I finally watched Pitch Perfect, just before Pitch Perfect 2 came out.
In fact, I watched it twice. Which surprised me, because the first time through I was thinking it was pretty lame/silly. There’s a part where one of the characters says she doesn’t like movies because they’re so predictable, and I was thinking, “TELL ME ABOUT IT.”
And it IS predictable. And a lot of the characters are caricatures, with simplified motivations and feelings and personalities (here’s The Weird One, here’s The Sexy One, etc.), and there are some really dumb parts (“Why won’t you let anyone GET CLOSE TO YOU??,” “Why won’t you let me FOLLOW MY DREAMS, Uncool Parent??,” etc.). And there is some exaggerated gross-out stuff that is not my style at all.
But the real point of the plot seems to be to hold together a bunch of really good/fun a cappella numbers, and it does that job very well. And everyone in the movie is really, really pleasant to look at, which helps too, and there are some good jokes and good lines and good scenes, and I LOVED the songs/performances, and the fact of the matter is that not only did I watch it twice, I’ll almost certainly watch it more times than that. And even though I found it completely predictable, at one point William, age 14, said, “Ug, I know EXACTLY what’s going to happen here,” and I said, “Oh, I know”—and then later he said, “That wasn’t at ALL what I thought was going to happen,” so it may be perfect for young-adult viewers (if you don’t mind them seeing a little crude/racy stuff, which I don’t).
One good thing about the movie is that you can pick up anywhere or leave off anywhere and still enjoy it; I made fudge and had to keep leaving the room and/or looking away from the screen, and that didn’t matter at all. A downside is that the soundtrack is reportedly disappointing: just fragments of songs, and leaves out a lot of the best ones. I had it in my cart to buy on the spot, and then read the reviews and backed off.
I read Find Me, which I thought would be exactly my thing, but it wasn’t:
The inside flap describes a girl who doesn’t catch a devastating and hugely contagious illness; she and other non-sick people are taken to a hospital so their immunity can be studied and maybe used for a cure. The subplot is that she’s looking for her mother, who left her on the steps of a hospital when she was an infant.
The book has several really engaging mysteries in it—and then it just chooses not to solve them. I consider that a big cheat: a good hook is only legitimate if a good reveal is coming. Oh, is that not how it works in real life, where we often don’t get to know why something happened or how something turned out? THAT IS WHY I AM READING FICTION. It is so wrong to have a reader follow a narrator right up to the BRINK of the resolution of a plotline, and then have the author be all, “Yeah, but it sounds prettier/deeper if I end philosophically/poetically rather than descriptively/satisfyingly. And by the way, I’m never going to tell you what happened with plotlines A, B, and C, either.”
I notice that the author previously wrote short-story collections, and this is her first novel. I remember reading another author, one who wrote both short stories and novels (I think it was Jeffery Deaver), say he enjoyed writing short stories because there isn’t the same contract with the reader: with a novel, you have to have satisfying resolution, you can’t kill your protagonist, etc., but with a short story you have more freedom to end things without resolution or with disaster or a sudden surprise twist. It seems to me that Laura van den Berg wrote a novel using the short-story reader contract.









