posted
Despite the fact that no one wears a bonnet and Caroline's hair is always down ( ), I think they're doing a pretty good job, especially as regards keeping the spirit of the books.
posted
I think the casting is closer to the spirit of the book. Especially Edwards. And I like the style they are shooting it in. It's hard to describe. It's like they aren't always focused on the characters. Sometimes its a wheel or a tool or the landscape. I think it's neat. I loved those books so much as a girl. I can't wait to share them with my daughter. Posts: 601 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, I really like the casting. I think Pa, although not quite as heavy as I pictured him, is perfect for the part. He has that mix of joyous, playful love, and sternness when a rule is broken; his expressions are wonderful.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I haven't gotten a chance to watch tonight's episode (had to tape it b/c of Shabbat), but I've been enjoying it. The no bonnet and loose hair are bothering me, too. Also, I think that Laura's hair should be darker - she looks as blonde as Mary.
And where's Carrie? She was born before they left Wisconsin. I remember when Laura and Mary had to give their beaded necklaces to her.
Posts: 3037 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, I was wondering about that, especially when she found the beads, but I decided that I'd rather they keep up with the spirit of the story in other ways than be accurate in every detail and ruin it with bad dialogue. It was probably an issue of the difficulty of getting babies to react on cue and filming time restraints. I suppose I could even overlook the bonnets (*sigh*), but the loose hair is really bugging me. There's a reason women used to always wear their hair up (and many still do)-- it's not practical to be doing manual labor and caring for children and running a household with long hair hanging down to get caught, tugged, and pulled on. Also, you get split ends much more easily, a big issue when there's no shampoo and conditioner won't be invented for more than 100 years.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Shampoo heck. Ya know how much work it takes to haul enough water for more than (what we would now call) a sponge-bath? Or what it's like to bathe when the room temperature is less than 60degreesFahrenheit/16degreesCelcius with even colder water? Or how much work it takes to provide fuel to warm up that water? When houses are built of sod cuz wood hasta be imported? Think about how much water it takes to wash&rinse your hair. And how long it takes to dry. And the women wore their hair long back then, so it would take even more water and even longer to dry in the colder (than what we're used to) room.
Think about the grease, tars, soot, and condensed noxious chemicals generated when ya gotta heat and cook with open hearths fueled by buffalo chips -- similar to dried cow dung -- cuz there ain't no coal or wood available during the initial settlement period. Later on ya might partially/fully replace the chips with corn cobs -- if corn was a significant portion of your crops -- but even cob-burning generates a lot of crud.
And about how much of that grease, tars, soot, condensed noxious chemicals, and dung dust would settle into your hair cuz yer working&living in one poorly ventilated room. Into which ya might bring a few domesticated animals: both to keep them from freezing and to use their body heat to supplement your precious fuel.
Wood, barns, separate rooms, cast iron stoves&ovens -- which still weren't close to clean-burning by todays' standard for wood-burning stoves -- and coal come much much later in prosperity.
Environmental conditions in the average -- average being very very very poor by current standards -- sections of industrialized cities were far worse.
You betcha they wore headcovering: to minimize the amount of crud settling into their hair, thus minimizing hairwashing; and to keep their head and hence their body warm. The head is highly effective as a radiator cooling the body. We ain't talkin about indoor plumbing, water heaters, gas/electric ranges&ovens, cheap fuel, and jumping into the shower whenever ya feel sweaty.
posted
It's on ABC Sat. at 7, at least in Dallas (Central time-- may be different elsewhere), but today was 3 out of 4, IIRC. I stumbled across it three weeks ago, and have been watching with interest, waiting for them to Disney-fy it. They haven't really yet. Of course next week is the last part, so...
(Oh, drat! And Emma's birthday party is next week from 7 to 9! I'll have to make sure to tape it!)
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read in a biography of Laura that Carrie was not born in WI, she was actually born in Kansan, and the day Mary and Laura and Pa went to the Indian camp and found the beads was actually the day Carrie was born-- they walked back home to find a new baby sister. I think the series is maybe more true to her actual life than the semi-autobiographical books.
I missed last night's episode but I've enjoyed it so far, though sometimes the music seems a bit, I'm not sure, just doesn't quite go, maybe anachronistic? But I do love the style of filming.
And Ma's hair being down seriously bugs me, too. Cooking over a campfire with loose hair? I think not.
Posts: 239 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, the music coming up over the fiddle when Pa was playing it was a little annoying. Definitely Disney. What are you gonna do? I've learned not to expect much of music in non-animated Disney films.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
), I think they're doing a pretty good job, especially as regards keeping the spirit of the books.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
What are you gonna do? I've learned not to expect much of music in non-animated Disney films.
