Fun fact: In Sweden, the 1982 Ivanhoe is a staple holiday film. It's on the main TV channel every New Year's Day. It's the perfect melodramatic period piece 😅 now with more info I'll definitely read the book
A 90 minute Liene video about classics? This day cannot get any better. I love those Chiltern editions, and I've also been thinking of giving The Moonstone a try, so I'm encouraged to hear that you enjoyed it! Can I ask, have you ever read any of Walter Scott's other books? I think he's a really interesting writer, and one of my favourite authors is currently blogging a big marathon-read of everything Scott wrote so I'm rather stuck in the Scottian mindset; I'd be interested to know what you think of his other stuff. I actually really like the 1952 version with Elizabeth Taylor, I think it has a charm that lots of big budget Hollywood movies nowadays no longer have. But do you know what I want to know? Whilst Disney was giving direct-to-video sequels to just about every one of their animated movies under the sun, how come Robin Hood never got one? There are loads of Robin Hood narrative ideas that they could chuck in there. Why doesn't Disney do a version of Ivanhoe set in the same world as their Robin Hood film? Have Allan-a-Dale, Friar Tuck, Maid Marian all reappearing again and make Prince John real hell bent on banishing Ivanhoe from England forever, let's make him the nastiest villain since Maleficent, don't let the haters hold you back Disney. Have Robin Hood show up near the end, and he and Ivanhoe can team up with King Richard for the ultimate climax to try and take down Prince John, IT COULD BE KILLER. We know from those awful live-action remakes that Disney likes to rely on the nostalgia of the public, why are they just sitting on it? P.S. I know this is random, but it can never be said too often, thank you for your wonderful channel, you always cheer me up whenever you upload.
I haven't read any other Scott, no, though I've always meant to read Rob Roy - maybe in 2023! one of my secret unpopular opinions is that I didn't care for the disney Robin Hood with the animals haha, but I know it's a fave and who knows maybe I'd love it if they did Ivanhoe hehe
I love your long vlogs. This is a real treat to watch. I've read more classics this year than ever before and so far I definitely prefer dark, gothic classics rather than Jane Austen type classics. My favourite classics of this year are Dracula and My Cousin Rachel by Daphne Du Maurier. I would like to try The Count of Monte Cristo and maybe some Oscar Wilde.
I'm the exact same about crying watching stuff! Like I'll be watching something and intellectually I'm like, this isn't sad at all, but I end up tearing up
Have you read "The Eyre Affair" by Jasper Fforde? Among many other things, it gives an explanation of how the Deus ex Machina comes to happen If you like Discworld or Lavie Tidhar's Bookman Histories, you should get on fine with Fforde's brand of British whimsical fantasy
Nothing feels better than rereading old favourites and realising that you do indeed still love them for good reasons, hahah. Is this the point where I admit that I haven't read *any* of these except for Frankenstein? 👀Classics always pique my interest, but then I never actually pick them up. Might have to check out Jane Eyre, Count and Peter Pan sometime next year though. Loved this vlog!! 🥰
Oh man the fantastic Sharpe books are definitely the way to go for Cornwell rather than the subpar Grail Quest books! You shouldn’t be at all intimidated by it being 22 books-they’re short and snappy plus all standalones, making them great palate cleansers. The first three books take place in India and form the first arc of the series, so you could even just look at starting the series as a trilogy.
I really enjoy your vlogs in general and you picked a very interesting topic for this one. I really liked Frankenstein , the rest I haven't read so far ( well except Ivanhoe which I dnf'ed). I have a bit of a difficult relationship with classics, they don't tend to work for me as often as I would like but your thoughts about each of the books was very thoughtful and well said. I'm also happy for you that your favs still slap ! I will be trying Peter Pan next year !
'The Count of Monte Cristo' was indeed written by instalments for a periodical like most of Dumas' books. Moreover, Dumas often employed subcontractor writers, working to his outlines, and this seems to have been the case with the latter chapters of The Count, which are not as good as the early ones. He did not recall writing them in later life. The 1975 television film version with Richard Chamberlain is highly recommended, as well as the 2002 film with Jim Caviezel. If anything the former is closer to the book. Sir Walter Scott was a professed admirer of Jane Austen and at least one of his lesser known novels is a direct attempt at imitation. I read all 24 of his novels leading up to his Bicentenary last year and found that they held up remarkably well, even if his prose style is obviously a bit dated. A common weakness is that his heroes and heroines are not as interesting as his supporting characters, 'Ivanhoe' being a perfect example - the nominal protagonist is immobilized for much of his own story. There have been a number of television adaptations in addition to the Robert Taylor film, the best being the 1982 version mentioned in another comment, which is fairly true to the book and quite cinematic in its production values.
haha very true, Ivanhoe is not the most exciting part of Ivanhoe 😂 I actually saw the old Richard Chamberlain film when I was a kid, as well as The Man in the Iron Mask, but I haven't seen it now in years...probably could do with a rewatch
I read Ivanhoe in High School and it's one of the few I don't remember. I remember a lot of books I read at the time so it is a little weird that it's forgotten. I should reread that. I am one of those people who enjoy reading Shakespeare and older works with hidden cynicism so that one should be fine. I should reread Frankenstein. I didn't like it, but I also had the wrong expectations for it, and now I know what the book is and be able to appreciate it. If you can imagine a weird sophomore who was expecting multiple chapters on how Frankenstein found and made a creature with a lot of detail, you could see why I was a bit disappointed.
Ah the Brontes ❤️, never to be taken at face value. I still want to try another Walter Scott when I have time for some brain power, The Heart of Mid-Lothian.
I read Ivanhoe for freshman high school English (40 years ago now-yikes!). I think it must have been the first novel I ever had to read for school. I don't recall having strong feelings about it one way or the other.
Your reading some of my favourite and amazing classic books 📚 which I love 💕 love you and your amazing channel please stay safe and enjoy your reading love this fantastic video prayers and thoughts for you and your family love your family friend and Aussie friend John ❤❤❤
One of my frustrations with the various Count of Monte Cristo adaptations is just how much they cut out and butcher the story, so I guess I'm coming at the book from the opposite perspective from you. The 2002 film, while a decent movie on it's own, is probably one of the worst adaptations I've ever seen of a text. The tangents and sprawling nature of the text has always been one of the best aspects of the novel to me and I really wish someone would adapt it faithfully as like a 10-16 episode miniseries or a movie trilogy.
personally I think the sprawling tangential nature of it is a bit much, and absolutely should be streamlined a bit if one is adapting it, however the film with Jim Caviezel is so different from the book that I kind of think of them as two different stories, both of which I enjoy
@@LienesLibrary Thanks for the reply. That's absolutely a fair opinion to have. The 2002 adaptation is a decent movie by itself. It's just so far from the source material that it's basically its own thing. As for adapting the full novel or not, I guess different opinions like ours are why texts (especially classics) often get more than one adaptation and in many different ways as time goes on. It's been ages since the last Monte Cristo adaptation though, so I'd be pretty happy just seeing another studio/writing team take a stab at the text.
Kids are "innocent" because they can't understand that their actions are right or wrong....insanity is not being able to know the difference between right or wrong lol. I haven't read Peter Pan yet but I may if you keep hammering away at it (no shade).
