The impact was not as great as with Act Like It, but I got hit in the feels. The internal conflicts – Sophy’s shyness and deep introversion, Mick’s distrust of people and justifiable caution with women – kept me up late reading, and their careful romance gave me deep-seated chest tingles. The attraction between the characters was evident in every interaction, though. As the romance moved forward, though, the mysteries seemed less vital. There’s also an uneven suspense plot that was mild but also somewhat unnecessary. It moved in little steps then BIG HUGE LEAPS, and the evolving conflict between Mick and Sophy didn’t always support those massive leaps in their relationship. I could also see where the plot could have been more consistently developed. Whenever characters were talking, my brain was 2500% there for all of it. I could see some of strengths I found in Act Like It – emotional resonance, creatively talented characters living deeply artistic lives, solid world building, and terrific, realistic dialogue. Mick isn’t very trustful of anyone, but he agrees.Ī | BN | K | AB This is an earlier book, and it sort of shows. After they’re thrown together by art, smoke, and sketches, she asks him to model for her to prepare for a massive sculpture project she’s undertaking for a competition. She thinks he’s compelling, both personally and artistically. Sophy finds his face, his demeanor, and pretty much everything about him completely fascinating – but not in a gawking, unkind way. He knows it, and he’s sort of accepted that fact about himself. Mick’s issue is that he’s really not attractive. He already knows that she’s got a sketch of him in her notebook – he saw her drawing it during the exhibit. ![]() Mick, one of the security consultants guarding the collection, rescues her, and then finds out she can provide detailed sketches of the people who orchestrated it. Sophy is at an gallery opening with her art school class when an attempted theft marked by a smoke bomb sets off Sophy’s severe asthma. By using some dramatic license, the screenwriter can rework those parts into something that keeps the rest of the story flowing.I grabbed this with fast grabby hands when Mandy at Smexxybooks mentioned that Elle Pierson was also Lucy Parker and, well, y’all know how I feel about her book Act Like It. Even the most dramatic true life story is bound to have some less-than-interesting details that wouldn't play well in a book or movie. I think some people complain about the overuse of artistic license, but they would probably not be happy with the end results if the writer didn't use it. They spent the entire time looking at each other and saying things like"Well, THAT never happened." and "I think the real madam would have hit him with a shovel by now." Once it became obvious to the audience that the story was mostly fictional, people started losing interest. ![]() When the musical premiered at the local theater, I sat with some older men who knew the real madam and boat captain. Both of these characters were based on real people, but they weren't exactly the loving couple portrayed in the musical. The two main characters were a rogue steamboat captain and the madam of an infamous local bordello. ![]() A few years ago, someone wrote a musical that was supposed to be about our city's "rough and rowdy" history. I don't mind the use of artistic license from time to time, but it really bothers me whenever the truth is sacrificed in favor of a good story.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |