The Little Prince gets release date and new trailer

Dear blog readers,

I thought you might be interested to know that The Little Prince movie now has a release date of August 5th.

Also, there's a new trailer.

That's all.

Sincerely,

Erin

Cap & Bucky: A Love Story

Captain America: White

Title: Captain America: White

Authors: Jeph Loeb and Tim Sale

Published: 2016 Marvel

Rating: T+

Synopsis: For Steve Rogers, the hardest thing about being a man out of time is being a man without a best friend. As Captain America comes to terms with his loss, he longs for the black-and-white moral simplicity of world war II . . . Bucky Barnes charging fearlessly into battle at his side. The Howling Cammandos right behind. Odds against them, lives on the line, taking the fight to the greatest evil of all. 

First, I would like to start with a quote from Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely the screenwriters of Captain America: The First Avenger, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Captain America: Civil War, and Agent Carter. 

"No adventure is complete without a love story. And, yes, these books have one - the longest, most tortured one in Marvel history, in fact. We're talking about Steve and Bucky, without smirking or innuendo or raised eyebrows. Platonic though the relationship may be, from the meet cute to the tragic separation, their bond has all the elements of a classic romance. These two men love each other - as any pair of friends who faced exclusion, combat, inhumanity, and death would. Their bond stretches across half of the twentieth century. The loss of it gnaws at Steve throughout modern day, and it slices his heart in half when the Winter Soldier rears his tormented, homicidal head. . . Steve and Bucky are each other's soulmate, if you will, because no one on Earth understands what either of them has been through as well as the other does. . . . Soldiers fight for their country. They fight for themselves. They fight for each other. And sometimes they die for these things, too. The ones who don't carry the memory of the ones who did for the rest of their days. Steve Rogers is no different."

This book starts just as Cap comes out of the ice to learn that he slept his life away in the ice, it then explores the early relationship of Captain America and Bucky Barnes, from the moment Bucky finds out just who Steve is, through one of their exciting adventures with the Howling Commandos. Throughout the story Steve's thoughts are shown in blue as he muses over his best friend and all that he lost. 

Yes, the adventure is quite riveting, but the story is really about Steve's emotions and love for his best friend James Buchanan Barnes. 

One of my favorite scenes is when a plane carrying the Howling Commandos, Cap and Bucky explodes over the Atlantic. The terror in Bucky's and Cap's eyes are painfully clear as they reach for each and miss. As they go down into the water modern Steve interjects a thought which I believe to be the theme of the story: 

        

Steve is knocked out as he hits the water and sinks slowly in the dark. Up top, Bucky is losing it, and although the commandos tell him Cap is probably hanging on to wreckage somewhere else he doesn't believe it, and dives under to save his partner. At the same time Steve's thoughts are present in blue: 

         "In the deep it got darker and darker. But I never felt alone knowing you were there. Somewhere. That was the part that no one understands. Or could understand. In war, you forge friendships. Bonds with the most unexpected folks. Like a 4F from Brooklyn and an orphan kid hanging around a Virginia Army training camp. Captain America and Bucky. When we lose someone we have a tendency to hold onto things in their memory. Meaningless things to anyone else. . . I know a little something about holding onto things long after you should We get attached to these things when it's the people we lost that we should stay attached to. Their hopes and dreams become ours to carry on."

Cap is saved by Bucky, and the story continues - bringing them behind enemy lines in France. It is there that they meet their french contacts and while Bucky wants to take down the Red Skull right then and there, the crew decides against it, and instead focus on Baron von Strucker. Just as they are about to set their plan into motion Cap realizes that Bucky is missing, and putting two and two together races after him into the dark. Unfortunately he arrives too late. The Red Skull is hanging off of the Eiffel Tower, which is rigged with explosives, dangling Bucky who is wrapped in barbed wire and more explosives. Cap has to make a decision, save his partner, or save the Tower and much of Paris from blowing up. 

           "The mission was so clear in my mind I couldn't lose you. It was never about black or white or good or evil. The mission. The orders. I couldn't lose you . . . 

 . . .Keeping you safe, James. In some ways, that's all I ever wanted to do throughout the war. I hope you'll understand why your death will always be my greatest failure." 

Cap of course is able to save both Paris and Bucky (because he's cool like that). As he's punching the Red Skull in the face (it's really quite satisfying) his thoughts continue to race across the page.

          "I got into this war - this uniform - to stop men like the Red Skull. Was I naive to think that one man - particularly if it were me - could make a difference? Or is that why I wear the flag of the greatest country there ever was? Because no matter the odds if we don't fight for those who can't - who will?"

The adventure is finished and Cap and Bucky ride away on their motorcycle, and it cuts back to present day. Fury and Cap stand in front of a memorial to Captain America and Bucky Barnes. Cap is full of so much grief and self loathing that he couldn't keep his partner safe. In a moment of anger he throws his shield knocking of the head of his statue leaving only Bucky. His last remarks are as follows:

         " I'm sorry, James. I wish we could bring back the dead. Maybe someday we can. I'm now living in the future like those comic books they sold during the war. Flying cars and everything. Isn't that where you said anything could happen? For now you're gone, Bucky. And all I have left are the memories of a young man who only wanted to win the war."

I think the end is the most heartbreaking. Because we know that Bucky isn't actually dead, but it would almost be better if he was - his reign as the Hydra controlled Winter Soldier is, I think, one of the most tragic and heart-wrenching events of the marvel universe. Last night my family and I watched Captain America: The Winter Soldier, in two days Captain America: Civil War comes out, and as I write this I'm wearing Captain America sweat pants. Honestly, no other Marvel series causes me the emotional pain of the Captain America films, maybe because they're so well done, maybe because the characters are so developed, maybe because the past of Cap and Bucky is completely unlike any other Marvel character. Whatever it is, I love these characters. 

I admire Cap's moral strength and integrity, as well as his ability to take down anyone and anything. I love Bucky's loyalty and caring, he was Steve Roger's friend long before there was even a hint of Captain America. Yes, they're just fictional characters, but that doesn't mean you can't learn from them. 

I realize this review has been long, but I feel like I can never be done talking about Cap and Bucky. Did I enjoy the book? The answer is an enthusiastic yes, with tears on the side. Marvel readers who want a fun exciting story, may not enjoy this, but readers who actually feel invested in the characters and their feelings, will, I think, find this as wonderful as I did. 

My hat is off to both Jeph Loeb and Tim Sale. If you haven't yet read their other "Color" books - Daredevil: Yellow, Spiderman: Blue, and Hulk: Gray, I suggest you do. This comics are different from anything else I have ever read, never have authors been so invested in the emotions and thoughts of their characters, and never has grief been illustrated so well in the Marvel universe. 

My Rating: 

So you think you can dance? You obviously haven't seen Newsies.

Disney's Newsies
Broadway's Smash Hit Musical
http://www.newsiesthemusical.com/

Starring Joey Barreiro, Morgan Keene, Zachary Sayle, Daniel Switzer
Music by Alan Menken
Lyrics by Jack Feldman
Book by Harvey Fierstein
Choreography by Christopher Gattelli
Some Other Stuff by Some Other People

April 21, 2016
Keller Auditorium, Portland, Oregon, USA


Right now I feel like Katherine Plumber - the young reporter and heroine of Newsies; I can't figure out how to begin this review. So let's just start with what I'll inevitably end up talking about anyway: the insane dancing in Newsies.

The dance numbers are the Newsies trademark and without a doubt the most incredible part of the show. When you go to see Newsies you go to see News Boys performing crazy dance routines - and you're not disappointed. The best dance numbers are featured in the songs "Carrying the Banner," "Seize the Day," and "King of New York." My favorite is the "Seize the Day" dance break, which, by the way, you can (sort of partly in a very simplified version) learn to do yourself by watching the tutorial video on the Newsies website.

If you're not sure what I mean by insane dancing, imagine a bunch of guys doing back-flips, sustained pirouettes, mid-air splits, spinning on newspapers, tap-dancing on tables with spoons, basically any and every incredible dance move you can imagine but didn't think was possible for mere mortals to perform - and then picture the Newsies doing it: 'cause they do.

Then picture them doing it in turn of the 19th century New York dress, and picture all of them as really good looking. That's Newsies.

Oh yeah, and they also sing.

Joey Barreiro as Jack Kelly in Newsies

I saw Joey Barreiro as Jack Kelly (the star of the show) and he was amazing - at his curtain call the applause rose ten decibels and everyone in the audience gave him a standing ovation. Of course he was a great dancer, and he played Jack Kelly with all the charisma, inner turmoil, and passion that the character demands. Also he had this small talent called being able to sing - really sing. When he belted "Santa Fe" (his big solo) from the rooftop, it was perfect.

Zachary Sayle as Crutchie with Joey Barreiro as Jack in Newsies

I also LOVED Zachary Sayle as Crutchie, Jack's best friend and brother in all but blood. I actually think Sayle might have been the best actor in the cast, and that's including all the "adult" cast members. His "Letter from the Refuge" song was perfect - with just the right blend of understated suffering and wry humor that the scene requires.

Davey was played by understudy Daniel Switzer, who apparently usually plays Race. Switzer did a fairly good job, but I wasn't crazy about him, and Davey is usually my favorite character. Part of that could have been the writing, though; I felt like Davey's character wasn't as fleshed out as it could have been, and he wasn't really allowed enough of a character arc throughout the show. As a point of comparison, in the Newsies movie (1992), Davey's character undergoes a dynamic transformation from the smart but timid and responsible oldest son to the fearless strike leader who has the guts to put his own words across instead of letting Jack speak them for him. I am definitely not suggesting that the musical should have been more like the movie; I'm just saying I would have liked a little more Davey.

The musical focused a lot on Jack's inner struggle to do the right thing for the Newsies, and that's great; but I felt like a couple of the main supporting characters had to take a step down and become less interesting so Jack could have the spotlight the whole time.

Morgan Keene as Katherine Plumber with Joey Barreiro as Jack Kelly in Newsies

And then there's Katherine Plumber, the show's heroine and Jack's romantic interest. I'm sure it's a fantastic role when played well, but I couldn't get behind Morgan Keene as Katherine; and I don't think it was just jealousy over the fact that she was surrounded by Newsies all the time. Her singing voice was great, but her acting style and speaking voice kind of drove me nuts. She was too whiny, I think, and most of the time she spoke in a sardonic tone of voice that I found irritating. At the very least, I wasn't convinced she was a match for the indomitable and dynamic Jack Kelly.

The Newsies

Everyone else in the cast was fine. Of course all the Newsies were great, Anthony Zaas was hilarious as Spot Conlon, though he didn't get enough stage time, and all the adult actors were good. The choreography and lighting were amazing, the set brilliant, and the orchestra perfect. Unfortunately, the music was just slightly too loud, which sometimes made it hard to discern what the actors were saying. I seem to remember this being a repeated problem with shows at the Keller Auditorium, so I don't know if it's just the venue or what.

Another thing (I don't know if it's a criticism or not), the show seemed to move REALLY fast - as in when Act I ended and the lights came on in the theatre, my sister and I turned to each other and said, "what? already?" As I said earlier, I think the show could have benefited from a little more character development and a little more conflict, or maybe just conflict that was drawn out a little longer than it was. But I think there might have been a very good reason for this, which is that the musical is geared towards a younger audience. It's still a really fun show if you're older, but I think the way the story unfolds is meant to cater more to kids than adults, and (though I can't technically speak as a kid) I think it hits the mark spot on in this respect.

The Newsies in "King of New York"

Finally, I want to give a shout out to the audience for having an awesome level of engagement and enthusiasm throughout the whole show. There was laughter, applause, and audible drawn-out gasps throughout, and an overwhelming ovation at the end. Maybe part of that is just the show's dynamics; but it helps to have a good audience.

And at the end of this review, let me just say it one more time: THE DANCING.

All in all, Newsies is an exhilarating amount of fun, a definite family musical, and entertaining across ages, featuring inspiring characters, a good message, and dance scenes you never knew could happen.

So if you get the chance to see it, I'd say, yeah, seize the day.
(You knew that pun was inevitable.)

Until tomorrow.

Must be a Thursday....

Hello friends, Romans, countrymen, Narnians, rebels, and free peoples of Middle-Earth! (If that didn't cover you, consider yourself included by default.)

Apparently my resolution to post every first Thursday took a month off. So here, a little late but still on a Thursday, is a post of relatively-random miscellany.

First, some Little Prince news: Netflix has taken over the rights to the film and will be releasing it... at some unknown future date. This means - barring a small miracle - we won't get to see it on the big screen. (sigh). If you have any further news on the movie, pleASE TELL ME!!!!!!

Second, I'm seeing Disney's Broadway musical Newsies in Portland tonight and will try to get a review of the play posted by my first Thursday deadline in May. However, I make no promises. You can go on strike if you want, but it won't make anything happen faster.

Third, I recently became aware of a program known as VidAngel which allows you to watch clean versions of PG-13 and R-rated films. The website (www.vidangel.com) lets you set your own filters, after registering, so you can choose how much you want to edit out of language, sex, nudity, violence, disturbing images, and Jar Jar Binks (yes, it really does let you edit out Jar Jar Binks; also the new scenes in the original Star Wars trilogy).

Though it might take a couple uses for you to figure out where you should set your preferences to ensure you don't see the bad stuff while also not missing out on key plot points like main characters dying (apparently my graphic violence filters were too high when I watched The Matrix), it's great for film enthusiasts (like me) who don't watch R-rated or even sometimes especially sketchy PG-13 rated films. I finally got to watch The Grand Budapest Hotel and for those of you who like Indie films with an original story, clever script, and high degree of artisanship - plus great actors - the film is a must-see. Also, it's hilarious.

Finally, enjoy some photos from my sister and I's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy Party. She'd just finished reading the first three books in the "trilogy" for the first time, and wanted to see the 2005 movie starring Martin Freeman, despite my warning that the film is a vast disappointment (though brilliantly cast).

Our menu included Babel gold-fish, non-alcoholic Pan-Galactic Gargle Blasters (if you want the recipe I'll try to remember how I made them), and ... some other snacks that had nothing to do with Hitchhiker's Guide - you'd be surprised how difficult it is to come up with HHGTTG themed snacks (yes, I got tired of writing the whole title out; from this point on you will see a number of different abbreviations, none of which really work). We also carried towels.

On a second viewing, the movie wasn't as bad as I remembered it being, but then again, my expectations were below ground-level. My sister and I agreed that the first third of the movie was great and we were laughing our double-heads off, but around the middle, the film took a dive, to be partly redeemed in the last third of the movie. Whatever else I can criticize about the H2G2 film (and there's a lot), I can say nothing at all against the casting. Martin Freeman as Arthur Dent, Zooey Deschanel as Trillian, and, of course, Alan Rickman as Marvin the manically depressed robot are all brilliant moves. Not to mention the actors who play Ford and Zaphod, also perfectly matched up, and Stephen Fry as the voice of the Guide. Seems like a recipe for success. Ah well.

Until tomorrow.

Victor Frankenstein: MEET YOUR MAKERS

This poster. There are better ones but I picked this one because it cracks me up.

Title: Victor Frankenstein

Director: Paul McGuigan
Screenplay: Max Landis

Starring: James McAvoy, Daniel Radcliffe, Jessica Brown Findlay, Andrew Scott (or Prof. Xavier, Harry Potter, Lady Sybil, and Moriarty)
Release Date: 25 November 2015 (but it took FOREVER to release onto DVD)
Length: 1 h 50 min

Rating: PG-13 for macabre images, violence and a sequence of destruction (that's seriously what it says)

Genre: Drama, Sci-Fi, Thriller

Well, after waiting a ridiculously long time for the film's release on Amazon, I finally watched the new Victor Frankenstein movie, starring Daniel Radcliffe, James McAvoy, and Jessica Brown Findlay. I expected it to be awful, and it wasn't, so that right there was enough to make me happy. But I was also impressed by a few things in the movie that I want to briefly comment on.

First, let's just get out of the way all the random BBC cameos. Was there anyone in this movie who hasn't worked for BBC? I don't think so. It was like a Muppet movie but with all BBC cameos. That was fun. 

Second, the physical appearance of Frankenstein's Monster. (It's probably not a SPOILER that the Monster gets created, but if you want the reveal of its physical appearance to be a surprise, skip this paragraph.) This is always a vital but difficult aspect of any Frankenstein adaptation: how to portray the Monster. Obviously, the most iconic is Boris Karloff's uncanny blend of life and death in the 1931 black and white Frankenstein. Other adaptations have gone out of their way to avoid making the Monster look too much like Boris Karloff's, but it's nearly impossible to replace an icon, and no other adaptations have ever succeeded in supplanting Karloff's Monster's place in pop culture. The makers of Victor Frankenstein obviously understood this, and so they didn't try to replace Karloff's Monster: they built on it. Frankenstein's Monster in this film is reminiscent enough of Karloff's to evoke that cultural touchstone in the viewer's mind, but different enough not to look like a direct copy. I found that stroke brilliant and sensitive. (Also the moment when someone mispronounced Frankenstein's name as "Fronk-in-shteen" = score.)

Thirdly, I really liked the focus on Igor as another of Victor Frankenstein's "creations." Since the focus of this movie wasn't on the Monster but rather on Igor, the makers of the film had to find another way to evoke the Frankenstein creation myth, and I thought it was very well done with the character of Igor. Victor took him from the circus and changed him from a misused, animalistic hunchback to a civilized, refined human being. At one point in the film, Victor claims that he created Igor. We can debate whether or not that's strictly true - just as we can debate whether it's true for Frankenstein's Monster.

The setting, costumes, visuals, and feel of the movie were imaginative and fun. It had that steampunk fantasy feel, but not to the point where it was overdone. I probably could have done without the demon monkey monster, but there had to be some element of horror in the film (since it was Frankenstein) so I guess maybe we needed the demon monkey for scares; the rest of the film was a little morbid but not really frightening. 

On to the acting. James McAvoy and Andrew Scott (the film's villain) are both fantastic actors, and it shows no matter what role they're in. McAvoy was perfect as the obsessive mad scientist and Scott was great as the similarly obsessive God-fearing policeman. Is there a mirroring going on there? I hadn't thought of that. That's kind of cool.

Jessica Brown Findlay (of Downton Abbey fame) is also great, though I'm not sure the role really let her show off her full acting talent, but that's OK. I can't exactly say the same thing for Daniel Radcliffe. I love him but I'm not going to lie and say he's a great actor. Harry Potter he could do, and did great, but this role naturally demanded a large spectrum of emotions and transformation, and Radcliffe just isn't really suited to that. A more seasoned and skilled actor could have played the role with about twenty times more pathos, complexity, ambiguity, and depth.

Also, the relationship between Igor and the female lead (played by Findlay) was a little hard to swallow. I can see them being friends, definitely, but it was hard for me to believe that Findlay's gorgeous and intellectually mature character would want to have a romantic relationship (and a bit more than that, too) with Radcliffe's sympathetic but rather flat character. That said, I liked the relationship that existed between Frankenstein (McAvoy) and Igor (Radcliffe). That one was a little more believable, and pretty well played overall.

Lastly, a small complaint: why does Victor Frankenstein always have to have a neglectful father and a brother who died young? Can we get some more creative plot points, please? It's becoming boringly predictable. I know not every Frankenstein adaptation has these elements, but most of the ones I've seen/read recently have. The dead brother plot point was well done in Kenneth Oppel's Frankenstein prequels, but now it's just getting to be a cliche. Frankenstein's brother doesn't have to die for him to be interested in creating life. Maybe he's just naturally curious. Or maybe there's some other reason; we can try to be a little more original than that.

WHY PARAMOUNT? (Or I have to wait a further unspecified length of time to see The Little Prince)

We continue waiting for the release of The Little Prince.

Over a year ago I posted the announcement that The Little Prince, the classic "children's story" by French author Antoine de Saint-Exupery would be made into an animated movie. Since then, for what feels like an age, I have been waiting for a mere RELEASE DATE for this movie. Then, just in the last few weeks, Little Prince merchandise began to appear at the mall. I hoped desperately that this was a sign the movie would be coming out in the U.S. soon, and apparently it was. But then catastrophe struck.

On Saturday, Mark Osborne, director of The Little Prince, tweeted that the film's release would be delayed. This was followed by another tweet announcing that the film "will in fact be released by another distributor later this year."

The most maddening part of this whole affair is that the film was scheduled for release one week after Osborne made his announcement. Now, no one knows when it's coming out.

To those of us who have been waiting for ever for this thing, Osborne advises that we head to Canada, as the film opens there this weekend.

Why Paramount would drop such a highly anticipated film adaptation of a book that has been translated into 250 languages and remained a classic since its publication in 1943 eludes me, but Osborne's reluctance to explain why Paramount dropped the film and his grateful acknowledgment of everyone who has offered "love and support in these strange times" makes me suspect that there's something else going on here and maybe it's not all entirely Paramount's fault. At least I can give them the benefit of the doubt, although I'm not feeling particularly generous toward Paramount at the moment.

So I guess I and my fellow Little Prince fans will be waiting a little (or a lot) longer.

On a different but not totally unrelated topic, I learned while researching facts about The Little Prince that Orson Welles, of Citizen Kane and War of the Worlds radio broadcast fame, bought the rights to the book immediately upon reading it, and tried to team up with Walt Disney to turn the book into a film. Reportedly (though I'm not sure this is true, but who knows), Walt Disney stormed out of the meeting shouting, "There is not room on this lot for two geniuses."

Maybe there isn't room in this world for The Little Prince. Whatever else we may think we know or don't know about him, it's clear at least that he's much too delicate, innocent, and intensely alive to last long here. Wasn't the whole book concerned with his attempt to return to his own planet?

Whatever the case, I still hope to see this film adaptation sometime before I die.

Articles consulted in the research for this post:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2016/03/12/little-prince-film-release-mysteriously-delayed/81694556/

http://www.slashfilm.com/the-little-prince-release-date/

http://mentalfloss.com/article/64148/12-charming-facts-about-little-prince

Birdwing by Rafe Martin

Title: Birdwing

Author: Rafe Martin
Publication Date: 2005
Number of Pages: 359 (but the font is fairly big)
Purchase: Amazon, Barnes & Noble, ebay, Abe Books, The Book Depository, Powell's Books

What Goodreads has to say:

A boy marked by physical difference--one arm is an enchanted wing--finds his strength and purpose in this stirring fantasy. A Washington Post Best Kids Book of 2005 and Book Sense Winter Pick.


Once upon a time, a girl rescued her seven brothers from a spell that had turned them into swans. But one boy, Ardwin, was left with the scar of the spell's last gasp: one arm remained a wing. And while Ardwin yearned to find a place in his father's kingdom, the wing whispered to him of open sky and rushing wind. Marked by difference, Ardwin sets out to discover who he is: bird or boy, crippled or sound, cursed or blessed. But followed by the cold eye of a sorceress and with war rumbling at his kingdom's borders, Ardwin's path may lead him not to enlightenment, but into unimaginable danger.

What I have to say:

The premise of this book is brilliant - it's why I wanted to read it. Doesn't every child who hears the Grimm's fairy tale of the Six Swans wonder about that one brother who is left with a wing at the end? His name is Ardwin, and this is his story. It probably should have been told a long time ago, but no matter; It's told now.

Birdwing was a well-written story, with likeable characters - Ardin (Birdwing) is especially sympathetic, and I enjoyed watching his character arc unfold. The language at times is beautiful, and the atmosphere feels otherworldly and mythic, but still human enough to be relevant. 

In fact, I find that if I stop thinking of Birdwing as simply a novel, and think of it instead as a fairy tale or myth, it's better. That's not to say the story was bad, but I do think it has a few flaws if you take it as a modern novel, and if that's what you're expecting, I think you'll find a sweet, thoughtful story, but you might be a little disappointed.  

In fact, the description of Ardwin towards the end of the book - as a young prince with one swan wing, a lion skin vest and worn traveling cloak, carrying an old heavy sword and a spear slung over his shoulder, with a lion's tooth hanging around his neck - is a good symbol for the style and setting of the story. The young man looks almost barbaric, but in a grand and mythic way. And his figure represents the weaving together of the human and faery worlds that is such a prominent part of the book and, in fact, of Ardwin himself.

I particularly enjoyed Ardwin's discussion with his sister, Rose Red, the heroine of the Six Swans story, who - quite literally - never really has a chance to share her side of the story in the fairy tale. Birdwing gives a voice to those characters in the fairy tale who have never been allowed to share why they acted the way they did and what the experience did to them. The characters in Birdwing are, in the typographical sense, heroes, heroines, and villains, but in this story they are human, and allowed to share their motivations, desires, and emotions. And it's about time.

Illustration by P. J. Lynch

Someone on Goodreads commented that the story of Birdwing feels very disjointed; and I think they're right. That may have been part of the reason I wasn't engrossed in the story. I wanted to finish it, and I wanted to find out what happened to Ardwin and how he resolved his dilemma, but it was more a general interest and desire to finish the book than a glued-to-my-seat level of engrossment. 

I think I might have enjoyed this book more if I had read it when I was younger, and C. S. Lewis would probably have something earth-shattering and brilliant to say about that, but as it is, I enjoyed Birdwing. 

The story is alternately sweet, funny, sad, and mythic. 

A few of my favorite moments: the description of Ardwin, mentioned above, in the second half of the tale; the moment I realized that the story was, to a certain extent, a Frankenstein adaptation, and the description of the madness of King Ulfius. And I have to say just a little about that last one. Though crazy Ulfius only appears in a couple short chapters, the way the author showed his madness was chilling and brilliant. I love a villain that makes me shiver, especially when he's totally deranged and there's no negotiating with him; it raises the stakes, and a good story should generally have high stakes, or we won't be invested. 

So maybe the ending was a little anti-climactic, from this standpoint, but then again, it was the perfect ending to a fairy tale, and, to tell the truth, an epic battle scene fighting a deranged king who's trying to cut the hero's arm off didn't really match the style of the rest of the story anyway, so it made sense that the impending climax of the book was resolved in the end in a way that was pretty clean and eucatastrophic*.

In the end, Birdwing finds its greatest success in doing what it set out to do from the moment of the story's conception: the tale is an exploration and attempt to understand, as the author puts it, "the wing we all have" - why we have it, and how we can live with it.

I leave you with one share-worthy quote from Ardwin Birdwing himself: 

Ardwin said to the children, "Do you still have the feathers I gave you?" 

"Yes," said Annie and the others.  

"Good. Keep them. One day - who can say when, but when the time is right - a wind will come and it will lift you where you need to go. For now, prepare," he continued. "Learn all you can. Study maps and books, music and stories. Grow strong. You will have wings, not like mine, but your own. Those feathers are the sign."

*See Tolkien's essay "On Fairy Stories" or my post on the Tolkien Reader.