SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion

Just curious- has anyone seen this yet? I only read the first book recently and I really enjoyed it. Did you like it? How did the movie and the book(s) compare?

Not yet, hoping to see it this coming week. I thought the book was genuinely one of the creepiest things I've ever read. Reviews are positive, so I'm looking forward to seeing how they do.

Sarah wrote: "Just curious- has anyone seen this yet? I only read the first book recently and I really enjoyed it. Did you like it? How did the movie and the book(s) compare?"

I haven't read the book, but I watched this yesterday. Good movie. Weird, scary, and clever, and leaves you wondering.

I saw it. I too only read the first book, but I didn't love it. I didn't... get it.

I liked the movie well enough, but it changed A LOT from the book. Some of the things that I did like a lot from the book were not included at all, which I was disappointed by.

I think that the movie also made the characters more... relatable. But, that was part of what made the book different was the way that we never really understood the characters, at least in my opinion.

I'd be willing to discuss it with you, Sarah. There were things I liked about the movie, but in a way I am feeling like it doesn't improve on the source material, even though I didn't much care for the book either. LOL That's an odd way to feel, but it's an odd book and I don't think the movie really did its oddness justice - it veered off into its own brand of oddness instead.

I like odd- but I get where you are coming from!! It’s funny how you mention not being able to relate to the characters. Do you think it was purposeful on Vandermeer’s part, considering in the book they are only ever known by their occupations and not their names?

Personally I was able to relate to the MC, but I am also a closed up, relatively cut off introvert, so a lot of the stuff she said rang true for me.

So I loved the trilogy and the movie....well I don’t want to keep anyone from seeing it as I LOVE that things like Vandeermeer books are actually making it to theatres!

But I was disappointed in some of the changes.
The most obvious and least spoilers is that in the first book it’s just “the biologist; the psychologist “ which is think was a large part of its power.

Sarah wrote: I like odd- but I get where you are coming from!! It’s funny how you mention not being able to relate to the characters. Do you think it was purposeful on Vandermeer’s part, considering in the book they are only ever known by their occupations and not their names?

Personally I was able to relate to the MC, but I am also a closed up, relatively cut off introvert, so a lot of the stuff she said rang true for me."

I could relate to her introvertedness as well... to a point... but I didn't understand her marriage at all. (view spoiler)[Granted, we only see it from her perspective, and she's far from reliable, but I just didn't understand why HE was married to HER. I didn't get what was in it for him, particularly, especially when they were SO different and she was so closed off and cold toward him. And he was so thoughtful towards her - things like the pressed flowers and his biological observation notes she discovers... I found myself wondering if she would have done the same for him if they'd been reversed. Would she have thought of him on her own, without the mystery of what happened to him? Would she have written her journal as if she was talking to him? And I have to say no. She just didn't strike me as the type to give him more than a passing thought if he was out of her line of sight. Unless impelled to by something bigger. (hide spoiler)]

The movie changes the relationship quite a lot, and not in ways I liked, even considering my previous comments... Neither one of them totally worked for me, honestly. =\

The director of the movie has admitted to not relying much on the book at all. The ending, I am told (I haven't read the book) is all his own work. I don't think it is anywhere as tight and good a movie as, say THE SHAPE OF WATER.

Rachel wrote: "So I loved the trilogy and the movie....well I don’t want to keep anyone from seeing it as I LOVE that things like Vandeermeer books are actually making it to theatres!

But I was disappointed in s..."

I totally agree- when I heard names being used in the trailer I was disappointed. It added to the creepiness of it all: (view spoiler)[Names don't matter in Area X because they were essentially being sent there to die. Easier to cope with if you don't form a personal attachment to anyone. (hide spoiler)]

Becky wrote: "Sarah wrote: I like odd- but I get where you are coming from!! It’s funny how you mention not being able to relate to the characters. Do you think it was purposeful on Vandermeer’s part, considerin..."

Yes I also found the marriage sort of odd. I think at one point in the book (view spoiler)[he says he fell in love with her because she was always a mystery to him. She was the only one whose defenses he couldn't get past. So he married her expecting the wall to drop or whatever. I do recall her having affectionate memories of him though so I don't think the marriage was completely for naught. Sometimes opposites do attract. Having just seen the movie- I did not like at all how the marriage was portrayed! I think aside from the names this was the worst thing they changed. He's described as gregarious and outgoing. Even in the flashbacks he didn't seem that way. I don't think he was cast well. (hide spoiler)]

So- I got to see it today! I enjoyed it- but I think it's better to separate the movie and the book. They don't have much in common at all if you ask me. Especially the ending, as Brenda said- it seems to be entirely the director's work. I don't think it was an improvement.

Things I did like: the upped horror factor. There were scenes I definitely had to turn away from. I'm sure those of you who have seen it know what I'm referring to. Some of those mutations- oh man. As someone who is a huge fan of basically every monster movie to ever come out of the 90s- Congo, the 90s version of Godzilla, Anaconda, Mimic, Relic, Jurassic Park and on and on, I was glued to the screen.

So, if you like creepy, horror, sci-fi mysteries- definitely worth seeing. Happy to discuss other points with everyone.

Oh! I just remembered, (view spoiler)[ I was so disappointed the hypnosis commands weren't touched on! It seemed like they would be when they woke up after crossing the border and then they just fell to the wayside. That was one of the things I loved most about the book. How the MC had to work to fool the psychologist. (hide spoiler)]

I completely agree regarding his portrayal, but I don't think it was casting at fault, but rather (view spoiler)[the disappointment in his marriage and his desire to do something dangerous to feel like he was alive/in control/mattered etc. because of the affair...

Regarding the book relationship, affection is something you feel for a neighbor's kid or your semi-close acquaintances, and if that's the best she could muster for her husband.... He deserved better and more. I felt bad for him, honestly. I think he went to Area X for similar reasons to his movie version, but without the physical affair. Still... It was a dying relationship if she couldn't find it in herself to even think about him from time to time. (hide spoiler)]

My husband and I are very much opposites... We have our issues but I couldn't stand living with the kind of unfulfillment shown in their marriage. :( Maybe I'm reading into it but man... I was ambivalent toward her in the book until I saw their relationship and then I started actively disliking her.

Becky wrote: "I completely agree regarding his portrayal, but I don't think it was casting at fault, but rather the disappointment in his marriage and his desire to do something dangerous to feel like he was ali..."

Interesting take! (view spoiler)[I am someone who personally finds it very difficult to be outwardly affectionate/loving towards anyone (seriously- it's hard for me to say I love you to anyone but my daughter) so I guess I got something different from it. Not being able to say it or show it doesn't mean I don't love my significant other- it's just something I struggle with and have to make a conscientious effort to do. In fact- her even going out to the bar with his friends was something I saw as a demonstration of love. Being in large crowds of people is something I actively avoid and whenever my boyfriend would invite me to a party or a bar or wherever, I had to tell myself: "Being supportive of him is more important than my own personal discomfort for a few hours."

I didn't recall the affair from the book- I thought it was something the movie added in. Did I miss it? Or is this shown in later books? If it is shown in later books I can totally see where you'd be coming from. (I might not be affectionate but I think cheating is despicable- I see how that would shift perception of her.) (hide spoiler)]

It didn’t make it into the theatres outside of the US......it has gone straight to Netflix.

I’m in Australia and I saw it on there the other day but didn’t get time to watch it. I read somewhere that the studio decided not to waste money advertising it overseas after so many of their recent movies were flops and who wants to watch a movie with a bunch of women anyway basically so gave it to Netflix in most counties. I think it’s on some other streaming service in one country but mostly it’s on Netflix.

I’m not saying that nobody would want to watch a movie with all women I’m saying that’s what the article said...

No, that bit wasn't in the book. Only the movie (at least as far as I know.). I do understand what you're saying and I'm right there with you in terms of my own relationship. I'm not super affectionate either and clingy touchy feely types are a no go for me. I've gone to many a bar with the hubby that I didn't want to be in because I wanted to remind his (our) friends that I did actually exist. Lol But this book was so much more extreme in that regard for me and it bothered me.(view spoiler)[ What I mean is that we're in HER head. She's narrating, telling her story. We get to see her thought processes, her habits, etc and I don't get the impression that her husband is somebody that she actively cares about or was important to her. I saw her going to his events and outings as a sort of penance obligation that she had to do to be "fair", considering how much she isolated herself from him mentally, emotionally, and even physically otherwise. Like it was expected not something she did out of love. (hide spoiler)] But that's just my impression. The beauty of books like this are in the interpretation. :)

That’s a disappointing take considering the mostly female cast was a personal plus. That scene with Lena and the machine gun was epic.

Also- it seems like they didn’t even do much advertising in the US. I happened across a trailer for it on accident and then only really saw one trailer on tv afterwards.

Ugh... Typing on my phone is so annoying! Please forgive all the grammar mistakes and such. I try to edit but its never ending! Lol

@Becky Didn’t even notice them! No worries. You’re making me want to re-read the book and I didn’t even read it all that long ago. I agree that the beauty in them is in seeing how everyone’s different life experience leads to different interpretations. And this is just the first in a trilogy! I always feel like I get more out of a group read vs reading solo for exactly this reason.

Sarah wrote: "@Becky Didn’t even notice them! No worries. You’re making me want to re-read the book and I didn’t even read it all that long ago. I agree that the beauty in them is in seeing how everyone’s differ..."

Agreed! I discussed it a bit with friends at my bookclub (which was for a different book hehe) and my friend who loved the book made me think of it differently than I initially did. Not enough to change my opinion or rating but maybe to not hate it quite so much as to write off the possibility of reading the remainder of the series.

Its funny with unreliable narrators how varied the interpretation can be.

I read the trilogy and saw the movies. I really liked the creepy weird vibe the book had and thought the movie did quite well in recreating that same creepy weird vibe. It captured the basic feeling of the books, but didn't really tell the same story.

It would be really difficult to transfer all that first person narrative and internal dialogue to the screen, but the movie seemed like it was made by someone had read 20 random pages from the books, forgot most of it and wrote the script based on the tiny scraps they remembered.

The visuals are beautiful and I appreciated that they didn't shoe-horn in a big military guy on the team and kept it a group of women.

There were two main changes I wasn't crazy about. Fairly general comment but I'll hide it just incase (view spoiler)[ Using names instead of calling people by their jobs, that added so much to the weirdness of the book, it forced the team to de-personalize everything including themselves. The changes to the Biologist's motivations really bugged me. In the book she's driven by her curiosity and wanting to learn about this weird amazing place, in the movie she just wants to find a way to save her hubby. Why couldn't scientific curiosity have been enough? Why did they have to go with such a tired cliche? (hide spoiler)]

Tina wrote: "I read the trilogy and saw the movies. I really liked the creepy weird vibe the book had and thought the movie did quite well in recreating that same creepy weird vibe. It captured the basic feelin..."

Whole heartedly agree Tina. The names thing bugged me more than everything else in the movie because it was such an important contributing factor to the book.

Tina wrote: "Why did they have to go with such a tired cliche?"
This... actually might be their way of shoehorning in the big military man. =\

It's four women going into a warped and weird expedition... but it's really ABOUT Lena's quest to find out what happened to her husband/save him. The setting and the horror and everything else is stage dressing for that.

It's 2018... we're still not ready for a man to not be central to our stories, I guess.

For me the #1 book was perfection. The movie - not so much :/ For me it was too colourful, the soundtrack was all over the place (there were attempts to use themed music, but everything was ruined with few "normal" songs), I didn't liked that the characters were named, I think it robbed the mystery. I didn't understand the green alien at the end at all, and I am afraid to recommend it to people who didn't read the book :D So, book was fantastic, and the movie - 6/10.

I have a question for you guys, is it worth to read the trilogy? Because I've only seen the movie recently and I liked it, although, can't say that it was a masterpiece...

The book was better. The first one is only 200 pages and I don’t recall it being a cliffhanger ending. So even if you just read the first book it should help you decide whether to continue or not. Even though they were different in many ways they both game of the same creepy vibe.

Sarah wrote: "The book was better. The first one is only 200 pages and I don’t recall it being a cliffhanger ending. So even if you just read the first book it should help you decide whether to continue or not. ..."

Thanks Sarah, going to check it out :)

Enjoy!

Mild spoiler-ish discussion of the movie vs. trilogy:

(view spoiler)[So the trilogy was kinda vague and the movie was much more literal of what was going on. I think the movie could be an interpretation of what happened and was happening with Area X, and a Hollywood interpretation at that. (hide spoiler)]