Video blogs that deal with classic literature and writing

[LeeseePieces]

Hi everyone!

I've been perusing these forums for a while and finally have a good subject that qualifies me registering (considering you all thought up the good discussion ideas first...!)

I have come to find that despite the universal quality of sites like youtube, blip, etc etc, there are very few videos that deal primarily with the analysis of what makes for a good story, much less the greatness of classic literature. I personally think that there is a great deal of potential in these sort of sites, considering that everyone has their own interpretation and analysis of any body of work, especially those in the literary category.

What good videos that deal with literature, be it about certain books, certain authors, what makes for a good story, etc etc, hav you found on the likes of Youtube and so on?

CONTRIBUTION: This video was also what inspired me to make this thread. I stumbled onto it (I have a thing for the Count of Monte Cristo) and the guy in it blends analysis, wit, insanity, and fun history lessons like The Best University Professor Ever. I highly recommend it.

[dfloyd]

I've never seen this version of Monte Cristo, although I think I've seen all the others. The last one I saw was the French tv movie with subtitles and a fat Edmund Dantes .... the one with Depardieu. The excellent food served at D'If put a lot of weight on Dantes. The first one I saw was the Robert Donat black and white movie from the 30s .... still a good watch.

I've read the unabridged novel three times and listened to the full CD set ....over 30 CDs. I've read most of Dumas' other novels also, including the full set of the Marie Antoinete Romances. I just queried my library via the internet and reserved the movie reviewed in the blog. So I can add one more Count to my viewing reportoire. It's too bad Masterpiece Theatre didn't do an adaptation so the full novel could have been presented with the full list of characters such as Caderrouse and Villefort's son.

[kiki1982]

A fat Edmond Dantès was the only thing you could say that was inaccurate? Oscar Wilde came out of prison double his size after one or two years! I suppose that was down to the the good food as well? Prisoners sat in a cell 24 hours a day. No walking, no sunshine apart from what shone through the tiny window. The only walks they could have were walks they did themselves, in their cell of a few feet by a few feet. Who would keep doing that, in the dark, day after day after day after day? No-one, I think. Before long, you'd be so depressed you ust do not bother. Any food you get then would be too many calories, sitting on your arse all day. 14 years of that, and there will be serious chance of you getting fat, depsite the ****e food.
At least the contents of that film was accurate beyond belief, apart from maybe the ending which could be discussed.

The 1930s version was so distorted. A court case?? Really?

2002 was even inaccurate from the start! It just spoke simplicity and total ignorance of history into the bargain, mixed with a bit of holywood sentimentality. I don't think the writer did even consider the book to be honest. The end was just vile, that's the only word I can call it.

Though the guy speaking is very good at speaking and analysis, I think (without wanting to sound too haughty) he would do well in reading the book again and reading some French history... Edmond and Fernand were not rich, just normal seamen. Fernand later went into the army where he made a career and through treason (and genocide almost) obtained wealth and a title. Edmond would have got to some wealth by being a captain in a private company. So, no merchant-nobility problem there, just plain hatred. They weren't even real friends! Disgusting behaviour by Fernand really. Disgusting beyond belief. And then, if it is not enough for Mercédès, his cousin, he moves on her in her biggest time of need and takes her from the man she loves and believes is dead. I think that is truly beyond honour even. How does he dare?
The sub-plot of Morcerf (no, not Mondego) and Villefort is not in the novel, because it is of no concern. Mondego bfore his title, is a sad penniless soldier. He cannot bribe Villefort with any money because he hasn't got any. Morcerf is not so evil as to go and bribe anyone, he just uses the tense political situation. He does not destroy himself or does not compensate materially for this bad thing he did in the past. It is worse, he does not care! He does not even recognise Dantès, as such, he has just totally forgotten about it. That is worse than feeling guilty.
Villefort does not even need an excuse to lock Dantès up. He, an honorable man, considers Dantès as innocent (something a lot of men from his rank would not have done with the evidence there), but when he knows it is his father who is to receive the letter, he locks Dantès up because of his own ambition! That is the travesty of the French justice system then! Even evidence was irrelevant in the face of ambition. If Villefort had had no ambition, the plot of danglars and Mondego would not have worked. If Dantès had forgotten the name of the recipient, he would have walked out a free man, but now, Villefort decides to lock him up. That was a travesty for a country that was trying to be egalitarian, liberal and brotherly. It wasn't even being a revolutionary that did the trick. That's the sad thing.

This thing... that has been called 'based on the novel by Dumas', is not the novel, it is not even based on it, it is a story that looks like it, faintly, that's it. It is really a bit sad and should be called something else instead.

But that's me.

[dfloyd]

We have disagreed about this before. Let's not argue about the food. It's just a matter of opinion. I just don't like Depardieu in this role. No manner of rationalizing about the food at D'If will make me like him. IMO, he is horribly miscast. He is a good actor, just ill suited to play Dantes.

The movie reviewed I haven't seen, but I could tell from the blog that the book wasn't followed. This is virtually true of all Hollywood movies.

The 30s film is also inaccurate. But Robert Donat is my favorite Dantes.

After Depardieu's Count, the next worst in line is the tv one with Richard Chamberlain and Tony Curtis as Fernand.

The next year, or maybe two, Robert Donat won the academy award for Goodbye, Mr Chips with Greer Garson. Who did he defeat? Clark Gable as Rhett Butler. Virtually no one remembers Mr Chips, but Rhett Butler ....

I've often thought that Stewart Granger would have made a good Count. He was very good in his many costume dramas .... Scaramouche, Beau Brummel, The Prisoner of Zenda, King Solomon's Mines.

[kiki1982]

In my opinion it is not the actor that makes the role, it is his script. Maybe Depardieu was blonde and not dark, fatter than a seaman, or whatever else, but the role he had to play was so much better than any number of the rest put together that it really didn't matter. Though one could argue that Edmond's darkness meant something about his principles of 'an eye for an eye'. I just don't think that is relevant as he becomes good in the end anyway, so therefore it is not important, not like for Bois-Guilbert for example. At any rate, even if Depardieu was too blonde, they did compensate tremendously with his clothing. There was something more sinister and dark in that blonde man than there was at any time in other people playing them.

And I do have something against French stories played in English. Somehow they do not work for me. Just the way of storytelling is so different, and the way of speaking, that it just does not suit the English way. Somehow those characters cease to be French and to act French and that's where it stops. There is a continuous feeling of unnatural action in those stories that I just cringe when I am watching one.