[DWJ] Chalice Discussion/Coraline

jodel at aol.com jodel at aol.com
Sun Apr 19 13:51:07 EDT 2009

>>I'm only up to about message #216 out of the 538, so I suspect that 
discussion, if any,concerning this book won't be turning up until some
months down the page.<<

Hah! Message #217 kicked it off. Sometimes I am so far off in left 
field I might as well be playing in a different game...

As to Helen's observation, no, 'Beauty' doesn't *quite* fit the mold of 
being about finding one's proper work. It is much closer to the source 
material which is all about being restored to one's proper "place". Or 
rather -- being a Cinderella variant -- about losing one's proper place 
and eventually being offered a better one.

But the centrality of the issue of one's work in McKinley's stories 
suddenly became obvious to me and it's hard to think of any example 
which contradicts it. Although I am sure that there must be a few.

As to 'Coraline'; I got out to see it and enjoyed it very much. I 
hadn't reread the book, and haven't had time to do so since, so I 
cannot really say for sure how good the adaptation is. But it certainly 
seemed to be a good one. I cannot recall anything of note that was 
missing from the movie, and the only thing that I *noticed* in the film 
that I didn't remember from the book was the little puppet's blue hair. 
Which was called out in the script in dialogue, but nothing ever came 
of it. So I don't know what *that* change (if it indeed was a change) 
was supposed to be about.

I went up to Universal City and saw it in 3D. It really did enhance the 
experience. There seems to be a little run of improved 3D technology 
being deployed in films all of a sudden. Particularly animated films. 
(To much publicity, and critical acclaim.) In 'Coraline' it really was 
used as an enhancement rather than a gimick. Absolutely *nothing* leapt 
out of the screen at you. But the depth really did the scale model the 
appearance of a real world, even one populated by puppets.

Gaiman has been nattering about on the progress of the film over the 
past couple of years, I gather. It sounds as though he probably was 
involved at some level. And even if not, the production was hardly 
taking place without him for him to have been keeping up to date to the 
degree he was. (I'd add that the film had nothing to do with Burton, 
but Judith beat me to it.)

More information about the Dwj mailing list