would have been knocked down if anyone had sneezed on it).  I feel like I’m getting off-topic…

Another plus for this book is Julia Wertz’s illustrations.  I promise that this isn’t a backhanded compliment:  I enjoyed how minimalistic the art design was for these comic demonstrations, because they didn’t detract from Sher’s words.  Wertz does a lot with…WAIT A MINUTE!  I just looked up Julia Wertz on Goodreads and apparently she has several volumes of a series called The Fart Party.  This is the strangest Goodreads discovery I’ve come across!

There’s no way I’m going to be able to refocus on this review.  I think I’ll just make up another word and grade this.

distract + internet

disternet

n.  The feeling when you’re trying to do something productive—i.e. write a book review—and get sidetracked when you find out that one of the cowriters of the book in question also wrote a bunch of books about a family that is known for farting, which leads you to an online black hole.

Rating:  B.

Here's what I plan on reading and watching this week (10/16 - 10/22)

I went into this week thinking it was going to be very iffy.  I thought I’d be lucky to read one book and get through two movies.  Instead, I got through three books—past my Goodreads goal of 70!—and saw six films.  After such a productive week, I’m going to try and keep the momentum going, but I may crap out by Wednesday.

Let's hope not!

Anyway, here is what I read and watched last week.

Books

The Assistants by Camille Perri – B-.  Reviewed here.  Very silly, yet enjoyable.

A Man Called Ove by Fredrik Backman – C+.  Enjoyable, yet episodic.  I read this because the film adaptation was playing at a local theater.  This is one of those rare cases of me liking the film more than the book.  I also had the same issue with the movie—sensitive material being played for comedy.  I’ll be a little less vague below.

George by Alex Gino – B.  Adorable middle grade book which should absolutely be available for kids to read.  I suppose my only quibble is that the prose could have been better constructed (or edited).

Movies

Keeping Up with the Joneses - C-. I got invited for an advanced screening of this film, due out on Friday.  I liked it better when it was called Date Night. I feel like this is the most derivative movie I’ve seen in years.  In an unrelated note, I know "keeping up with the Joneses" is a fairly standard idiom, but I never cared for the spelling of Joneses; it just looks misspelled.  

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone – B. I watched the Harry Potter movies before reading the book (DO NOT DO THIS) so this is my first time watching the films since reading them.  This one was a pretty good adaptation.  

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets - C+.  Chamber of Secrets is my least favorite book (too zany, not enough Hermione, lame conclusion), so it’s not surprising that I’m not too fond of this in comparison to the others.

13th – A.  An absolute punch to the gut.

Denial – B+.  To be fair, it’s a standard procedural film, but I was enthralled by the story and the acting of the full cast.  Also:  Rachel Weisz!!!

A Man Called Ove - B-.  I liked it slightly more than the book. I'm still not a fan of the suicide attempts being played for laughs, though. Other than that, it’s a hilariously heartfelt film that ends about as you’d expect it to.

And here’s what I plan on reading and watching this week.

Books

Thirteen Reasons Why by Jay Asher.  This is evidently my sister’s favorite book, so I feel a familial obligation to get through this.  Also, I’m going to an author event for Jay Asher at the end of the month, so I can get my sister’s copy signed.  I’m liking it so far, which is slightly surprising because when my sister told me the plot of the book about eight years ago, I was mortified.

Drums, Girls & Dangerous Pie by Jordan Sonnenblick.  I went to (yet another) author event last week and got this personalized by him.  I wasn’t even thinking of this book, but hearing him talk about why he wrote it, I knew I had to pick it up.  It’s a very short book (written in double spaced Arial font for some reason), so I’ll probably finish reading it before I finish writing the end of this sentence.

Rose Madder by Stephen King.  I just started this on audiobook.  It’s widely considered one of the worst Stephen King books—even by the author himself, who has all but disowned it.  Even so, it has a fairly large fan following due to its subject matter (domestic abuse). 

Movies

American Honey – I heard about this after its premiere at the Cannes Film Festival.  Its length (two hours and 40 minutes) gives me pause, but by all accounts it’s quite good.

The Accountant – This may or may not happen, depending on my schedule.

Captain Fantastic – Another film that may or may not happen.  I’m looking forward to it, and it’s at my local bargain theater ($2 on Tuesdays!).

"The Assistants" book review

Tina is a thirtysomething who works as the executive assistant for Robert Barlow, one of the richest men of the world (number 35 on the Forbes billionaires list).  Robert is the CEO of Titan Corp, a media corporation responsible for nearly all of the media we consume.  Despite working for a billionaire as his personal assistant, Tina only makes around $40,000—which still leaves her with student loan debt.  One day, a misunderstanding leads her to accumulate enough money to pay off her Sallie Mae account.  Tina is nervous that Robert will find out and not only fire her but press charges.  Things start to unravel from there…

That is the plot synopsis for The Assistants, the debut novel of Camille Perri.  It’s a funny novel with many aha moments that will speak to those (like me) who work in administrative offices in a support role.  That said, it’s not exactly rooted in reality:  the wheels start spinning out at a chaotic pace; the deception (and cover-up) builds with more assistants jumping on board to pay off their student loan debt via grand larceny; and the book’s conclusion contains so much fantasy that it makes the entirety of The Hobbit feel like a sobering documentary in comparison.   

And yet, I liked it.  I wish I could say that the characters are four dimensional people who are unlike anything I’ve read before, but they’re not…except for the main character, who is introduced as naïve and ultimately turns into a straightforward, no-nonsense person (although I could have lived without the obligatory romance subplot).  And it’s not like the book is a revelation for millennials by any stretch of the imagination.  Ultimately, what won me over, was the funny and frivolous tone:  it never took itself too serious, even with a built-in social commentary.  I’m having trouble stating in certain terms why this silly book was enjoyable, but it was.

Rating:  B-

"The Girl on the Train" movie review

I read The Girl on the Train a year and a half ago, shortly after its release.  While I admit I went into the book cautious because it was being compared—somewhat dismissively—to Gone Girl, I was pleased that the book wasn’t entirely derivative.  Sure, the structure is familiar (although while Gone Girl only had two POVs, Paula Hawkin’s book one-upped it with three), but for me the story for The Girl on the Train was more solid, and didn’t unravel after the second half like Gillian Flynn’s book.  Still, The Girl on the Train wasn’t without its blemishes:  Paula Hawkins was clearly a debut author, and multiple characters felt clunky and was inserted too obviously as red herrings. 

Even before Paula Hawkin’s book hit the shelves in January 2015, Hollywood already picked up the movie rights.  I was excited about the casting of Emily Blunt, but went in with low expectations; even though the book didn’t read like a Gillian Flynn copycat, it was clear that Hollywood was going to make Gone Girl-lite.

My verdict?  I’m not very invested in this film, so I’m just going to make a list of things I thought about while watching the film.

• While Emily Blunt is clearly doing an excellent job showcasing her talent, I’m still frustrated at how Hollywood depicts alcoholism.  We’re led to believe that Rachel drinks a bottle of vodka everyday while traveling to and from New York, but outside of looking a little disheveled, she still looks like she would fit in as a model in a Cosmo magazine.

• Speaking of New York, I’m unsure why Hollywood felt it necessary to update the setting from the UK to America.  This isn’t exactly a new concept—hell, at this point I’m surprised when Hollywood doesn’t update the setting—but it still irks me that executives have set in their mind that unless a film is set during a war, or is a fantasy epic featuring wizards or hobbits (although you know if J.K. Rowling wasn’t so adamant about it, Hollywood would have had Hogwarts in America), the setting has to be in America, because Americans won’t accept things that aren’t homogeneous. 

• I understand why the actresses playing Megan and Anna need to look alike (because of a plot point in the second act), but an older couple sitting behind me was clearly confused and kept asking each other which character was which.  This is probably a plot point that could have been changed when adapting to the screen from the page.

• I complained that some characters in the book felt pointless and only served the purpose of being an obvious red herring, but the movie contains even more characters that are poorly written and just disappear about halfway through the movie. 

• The movie, like the book, ultimately turns into a whodunit.  I confess that I guessed wrong while reading the book.  Even if I hadn’t read the book before catching the film, I feel like I would have noticed the glaring red flags that follow this character from his or her introduction. 

I’m so ambivalent towards this film.  Ultimately, I didn’t care for it…but it doesn’t rise to the level required for me to actively dislike it.  I quite enjoyed Emily Blunt’s performance—but other than that, it’s a paint-by-numbers film that wouldn’t be out of place premiering on the Lifetime Network.

Rating:  C-

Here's what I plan on reading and watching this week (10/9 - 10/15)

Without further ado, here is what I read and watched.

Books

Home is Burning by Dan Marshall:  D.  Review here.  I'm still not over that bitter aftertaste.

The Girl with the Lower Back Tattoo by Amy Schumer:  C+.  Not exactly the most articulate celebrity memoir out there, but it was fine.  I listened to it on audiobook, so it was almost like listening to Amy Schumer's stand-up routine for seven hours.

Heartburn by Nora Ephron:  B-.  I'm a fan of the late Nora Ephron's humor--especially in When Harry Met Sally..., which is one of my favorite romantic comedies--so I thought it was fine.  Again, listened to it on audiobook, and Meryl Streep was the reader.  Did you know this book was adapted into a movie starring Meryl Streep in the 80s?  I'll have to check it out.

Movies

Operation Avalanche: B+. The first half was definitely better, but the stylistic choices never tire on me, and the conclusion made me feel legitimate uneasy.

The Girl on the Train: C-. On the bright side, it was just like the book. On the flip side, the book was the kind of frivolous junk you can read in one sitting. Blunt works her ass off and I loved her for it; I just wish the rest of the movie gave the same effort.

Amanda Knox: B+. Maybe I'm rating so generously because of how interesting the subject matter is, and because I'm trash for Netflix documentaries.

And here's what I'm planning to read and watch this week:

Books

Holding Up the Universe by Jennifer Niven.  I was a reluctant fan of All the Bright Places:  I admit its limitations, but it still turned me to mush (see also:  John Green).  I'm not sure how the "World's Fattest Teen" plot will work out, but I'm hoping Niven tackles it with tact.

I'm not sure what else I'll read.  It's going to be one of these:

Angus, Thongs and Full-Frontal Snogging by Louise Rennison.  I got this at Goodwill for a dollar, so what's the worst that can happen?  Never mind, I read the first 30 pages and threw it into my pile of things I'm going to donate the next time I go to Half Price Books.  This is the kind of thing that I'd call sophomoric 15 years ago.

Rose Madder by Stephen King.  Gotta get into that Halloween spirit!

The Assistants by Camille Perri.  This book has been on my radar for months now, but I still haven't started it yet.

Movies

13th.  I love me some documentaries!

I have no idea what else I'll watch.  This is a crap-shoot of a week for me.

"Home is Burning" book review

I really wanted to like this book. 

Dan Marshall’s ALS memoir has the emotional impact you’d expect, but it was ultimately sabotaged by the author’s attempt to convey his message in a crude fashion.  I’m not a conservative person when it comes to foul language, but there is a line between using foul language as a coping mechanism and being offensive, and I believe the author crosses that line a few times. 

Further, I’m not the kind of person who throws out the word misogyny with reckless abandon—but the women in Home is Burning are rarely ever presented in a positive light:  Dan’s mother (who is suffering from Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, but is treated like the family gnat who wants attention); Dan’s little sister (who betrays the family by getting married and pregnant while the Marshall family is dealing with terminal illnesses); Dan’s long distance girlfriend (who interrupts Dan’s depressing stories to convey annoyance about things in her life, which Dan deems insignificant in comparison).  The only woman who comes out of this memoir without being openly resented is the household’s nanny, an illiterate elder foreign lady who is inserted as comic relief (she hates the family’s cats and openly talks about wanting to murder the cats). 

Even if the book didn’t have the unfortunate characterizations, my praise for it would be measured, as the middle portion is so repetitive that it dragged.  Combine the repetition with the aforementioned casual misogyny, Home is Burning wasn’t exactly a page turner.  It’s a shame. 

Grade:  D.

Here's what I plan on reading and watching this week (10/2 - 10/8)

Good afternoon!

Without further ado, here is what I ended up reading and watching last week.

Books

Fight Club 2 by Chuck Palahniuk, et. al:  F.  I reviewed it here.  In short, it was a terrible waste of time.

This Book is Gay by James Dawson:  B.  I’m glad this book exists because it contains valuable information for LGBT* youth, but it’s not exactly a breakthrough:  the information is readily available elsewhere, without the author’s silly (at times) commentary.

The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian by Sherman Alexie:  B+.  I reviewed it here.  It was a lovely, fast read (I finished in about three hours).

Movies

Deepwater Horizon:  C+.  I wasn’t expecting to catch this in theaters, but I got a last minute invitation to see an advanced screening.  I may review this further, but it was high in action but develops into the standard action movie tropes. 

Storks:  B-.  Cute, but forgettable. 

Miss Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar Children:  C.  I’ll definitely review this shortly.  It’s your typical Tim Burton movie in terms of wacky production designs and costume design.  Other than that, however, the film felt hollow.  The last half of the movie didn’t exactly do the source material any favors.

The Fundamentals of Caring:  B-.  I really wish I wasn’t so wishy-washy on all of these movies this week.

And here’s what I plan on reading and watching this week.

Books

Home is Burning by Dan Marshall.  I’m 75% of the way through this.  I will most definitely have a review for this shortly.  So far it’s a very polarizing read.

Heartburn by Norah Ephron.  The audiobook is read by Meryl Streep.  Sign me up!

Cinder by Marissa Meyer.  Another audiobook.  I’m going to a book signing on Friday and Marissa is going to be one of the featured authors.

Movies

Operation Avalanche.  I got an invitation to see an advanced screening for tomorrow night, otherwise I hadn’t heard of it.  Found footage movies are hit or miss for me, so we’ll have to see how good this is.

The Girl on the Train.  Despite only kinda liking the book, I’m really anticipating this. 

I’ll try to catch up on some documentaries on Netflix and/or Hulu, too.