Author Gift | Expletives Not Deleted

I received free digital and physical ARCs and final copy from the author in exchange for an honest review.

Rating | ⭐⭐⭐⭐

The first thing I must do is apologize to you, Mr. Acord, for not getting this review posted in anything that could be remotely considered timely. I enjoy your work and devoured the book quickly. But reviews have been harder for me the last couple years and what I have posted, has been practically forcing myself to sit down at gun-point and write, instead of just reading, reading, reading.

In 2020 I read Acord's first book, Sub-lebrity: The Queer Life of a Show-Biz footnote and absolutely LOVED it. you can find my review HERE. Acord's writing style makes you feel like you're having a conversation with him. You could be best friends, chatting over dinner, getting drinks after a show, anything. I liked the book so much, I went and found his web series Old Dogs & New Tricks. It's fantastic as well.

I was so excited then when Acord offered advanced copies of his new book (in 2023. I'm a terrible person). He is a talented writer, witty and clever. All of the characteristics I loved in the first book were here as well, which makes for another fantastic book that is a must-read.

So, where to begin, but at the beginning? Acord tells us from the start, "I've been trying very hard lately to not become a grumpy old queen. I fear I am not being entirely successful."

There are plenty of things Acord was annoyed about when he penned this one, and it's likely he's still annoyed with those things, because some are even worse now. He touches on a variety of topics in this eclectic collections of essays. We get the heavy ones, like racism, cancel culture/culture wars, maga/the idiot-in-chief, and more. But he leaves plenty of room for lighter pieces as well, and it is a testament to his writing skills that he is successful with both. I know that no matter what topic Acord is tackling, he will be unflinchingly honest, and that kind of honesty is a breath of fresh air these days.

As in his first book, Acord takes us back to life in Indiana as he was growing up. I especially enjoyed his essay, "Am I a 'They'?" as he thinks back to his preferences in childhood for horses, books, and Barbies instead of GI Joe and cops and robbers. He concludes that he may actually be a They after all, but has reached the point in his life where he might just be "a bit too old to make a radical lifestyle change now" (page 150).

Acord also keeps us in the present as well, in the essays about cancel culture, facebook, and all this exhausting racist reactionary bullshit that followed President Obama's election as our first Black president. These essays are timely and hit the nail on the head each time. Acord is intelligent and concise without being preach-y. And as I said before, always, always honest.

Highly, highly recommended.

NetGalley ARC | History vs. Hollywood: How the Past is Filmed

I received a free digital ARC from the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.

Rating ⭐

I can't stand historical fiction when it is based on real people, especially my girl Eleanor of Aquitaine. I am the person who constantly corrects books and movies on their inaccuracies. So, a book doing the same? I should have LOVED this then, right? Here's the premise, from Goodreads:

Film studios have been making historical movies now for over a century. In that time, thousands of films have been made covering not just centuries but millennia. Did Neanderthal woman really look like Raquel Welch in her bearskin bikini? Did 6,000 rebellious slaves claim that they were Spartacus? Did Berengaria complain to her husband, Richard the Lionheart, ‘War, war; that’s all you think about, Dick Plantagenet’? Was El Cid strapped to his horse’s saddle to lead his army after he was dead? These aren’t questions of history; they are questions of Hollywood.

Charlton Heston was a foot too tall for General Charles Gordon. John Wayne was a tad too American for Genghis Khan. Eric von Stroheim’s bald head was an odd choice for the perfectly hirsute Erwin Rommel. And Warren Beatty and Fay Dunaway were far too gorgeous for bank robbers Bonnie and Clyde.

Hollywood never gets it right. History and its characters are endlessly complicated, and producers, directors and screenwriters have a simple story to tell. They have a maximum of two hours to explain what happened over weeks or months or years and many of it give it their best shot.

Yet for all Hollywood’s shortcomings in recreating the past, it has managed to evoke eras and people long dead in a magical way that has kept millions of us enthralled for generations

Sadly, it was not to be. The author was incredibly snide and condescending throughout the entire book. This is especially evident when the author discusses Titanic. Yes, I love that movie, and have since it came out when I was 15. I will defend it until I die, and while there are certainly parts that were not historically accurate (Murdoch killing himself remains my biggest issue with the film), it was still incredibly well done. But for the author to say it was incomprehensible that Titanic won eleven Oscars is simply stupid. It was an incredible tribute to a piece of history that we continue to be enamored with, over 100 years later.

The author was also inaccurate with some of his history concerning the Tudor period, in comparing it to Hollywood depictions. This is an era I know very well, so I was able to identify those parts pretty quickly. This caused me to question his facts and what was accurate regarding the periods I know less about.

I also found that the scope of the book was simply too massive and unwieldy. So many movies were introduced, that the author's analysis was superficial and there was not much room to actually dive into any of the movies in question.

Overall, this was a disappointment. I was expecting to learn new things about the movies and the history they were based on. Instead, the author's tone made it unenjoyable and I can not recommend it.

Quick Thoughts | Titanic and the Making of James Cameron

Rating ⭐⭐⭐

The author is kind of a toad who REALLY doesn't like DiCaprio at all, or Hollywood much either it seems. The fifteen year old in me wants to fight her.

The adult in me recognizes this is decent work otherwise, detailing Cameron's passion for underwater exploration, telling the story right, and doing it well.

Publicist Gift | The Greatest Hoax on Earth: Catching Truth, While We Can

 

I received a free physical copy of this book from Emily Keough (publicist) in exchange for an honest review.

Rating ⭐⭐⭐⭐

Just to get this out of the way, the cover is weird and I don't like it.

I know Abagnale's "story" - his version anyway - for the most part, though I might be the only person left on the planet who has not actually seen the movie (surprising, considering the fact that we are talking about Leonardo DiCaprio and Tom Hanks here, my two fave actors of all time). Honestly, the story just did not interest much, though I think I have Abagnale's book on my Kindle, possibly.

This story, however, the story about the story, is HIGHLY addicting.

Here the author has pieced together what ACTUALLY happened in all the years Abagnale was supposedly such a charming con man who never hurt a single person, so he claimed. He's given a voice to those who were hurt, who suffered financially at the hands of a guy who likes to say he is the greatest con man the world has ever seen. Turns out, he's not. What he is though, is a big fat liar. About EVERYTHING.

For decades Abagnale has been leading this life in which he claims to have been a doctor, an attorney, and pilot, and more. He makes his living now by giving lectures and basically explaining to companies how to not get duped by guys like him. Except that in itself is all a con, because almost certainly most of it did not happen the way he claimed. There are likely bits of truth here and there, and the book still leaves some questions unanswered, but overall it is a big fat nope on the truth scale.

One of the most important points I took away from this book is that these were not the victimless crimes that Abagnale has always claimed. He has maintained that he never stole from small companies or individuals, and that he has paid everyone back. Yet this is proven false in multiple instances when the author uncovers victim after victim, people who trusted Abagnale.

The Parks family in particular is key to unraveling the truth and separating fact from fiction. Paula Parks was a lifhgt attendant for Delta in 1969 when she met Abagnale basically because he stalked her, claiming to be a pilot. He charmed his way into her life and the lives of her family members, moving in with her parents and sleeping in her old room. Outward appearances showed him spoiling her parents constantly with gifts and dinners - all paid for by the money he was stealing from them. Mark Zinder is another key figure in tearing away the curtain. He was Abagnale's booking agent in the 70s and 80s, and had a front row seat to many of the shenanigans - and had plenty of stories to share on Abagnale's darker side.

The author makes fantastic use of all kinds of records - proof that Abagnale's cons are what the actual con is here. Court records show that he could not have done some the things he claimed, because he was already in jail for far less glamorous charges. That alone is all the proof I need to see through the bullshit. There's more, however. So much more.

More written records in the form of multiple exposes written at the time are discussed and those are just as damning. Many journalists were skeptical of Abagnale's claims then, and did plenty of investigating of their own to expose his lies. Yet for some reason, their findings failed to gain traction and Abagnale only rose higher and higher. The obvious cause for this is the way information was disseminated at the time. Long before the Internet became a thing, Abagnale was free to peddle his nonsense and his wider audience was none the wiser. This part is the most frustrating for me. He's on Johnny Carson how many times, and no one from the show looked through newspaper accounts from across the country? The journalists who wrote the stories pushed to make their work known, but it seems like people would rather have believed Abagnale and his complete fabrications.

The most frustrating thing now though, is the fact that people STILL believe his stories. Nearly all of his claims have been disproven and here we are, still at a place where many who have read the book and/or seen the movie believe what he is selling. It is beyond absurd.

I found the sections that delved in Abagnale's family to be of high interest. His parents divorced and he ran off. He was arrested for a slew of petty crimes in NYC on many occasions and was almost always placed back into the custody of his parents. It is especially telling that his parents believed him to be mentally ill. They believed he needed psychiatric help to confront the causes of his compulsion to forge checks and steal credit cards. If that had ever happened, perhaps none of Abagnale's victims would have ever crossed paths.

What I don't understand is how this has gone on for so long. Abagnale is still a security consultant and makes his living pushing this story that has been shown time and again to be false. Yet, he has never been charged for any crimes in this deception. How is this possible? He has claimed to have worked for the FBI as a consultant because he was just so fantastic at forging checks. This has been proven false. Yet Abagnale has not been arrested or charged with the crime of impersonating a government employee. That's kind of a big deal, something like three to five years in prison if found guilty? And it's not like the FBI doesn't know who he is or what he's doing still, to this day. Every FBI agent contacted about this say they never knew or worked with him. Abagnale claims that everyone denies knowing him because they are all so embarrassed to have been duped by him as a teenager. Why has the FBI never come out and formally said this is not true? Why have none of the places he has claimed to have worked (hospitals, airlines, city governments) not come out and announced that it is all lies? And what about the companies who pay him for his supposed security expertise? I would be demanding my money back and taking him to court over it.

Those questions are ultimately left unanswered and the only reason I rated the book four stars instead of five. This still makes for a compelling read that I highly, highly recommend - regardless of your familiarity with the supposed exploits.

Book Review | Sorry Not Sorry: Dreams, Mistakes, and Growing Up

Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐

I never watched Glee, not a single full episode. While I thought the premise was interesting, I could not stand Lea Michelle, and quickly abandoned any ideas I previously had about watching. Even so, it is still hard to escape Glee-related news even after the show ended. Cory Monteith's death due to an overdose, Mark Salling being a disgusting fucking excuse for a human being and then committing suicide, and then Naya Rivera, the victim of a tragic accident when she drowned in early July during an excursion with her young son.

I can not explain why, but I was immediately drawn in as word spread quickly that she was missing. I think partly this was due to the fact that I have a young child myself (though a couple years older than her son) and I could never imagine a scenario when I would leave Eleanor alone on a pontoon in the middle of a lake. From the very start I wanted to be optimistic, but as a mom I just knew in my heart that something terrible had happened.

I read thread after thread of fans sharing their favorite scenes from Glee, and watched clip after clip after clip. The one that really hit me though, was her rendition of "If I Die Young" by The Band Perry - and I have no doubt I am not the only person struck by this performance. Rivera's character Santana sang this song for Finn Hudson, the character played by Cory Monteith. It was such a haunting performance, her voice so pure and filled with grief. The first time I saw it, I started bawling by eyes out, while at the same time completely confused as to why. This was a celebrity who I had very little knowledge of, and I don't say this to sound crass or uncaring, I just mean that I anticipated a reaction much like others I had to celebrities who I was only vaguely familiar with - prayers for their families. I had no emotional attachment to this actress or show.

Yet there I was, sobbing as she sang. And I think it all comes back to that common denominator we have: we are mothers who love our babies so fiercely that we are willing to lie, steal, cheat, kill, or die for them. In Rivera's case, it appears that is exactly what happened, she gave her life for her son's. We will never know for sure, but I think it is safe to say that it is the most likely scenario.

I decided to read Rivera's memoir to get to know her, this person who had suddenly brought out these huge emotions in me, who I did not know at all. I've watched tons of clips by now of her being amazing as Santana Lopez, and have never laughed harder than at some of her quips - often at the expense of Lea Michelle's character, which I am always down for.

What struck me throughout was the completely candid way Rivera spoke of her life, her career, her mistakes, her choices both good and bad. She owns everything, and knows there were plenty of times she messed up, but also plenty of times where she took responsibility and forged her path. She's confident and to some that will probably come across as arrogant, which could be off-putting but I found it refreshing. It's clear she was an immensely talented person and the world has been robbed of that talent.

I appreciated that this was not just a gossip-fest, and that Rivera gave ample attention to all stages of her career, not just Glee. I had no idea before this that she had been a successful child actor who had appeared on several shows, including Fresh Prince and Family Matters. But after that, roles started to disappear and by the age of eleven, Rivera was dealing with going back to being a regular kid - something she had absolute zero interest in. She did continue to go on additions, but nothing came of those. As she grew up Rivera details all of the jobs she knew she did not want, and what it was like to have lived her dream, knowing it was still out there, but potentially giving up for good. Her role on Glee almost didn't happen, because she was ready to call it quite for good. Her mom convinced her to wait it out a little longer, and the rest is history.

Rivera does not shy away from some very serious, painful topics. She is open and honest about her decision to have an abortion, which I think is commendable. No one has the right to judge a woman for making this decision, and I appreciate that Rivera opened herself up to criticism and makes no apologies to those who might look down on her decision. Rivera also discusses her identity as a biracial person, and how she felt that she did not fit in as a result. She also outlines her struggle with an eating disorder and how that impacted her for a long time.

Though I had only limited knowledge of Monteith, I found the section devoted to him incredibly moving. It is clear the two were close and that his death impacted her greatly. Learning about their friendship made the clip of her singing "If I Die Young" all the more heartbreaking.

For those like myself who at first did not understand the big deal about Glee, and Naya Rivera in particular on the show, the book helped - as did the many fan tributes that poured in during the search for Rivera, and after the recovery of her body. Sanata Lopez might have been the supremely confident, vicious cheerleader, but she was also so much more than that to so many viewers. She was among the first to portray a Latinx teenager who was also queer. This representation is absolutely critical to those who so often feel invisible. The journey Santana went on to become who she truly was, and to be able to declare openly and without fear that she was a lesbian, this was huge. And Rivera played the part stunningly. She was witty and scathing and took no shit from anyone. She was confident and talented, much like Rivera was in life, and will be remembered as such in death.

One of the things that also brought me to tears as I read were the many instances where Rivera referred to something in the future. It was so heartbreaking to know that just four short years ago when the book came out, she had these ideas and plans, which will never come to be. She talked about having more children, her (ex, as of 2018) husband, and all that entails and I could not help but tear up, thinking again of her son out there alone on the lake, terrified, having no idea what was going on.

Page 235: When I started writing this book, I knew I didn't want it to be the kind of book everyone was expecting me to write, which was a trashy tell-all that talked a whole bunch of shit - I'll write that book when I'm 85 and just don't give a fuck anymore.

Page 171: Getting a second chance at parenthood with the person I was always meant to be a parent with...

Page 148: "Years from now, when I'm still married and Ryan and I have all these kids and grandkids running around, I can sit back and think, "Yeah, I lived. I really lived."

Recommended for pop culture/Hollywood fans who especially appreciate a strong, badass female.

Book Review | SUB-LEBRITY *The Queer Life of a Show-Biz Footnote

I received a free physical copy of this book from the author, Mr. Leon Acord, in exchange for an honest review.

Rating ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

The very first best thing that the author did was use and reference footnotes EVEN IN THE TITLE. As Matthew Lewis can tell you, I ADORE footnotes. That it just one more quirk in my nerdy little history brain. Why have just enough information, when you could have ALL OF IT? Seriously, I probably need help. But I love footnotes, so Leon and I were already off to a great start.

The author contacted me via Facebook and asked if I would care to review the book, and I knew right away this one was for me, for a few reasons:

• I love salacious gossip and drama (just you wait until you find out what a psycho sweet little Cindy Brady is)
• footnotes, already mentioned
• I dig stories about Hollywood NOT related to gossip, but to the inner-workings as well; not just the finished product but the behind-the-scenes work that goes into getting to the finished product
• I know and dearly love many fabulous men, and I am glad that we are living in a time when these men are finally allowed to be their fabulous selves without (nearly as much) fear as in earlier decades

This book is mostly hilarious, which I appreciated (seriously, she's a fucking psycho) - and a little gross, which I did not (STDs are yucky. Don't get them.)

Even though this was a quick read for me and I breezed through it within a couple days, that doesn't mean there was no content. It got stunningly deep at times, but also beautifully shallow at others and a good memoir needs both of those things, as well as everything in between. Acord is a gifted writer and for much of the book it felt like we were chatting over drinks (something I would LOVE in real life because I think Leon Acord and I could be BFFs and it would be A-MAY-ZING). He is unflinchingly honest about his highs and lows, and that is refreshing. It is not in a manipulative or "poor me" kind of way. It is matter-of-fact, this is what happened, this is what I learned, this is how I grew from that.

I mentioned previously that I love the inner-workings of Hollywood, not just the gossip parts and the red-carpet premiers, etc. There's a reason Ari and Eric were my faves on Entourage: they're the ones who got shit done. Vin had to show up, look pretty, deliver his lines, but especially early on, Ari and Eric were in charge. So, seeing all the hard work that Acord put into these projects he cared about, these labors of love, was one of the high points for me. Fundraising is awful. I hate it and it is embarrassing to basically ask people for money (which I am basically currently doing anyway, because my sweet little ballerina made one of the competition teams at her dance studio and it is expensive as hell. But she loves it and one way or another, I will find the money for it). But, it is also what you do when you love something and believe in it, and that's exactly what Acord did. I also found so many of the behind-the-scenes goings-on interesting - again not the gossipy stuff always, but just how you have to work together, interact professionally even when you are fed up with each other, and how to just completely blow your top off when YOU. HAVE. HAD. IT. There is a time and a place for everything, especially when telling off a director who just doesn't GET IT.

Acord's story does not pick up right in Hollywood though. We are first taken to his childhood in Indiana and his youth reads much like the tales of my friends who also grew up gay in the Midwest. Some are out fully and happily now, some are out but everyone who is uncomfortable with it pretends they're not, and some still have not found the right time for themselves. I can't imagine worse places growing up gay than the Midwest, except the South I guess. Ugh, half our country just sucks at being good people #SorryNotSorry

Going along for the ride was at times exhausting. There is so much rejection one has to deal with when trying to make it in show business. I don't know if I could handle that over and over, but that's the nature of the game and Acord comes through it shining because he did the things he wanted to do and developed the projects he wanted, found the funding, and brought them to life. I had previously seen ads or references to Old Dogs & New Tricks on Amazon but not watched it yet. For the life of me, I don't know why because now having viewed the first few episodes I am hooked, and only stopped watching to knock this review out of the way so I can get back to it. The show is wonderful. It is honest and heartfelt, clever and witty. It was also really cool just to see Acord shine on the screen after having read the memoir and recounting how it all came to be. So much about the show just flows so smoothly, I really like it.

I often found myself laughing and crying as I read of Acord's journey. He is so passionate, and honest, and hard-working, and compassionate, and engaging. He is someone you absolutely want to hang out with because he makes you feel like you belong. I also got pretty angry too, in reading specifically about the issue with Cindy Brady (I can't even remember her real name, not that it matters here) and her trash followers. The whole show was such a bullshit set-up anyway, and Acord was a much kinder person than I would have been, even posing for a photo before leaving. I would have straight up left, knocking shit over. But again, I am not a very nice person. Long story short, she's a terrible person and sent him all kinds of hateful shitty messages and so did some of her "fans" and fuck all, he was way calmer than I could have ever hoped to be. But, we do have to remember that trumplethinskin supports don't logic very well, so there's that hurdle also. Google the story, I'm sure her horrendous Facebook messages are out there online for people to see. What a wench.

In the end, I thoroughly enjoyed the book. I stayed up later than I should have, for "just one more story" which then became "just one more chapter". The writing is clever and engaging, and Acord is not afraid to lay it all out there, all the good and bad. I think there are so many great messages to take from this book: going after what you want, while staying true to yourself. Maybe where you end up is somewhere completely different than you thought you'd be, but if you find yourself happy with that, then it is all okay. There will be detours and road blocks, but finding the solution to going under, around, over, or through is worth it when you are chasing your dreams.

Highly recommended.

Book Review | Life Moves Pretty Fast: The Lessons We Learned from Eighties Movies (and Why We Don't Learn Them from Movies Anymore)

Rating:⭐

I had such high hopes for this one, but the author's voice/tone was completely off-putting to me. And some of the conclusions she drew were absolute bullshit and ridiculous. I love 80s movies. This book, in theory, was made for me.

So why did I dislike it so much?

Because it was TERRIBLE AND TRIED TO RUIN MOVIES I SO DESPERATELY LOVED when I was finally allowed to watch all the films from the gloriousness that is the House of Hughes (plus many others not made by him). I was born in '83 so while I am an 80s baby, I am a 90s kid. Even so, I saw those movies fairly young (probably younger than I should have), but the Breakfast Club is one of my all-time faves, ever. Yet with all the pretentious bullshit the author constantly spews, I am apparently inferior because I was not a CHILD OF THE 80S. Or something. Whatever.

This book is definitely not about things 'we' have learned from 80s movies. It should have been titled 'Inaccurate Conclusions I Have Drawn from 80s Movies', though Freeman of course would not include the first word, because she is the end-all, be-all well of knowledge of all things 80s movies-related and she could never be wrong.

Except she is, a lot. It was pretty annoying and honestly she is lucky I even finished her terrible book.

Exhibit A: Freeman states that When Harry Met Sally is the most quotable movie of the decade/ever (can't honestly remember which she claimed.)

Verdict: How about NO. When Harry Met Sally is NOT the most quotable film of all time, or even of the 1980s. There is literally ONE LINE that is quotable and it is obviously the "I'll have what she's having" quip.

Perhaps she momentarily forgot about The Princess Bride, Goonies, Sixteen Candles, Breakfast Club, Ghostbusters, or literally ANY other movie from that decade.

Freeman also has a really weird hang up on what does or does not constitute rapey-ness. Sixteen Candles is not my most fave of the Hughes movies, but 12-year-old me was in love with Jake Ryan. As I got older, I obviously saw all that was problematic and downright terrible about the subplot where Jake pawns Caroline off onto Ted and how disgusting that all actually was. It was all Caroline's fault because she was drunk, obviously (Not obviously, for those who don't get sarcasm).

Yet the author has ZERO problems with three other movies I really, really love: Big, Ghostbusters OR Breakfast Club. Even I have issues with those movies, but apparently this rapey-ness, or at least creepiness, is somehow allowed for these movies? I don't get it either.

First there is the most obvious. In Big, Tom Hanks plays a thirteen-year-old who most definitely has sex with a grown ass woman. Now, this woman has no way of knowing she has just committed statutory rape, but she did. And there are always jokes about how no thirteen year old boy would ever turn that down - well DUH. Because they are not MATURE ENOUGH TO THINK THROUGH AND MAKE THAT DECISION FOR THEMSELVES. But, it is okay in this case so, whatever. *Eyeroll* (I still love this movie, and I love Tom Hanks, but this is not okay or humorous - except the author doesn't bat an eye at it so...)

As for Ghostbusters, another all-time fave of mine, let's pause an think about how creepy Venkman actually gets in the movie. Perhaps his behavior was meant to convey extreme confidence in himself, but he kind of just comes across as a creep - first in his opening scene with the telepathy test, and then literally with every other scene with Dana. She even describes Venkman as the example of a way a man *should* act. Really? Because being completely arrogant, stalking me, waiting around for my rehearsal to end, and then shouting like a crazy person is not generally considered ideal...

With the Breakfast Club, need I say more than reference the scene where Judd Nelson's character was hiding under Molly Ringwald's character's table?

Didn't think so.

Again, I love the movies I talked about just now, but that doesn't mean they are problem-free. And this whole "80s rape culture perpetuation" certainly should continue to be addressed. The issue I take with it here in this book is that the author does not apply her 'analysis' evenly. I guess it is just okay with her that some guys are rapey, but other guys better not be!

Much like her deciding which times it is okay to be rapey and which times it is not, Freeman does not actually seem to have any kind of coherent argument about any of the subjects she touches on. Basically it is terrible of us to not take these masterful films so seriously and we should be ashamed of ourselves for not recognizing them as high art. But if you DO recognize them as high art, you need to relax and not read too much into anything or take any of them too seriously.

What? So which is it? Does the author even know?

In the end, this is not about anything we have collectively learned from 80s movies. It is the author's memoirs as they relate to what she thinks or feels about a variety of movies from that era and how that may or may not impact films made today and how she also feels about that (Spoiler Alert: Anything made after the 80s is garbage, according to Freeman). Only the author's opinions are correct, so if you are going into this thinking you will get a balanced and well-researched chronicle of 80s movies and their wider impact, you are mistaken. If you go in preparing for movies you love to be ripped to shreds and your entire childhood/young-adulthood spat on, then go for it.

Book Review | William Shakespeare's Much Ado About Mean Girls

Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

This play was freaking amazing. Maybe that is because the movie is an absolute gem that I love, and giving it the Shakespeare treatment made it even better.

Tina Fey wrote the script for Mean Girls based off a non-fiction parenting book called Queen Bees and Wannabes by Rosalind Wiseman - as if we needed further proof for how awesome Tina Fey is. If you have never seen the movie, I highly recommend it. Don't let the setting fool you; despite the trappings of high school melodrama, the movie is sharp, witty, and intelligent.

Naturally then, movie lends itself to being rewritten in a form the Bard might have taken, were he to have written about high school cliques, slutty Halloween costumes, and subterfuge. The only concerns I had going in were how Cady's many voice-overs would be addressed, and how some of the quick scenes from the movie would jump but still be able to mesh together as the movie did. This was handled in a satisfying way by making use of the balcony and of asides from characters while on stage. Those were also used in Shakespeare's actual work, and worked well. The same can be said here. It did not feel jarring or disjointed to jump from stage to balcony and back, because it mimics the same flow of the movie. He also made great use of stage directions and this is 100% written as if it were a play script.

Not only does the author do a fantastic job of fully immersing us in the world of Shakespeare through iambic pentameter (this truly sounds as if Shakespeare could have written it). but he gives some of my favorites lines moments to shine, including one of my all-time faves, "You go Glen Coco!" I laughed through so much of the book because it was a humorous to read as it is to watch.

I loved this book for three main reasons. The first and most obvious, because I already said as much, is because Mean Girls is one of my fave movies. The second reason is because I love Shakespeare. I am one of those who, as a kid, was already into Shakespeare by 5th or 6th grade. I didn't always understand everything I read, but I asked family and teachers when something stumped me, got answers, and I have been in love with his works ever since. The third reason is that this book, and the others pop culture faves that the author has given this treatment to can open up Shakespeare to a whole new audience. Shakespeare is intimidating and frustrating and sometimes even infuriating when you don't understand the language. But here we have something that is 100% of our modern world, dressed up in the fashion of 500 years ago. This makes Shakespeare that much more accessible to those previously put-off, because they can easily recognize movies they love and the plots playing out.

There are a few differences you may pick up on if you are one of those who has watched the movie a million times - mainly having to do with staging and movement. I was aware of the differences only because the author mentioned them in his note. While reading the actual play, I did not even notice. This is another testament to the strength of the author to reproduce this as it could have looked like in Shakespeare's hands.

The Shakespearean language will not trip you up if you have seen the movie a lot (or have most of the lines memorized, like me). I found that I heard the voices of the characters from the movie as I read the lines, which made the reading all the better and did not slow me down because I knew what the author was trying to say then without having to think about it or dissect Shakespearean phrases. Even so, this can still be enjoyed even if you do not know the movie inside and out. If you have not seen the movie, it will still make sense, but you won't catch some of the subtle things that reference the movie, or Tina Fey herself.

Highly recommended.

Book Review | Generation Friends: An Inside Look at the Show That Defined a Television Era

Rating: ⭐

So here's the thing: I know this show inside and out. I probably know Friends even better than I know Buffy, which is saying A LOT. My mom got me the boxed set of all ten seasons way back when it came out and I was still in college; I fell asleep to Friends every night for the next eight years, right up until Eleanor was born. I still fall asleep to it now on the nights she has to be at her dad's. So, I know the show well. I finish lines when I am half-asleep, chuckling as I drift off into dream land.

Need proof? Some of my friends and I go to pretty much anything Friends-related that we can find - which is surprisingly quite a bit for a show that went off the air fifteen years ago. A few months back we had t-shirts made for a Friends trivia night contest. Then a couple of us from that group when to a Friends painting/trivia night back in January. To say we like the show is an understatement.

 

This means that if you are going to write a book about one of the greatest shows of all time, get your fucking facts right. And not only had you better know the show inside and out, but anyone who claims to be an editor had better know also, in the off chance that you might make a mistake.

One mistake is one too many. You have an entire rabid fandom who will point out every single error you make in regards to the show. Unfortunately, there was definitely more than one and ain't nobody got time for that.

Evidence

1. "Chandler has erectile dysfunction." (page 230)

Because of the engagement episode? And the "I knew it!" that he shouted after Rachel informed Ross, "And just so you know, it's not that common, it doesn't happen to every guy, and IT IS A BIG DEAL!"? Because I am pretty sure that all the other times he and Monica had sex when they were trying to get pregnant, and in general throughout their relationship, shows that he didn't.

2. "Chandler must explain why he has suddenly been seized with the urge to take a bath - and in Monica and Rachel's apartment, no less." (page 217)

Except they were in Joey and Chandler's bathroom. It would also make no sense for Joey to have randomly knocked on the bathroom door in the girls' apartment to ask Chandler if he wanted some chicken.

3. "He was regularly shown violating the masculine code via wearing a towel on his head after a bath or blotting his Chapstick with a tissue." (page 214)

Except no, not regularly. Those two very specific things happened when Chandler was listening to the hypnosis self-help tapes in his sleep to try to quit smoking. The female speaker on the tape also made statements about being a 'strong, confident woman'. Chandler did not do those things at any other time in the entire series.

4. "Writer Andrew Reich thought that Michael Rappaport's exit from the show, at the end of an arc as Phoebe's police-officer boyfriend, was particularly undignified; after shooting a bird from bed, he disappeared, never to be seen again." (page 198)

Except he did not just 'disappear'. Seeing as how Phoebe loves animals, is a vegetarian, won't even wear a fur coat given to her by her mom, it makes sense that she would break up with him. She even SAID SO at the end of the episode, that it was over because he shot a bird.

5. "He once had a threesome with Carol and Susan in which he was mostly left holding the women's coats." (page 182)

FALSE. So, so false. The scenario took place in "The One that Could Have Been" which was the two-part what-if episode. Ross's what-if was 'What if Carol had not realized she was a lesbian?' It didn't actually happen.

6. "His father regularly cheated on his mother - with her blessing, as it turned out." (page 182)

This is a pretty solid misrepresentation of the situation. That's not exactly right. By saying Joey's dad regularly cheated, the author makes it sound like he was out cheating with different women all the time. It doesn't make his cheating any less terrible, with him actually having one mistress, and his father even says he is in love with two women, but it is still different from what the author seems to be implying.

7. The author states that Ross's mantra is "eat fast or don't eat." (page 181)

No. Ross explained that, "Hey! I grew up with Monica! If you didn't eat fast, you didn't eat!" This is not his 'mantra' but was a way of explaining why he always ate fast, when Rachel talked about how he would be done and she had not even finished her soup.

8. The author says of Monica that she weighed 200 pounds by age 11, but in her "earlier, lighter years, enjoyed riding the family dog, ChiChi." (page 181)

Wrong again. ChiChi needed knee replacements because Monica rode him when she was heavier. She could not get braces because ChiChi needed the knee replacement.

9. "Rachel developed a crush on Joey the first time they met." (page 181)

Nope. That was Monica. This is mentioned or shown on the show more than once.

10. "Phoebe had already discovered a thumb in her can of soda, demonstrated her skepticism about the theory of evolution to Ross, and once whistled at a man and accidentally sent him into a coma." (page 127).

Nope. That was Monica. AGAIN. Phoebe and Monica were at the newsstand and saw a cute guy. He smiled and walked by and Phoebe nudged Monica to whistle at him. Monica made the 'woo-woo' noise and when he turned around, she pointed to Phoebe to try and say that Phoebe had woo-wooed. The guy had also made the mistake of stopping in the middle of the street and was hit by an ambulance.

11. The author says that Rachel borrowed her date's cell phone to leave a message on Ross's answering machine that she is over him. (page 118)

Um, except no. She borrowed the phone from a stranger at the table behind her.

So, in summary, this book is garbage and you should not bother reading it. The author also made some really weird connections and assumptions, but I chose not to include those because I guess everyone is entitled to see things how they want to see them, even if what they are claiming/assuming/suggesting is COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY WRONG. That is why I stuck to only the facts, pointing out the errors that are 100% provable to be errors. Not only that, but there is not really anything new here, no new insights, stories, or analysis. The author rehashes multiple times the lack of diversity, something the show has always been rightly criticized for. The author brings nothing new to the table except an alarming disregard for the show itself, evident in his lack of knowledge and also the lack of knowledge of whoever edited this thing.

Friends deserves way better than this dumpster fire.

Die Hard: An Oral History

Rating: 5 Stars

Totally found this gem by accident when I saw the author's book about President Obama advertised on Goodreads. I ended up getting both for free via Kindle Unlimited. It is only about 70 pages, but it was a lovely little slice of goodness about the greatest Christmas movie ever. It details, through various people involved in the process, what it took to get this movie made, and showed just how many times it was rejected until it was completely re-written into what we know the movie to be today. Thank goodness that it was re-written at all, because the original premise involved a retired police officer going to his daughter's office Christmas party, and she ends up dying, and it would have been a terrible movie. Instead, things were changed up quite a bit, and we get a great hero in John McClane, and the final result is fucking perfect. Die Hard is such a perfect action movie BECAUSE John McClane is not a typical hero. He's a regular guy who gets put into a situation totally out of his control and he is in way over his head. He survives time and time again not because of convenient happenstance, but because he is constantly trying to be one step ahead of the bad guys, and that is REALLY REALLY hard when the villain you are up against in Hans Grüber. (This is obviously different in the later movies when McClane goes from being the Everyguy Hero to an Action Hero, but I don't really pay attention to those. The original Die Hard is pretty much it for me. I am really good at ignoring sequels.)

I only wish this short could be expanded to a full length book. Perhaps material about actual filming of the movie, things that were easy or difficult, funny anecdotes, and the like. Maaaaybe even an interview with Bruce Willis, that would be kind of fantastic. Such a shame that Alan Rickman has passed away, one of the all-time greatest film villains - Hans Grüber. (Don't come at me with Harry Potter b.s. Hans > Snape. Goodbye.)

Die Hard fans will really like this, but definitely get it from Kindle Unlimited if you can.

The Bling Ring: How a Gang of Fame-Obsessed Teens Ripped Off Hollywood and Shocked the World

Rating: 3 Stars...and that is generous. More likely a 2.5

Oh Sweet Baby Jesus.

I first remember hearing about the so-called Bling Ring when Orlando Bloom's house had been robbed and didn't think much of it again until 'Pretty Wild' started airing. I caught bits and pieces of the show and eventually started watching it because it was simply insane and I could at least rest assured that my life in grad school was no where near as terrible as these crazy girls and their crazy mom. I specifically remember the episode where Alexis Neiers was arrested and how she sobbed and cried and swore up and down that she was not involved, she had nothing to do with it, yadda yadda yadda.

Then here in the book we find out she was a consultant on the movie. I mean, it was pretty obvious from her overly dramatic reaction that she was completely involved.

I must admit that I kept watching the show, oh you sly Ryan Seacrest, you should do know how to hook 'em! But since it was only something like 10 episodes or whatever, my brain didn't rot too much, plus I had the whole grad school thing to help keep away the rot as well. The timing of the show airing was certainly interesting, given that the first episode is literally the one where Alexis is arrested - I missed out on the first couple original air dates and subsequently watched them out of order, so my memory may be a bit hazy on the timeline. Not to mention this all happened six years ago, and I read the book in July. But whatever.

Anyway, the book gave some interesting tidbits, such as the fact that Alexis' adopted sister-whatever was also a suspect in the burglaries. On the show it seemed pretty clear that Alexis was the only suspect. Tess was there when she was released from jail, and the paparazzi were snapping zillions of photos, but the book says Tess was never charged - implying that she was at least a suspect. The show definitely did not focus on that, and I am curious as to why they would do so. Surely TWO socialite-wannabes being charged with burglary is even more entertaining than one, no? In the book Nick (the ringleader) even says around 42% that he and Tess robbed Rachel Bilson's house together, yet she was never charged? It does not make sense to me, unless it was explained somewhere else in the book and I have forgotten. It said something earlier on that Alexis didn't rat her out, but why wouldn't Nick? He ratted our everyone else - including himself.

It is sometimes really easy I think for people to forget that these celebrities are human. They might be super shallow and self-absorbed humans (I'm looking at you, Paris), but they are still human. I really felt bad for Rachel Bilson in particular - not only because Summer Roberts remains one of my all-time favorite characters - but because of how deeply this impacted her and how she felt so violated in her own home and could not stay there. I think sometimes it is really easy for 'regular people' to look at celebs as animals in a zoo here for our entertainment and forget that they really are still people who deserve to feel safe in their own homes. But these punk kids thought it was perfectly reasonable and even acceptable for them to waltz in, take what they wanted - sometimes making numerous trips. It is so incredibly infuriating to see these brats doing stuff like this. This may also have to do with the fact that stealing is one of the things that truly pisses me off the most (especially being a teacher and all). You didn't earn it, you didn't pay for it, it does not belong to you.

There are other people to feel sorry for in this whole debacle though, not just the celebs who could obviously recover financially even if emotionally it took a bit longer. I could not really keep all the thieving kids straight, so I don't really remember most of their names, or their parents' names either. But I most definitely felt bad for the mother of the older guy who was fencing the stolen goods. It seemed from the book that her life had never been easy and suddenly all of this was happening and it was terribly unfair of these bozos to put their parents into such difficult positions.

My biggest issue with the book ended up being the author herself. It was an easy read and one I finished pretty quickly, but I was not there for any pseudo-intellectual dissection of why these kids felt entitled to help themselves to whatever they found lying around in the homes of these celebrities. I could certainly have done without her theories or sociological interpretations of the whys or the impact of reality television on people. My purpose for reading was to hear about the case and the crimes and I didn't have much interest in a magazine writer trying to make the book more academic-sounding. I skimmed over the parts where the author discussed pornography and modeling, and the impact these things have on society - especially for young boys and girls. Eventually the author did some kind of dissection on Bonnie and Clyde and compared them to Rachel and Nick, the leaders of these bored, dumb kids. At that point I was pretty much done.

Overall this one was kind of like watching a car wreck. You want to look away but for some reason you just can't. You have to know what happened. You can find out, if you tip-toe around all the pop-psychology bs, and if you can do so then by all means, have at it.

The Hollywood Book of Death: The Bizarre, Often Sordid, Passings of More than 125 American Movie and TV Idols

Rating: 2.5 Stars

I mean, eh. It was okay, but this is not the kind of book you read straight through, even though that is what I did. It's a sort of reference book with information about a variety of stars and how they passed away, divided by sections into murders, suicides, etc. In addition, for several of the stars, the author gives at least paragraphs-worth and sometimes pages-worth of information on the star's rise and fall. For quite a bit into the book I did not recognize any of the celebrities mentioned, save Jayne Mansfield and James Dean. And to be honest, I only know who Mansfield is to begin with because her daughter plays one of my most favorite television characters ever, the amazing Mariska Hargitay. An interesting fact about Mansfield's death (that I knew prior to this book) was that Hargitay and her brothers were in the backseat of the car when the accident occurred and none were seriously injured.

I went through a phase in college of being completely obsessed with celebrity gossip. This was when Paris Hilton, Nicole Richie, and Lindsay Lohan were at their height. Oh how we begged they would go away, even while devouring every article we could about them. If only we had known that those three would give way to the Kardashian juggernaut. Ah, simply times. Anyway, seeing as how I still have some residual affection left over for celebs, especially those of the golden days of Hollywoodland, I was most interested in the book to begin with. It's morbid, that is for sure, but by nature I think we are all fascinated by death on some level and the death of celebrities is equally as intriguing because given their time in the spot light, we feel like we know them.

There were a lot of people I was interested in to read about and I learned some interesting tidbits that I did not know before, such as that Judy Garland tried to kill herself so many times before she died of an overdose, or that Marilyn Monroe's phone records from the day she died mysteriously disappeared.

The Phil Hartman bit was especially sad to me. He was one of my favorite SNL cast members and I loved NewsRadio. When he was murdered, it absolutely devastating to me. I was 15 at the time and watched the news cycles endlessly, as they replayed the stories over and over. I remember feeling so awful for their children, who were so young, and also because of the fact that they had been in the home at the time of their father's murder.

I can't even begin to discuss Farley's death. That was another one that hit me hard, as another cast member from what are arguably SNL's best years since Belushi, Murray, Ackroyd, etc.

There was a large section of text devoted to River Phoenix and I feel like until reading this book to jog my memory, I had completely forgotten that Joaquin and River are brothers. I was only ten when River died and I never really knew what the Viper Room was at that age, but I had watched Stand By Me by that time (I was a mature ten year old).

As I neared the end of the text (at 59%) I could not help but notice the absence of a couple young actors who I had liked as a youth and as an adult - Heath Ledger, Paul Walker, Jonathan Brandis and Brad Renfro, to name a few. Ledger's death hit me especially hard because he was so impossibly talented, he had a young daughter; it was all just too awful. I did not realize this book had been published in 2001, and that is the problem with books like this - they are hopelessly and forever out of date. So many celebrities have died since 2001, the book would easily be doubled in length to include new content. But it would also be in need of an update pretty much every year, and that is why I typically shy away from books of this kind.

The additional information in the appendixes offers a list of notable movie and tv stars who had passed away up to 2001 and those marked with an asterisk were included in the book (appendix A) and then a list of cemeteries where notables are interred (appendix B). The bibliography contained some interesting books I would like to read, mostly biographies I would like to read to gain a bit more in-depth knowledge of certain stars.

While this was interesting, I would definitely say do not buy it. As mentioned above, it is hopelessly out of date and that alone makes it not such a great investment. Luckily I snagged it via BookBub for I think $.99, so it was not so bad.