Post 10: Reading Wishlist

HTML/CSS as a placeholder in case js is not enabled - javascript include will override this if things work -->

Sam's books

The Color of Water: A Black Man's Tribute to His White Mother

by James McBride

Great memoir. There is a lot of life lessons you can learn from this book. Great read, I recommend it to anyone who just wants a simple read.

The Wolf of Wall Street

by Jordan Belfort

This book is in my top 5. Amazing story about Belfort's life. I recommend this book to anyone that's just looking for a relaxing, yet exciting read.

Mockingjay

by Suzanne Collins

I thought MockingJay was the best book in The Hunger Games series because it wraps everything up. I would recommend reading the first two books before this one to get what is happening in the plot.

The Pacific

by Hugh Ambrose

The Pacific was overall a great book. It had so much detail on the war in the Pacific. Great read and I highly recommend it to others.

Something like Normal

by Trish Doller

Over the summer I read the book Something Like Normal by Trish Doller. The book was about a marine who comes home for 30 days before re-employment. During the 30 days he is back is has some struggles to face; his best friend Charlie was ...

Post 9: Book 4 Reflection

Book 4 Reflection

             MockingJay by Suzanne Collins has a lot of heroes in the book, but one hero stands out the most. Katniss Everdeen. But what type of hero would Katniss be? Katniss would be an Anti/Epic Hero.

            Katniss lacks the characteristics of a typical hero because she can’t make decisions for herself and she won’t follow through with the mission she is given. That’s why Katniss could be an Anti-Hero. She does what she wants and in the end you could say she turns into the bad guy but for a good cause. **SPOILER ALERT** Katniss kills the rebel leader at the end of the book so she won’t break her promise to President Snow. In a way Katniss has a justified reason for doing what she did, which makes her the Anti-Hero. Katniss is confused on what she wants to do, work for the rebels or keep her promise to President Snow. Katniss lacks the courage to do most of the simple tasks she is given, and her morals aren’t the best (kills someone because they blew up my hometown to than backstab the rebel leader in the back). This is why Katniss can be an Anti-Hero. She is confused, bad morals, lacks courage, and just doesn’t show the same attributes as your typical hero.

            On the other hand, Katniss could also be an Epic Hero. Katniss goes through some pretty tough time. She lost her dad and her hometown. Katniss used to be a kept-to-self gal who would do anything for her mother and sister…that’s why she promised to come home from the Hunger Games. Those fist games really changed her. She defied the Capitol by allowing two victors. She became the heart of the rebellion, and when her hometown get blown to bits, she turns into an unstable killer with one wish. To get revenge on President Snow. All throughout MockingJay Katniss struggles to find her purpose. She doesn’t want me be the face of the rebellion but she wants revenge. Along the way she gets allies with the same purpose as her. Revenge. Katniss travels a long way to get what she wants and she’s changing all the through it. This is why Katniss could also be an Epic Hero. She goes on a long journey, gathers friends with common goals, and changes at the very end.

Post 8: Book 2 Trailer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=gBs4yLgxlgY

Post 7: Book Talk Presentation

Post 6: 5 Reasons why The Pacific should have stayed a book and not have become a miniseries

                The Pacific was overall a good miniseries but I feel as if the book just had more to offer. It went into greater detail that the show couldn’t do. Here are 5 reasons why I feel like it should have stayed a book.

1.       Hugh Ambrose should have stayed the writer.

Hugh Ambrose wrote the book so he should have stayed the writer. What I mean by this is; the miniseries had many script writers and I feel that has affect the book because the script wasn’t written by Ambrose. Yes, it had his oversight but he wasn’t directly directing it.

2.        Keep in the detail.

The book had a lot of detail that I feel the miniseries left out. Yes, the miniseries was action packed and gave detail of the events and characters. The book just had something different. It gave me a sense of what it was like on the pacific side of the war.

3.       Out with the visuals.

Whenever I picture The Pacific in my head I always see the same people, James Badge Dale, Joe Mazzello, and Jon Seda (the actors that played the characters). The miniseries gave me a visual that I didn’t really like. Personally I like to use my imagination when it comes to picturing characters in a book, I feel like the TV shows ruin that experience for me.

4.       Script-writing.

I can’t think of one movie or show that stays exactly to the script. They need to change something so it is more entertaining to the audience. I would like for once something that stays true to the book. Follows every action and word the characters say/do. It’s more fun to do it that way, sure it won’t be as entertaining, but the fans of the book will compare it to the show and say, “Wow, this is just like the book.” There would be as much criticism if it stayed to the story line.

5.       The book was amazing.

Have you ever had one of those moment when you think that the books ending was so good that they shouldn’t make another book because it will ruin the series? This is a moment I had with the book. It was a fantastic book overall, but than they had to make a show. They already had the icing on the cake so why put more of it? They should have stopped at the book and not made a show because in my opinion it just wasn’t as good.

Post 5: Can a non-fiction book contain un-true facts and still be considered non-fiction?

As you may know already, a non-fiction book tends to be true, but what if it contained un-true facts? Would it still be considered non-fiction? In my mind a book has to be 100% true in order for it to be non-fiction. This is because if you're reading a historical book and it has un-true/made up facts, will you be able to tell what is right and what is wrong? If you use this book as a reference to a paper you are writing; yet the "facts" you give are wrong. You quote directly from the book which caused you to get something wrong, yet you thought it was right because it was a non-fiction book. That is why a book that is put in the non-fiction genre should contain only the truth.

Half-truths are not okay even if they have a good story. If someone changes something only to make a profit it shouldn't be considered a good book because you are not getting the real experience that they got. You're not fully understanding what they actually did if the story is bent. That's why I think it does matter that Frey and other memoirists who bent the truth in their story should be considered un-reliable because they want people to hear their story but they have to bend the truth to do it.

David Shields in my opinion is wrong. There needs to be line in between genres because if you have a fantasy book without a genre label and someone thinks its real because they didn't know the genre, what do you think would happen? Also with history books, if it doesn't have a non-fiction label and it holds the correct information but there another history book on the same topic but it is fiction. Which one will we believe? That's why I think we need to have a line that draws when a book crosses over the line into another genre.

Post 4: Adapting The Wolf of Wall Street

The Wolf of Wall Street was already made into a movie. I have never seen the movie, so here is 3 things that I'm hoping they would have put in the movie that was in the book. In the book Jordan and his wife have a big fight where she just yells at him and he can't explain himself. They should also keep where he is explain his company, how it started, what they yearly income should be for the brokers each year, and how much they should make the next year. They should also keep the part where Danny eats the goldfish on New-Issue day. They should have all these parts in the movie because the fight shows how Jordan would lie about everything he did the night before, and how he lies in general. When Jordan explain how his company was created and what it's like to work for the company it gives you a sense of what it would actually be like the work there. The New-Issue day scene should be in the movie because it show that on New-Issue day you should be preparing for the presentation not at your desk cleaning a fish tank.

Two scenes from the book that I think should be cut out when adapting are the helicopter ride and when he explains the salaries of each and every house worker. I just don't think it was necessary to have to explain how long it take him to fly from the hotel to his house, yes it does lead to the fight scene and is one of the reason why they are fighting, but I'm sure that the movie could do without it. Than the book goes on to explain each and every house working, what their job is, if they are related to any other house workers, and what their salary is. I just don't think as a reader it was enjoyable to read about each person who works for him. Those are just two of the scenes I wouldn't want to see in the movie because I view them as pointless and have no effect on the story.