Worst “Preparing-For-Baby” Book Ever

Tags

bad books, bad children's books, book, preparing for baby, sibling, there's going to be a baby

When I was pregnant, Owl picked a book out at the library and we thought it was great because it was called “There’s Going To Be A Baby”, so I thought it would be good for preparing Owl for the baby.

It looks fine in pictures.

The mother tells her son that “there’s going to be a baby” and then there’s a a series of lovely pictures showing the mother out with her son while her belly slowly expands and the seasons pass.

Then we got home and read the text.

WTF.

Throughout the book, the kid asks his mother questions about what it will be like to have a baby, what the baby will do, and occasionally expressing resentment of his sibling-to-be.

Ignoring all of that, the mother responds with speculations about what the baby may do when it grows up.

The kid, totally not comprehending the “when it grows up” part, tries to imagine a baby doing all this cooking, banking, sea faring, gardening etc. He gets a very confused image of what exactly having a sibling is going to be like, but he seems sure of one thing – it will be messy.

So this poor kid basically keeps imagining various iterations of the theme “this baby sibling is going to ruin my life” while the mother does nothing to reassure him. She’s too busy watching the seasons change and speculating on baby names.

Finally, at the end of the book, the kid goes with his grandfather to meet the new sibling, and asks “…we’re going to love the baby, aren’t we?”

He never gets an answer because the BOOK ENDS THERE.

Not only does the child never receive actual adult reassurance that they will, in fact, love the baby, but we never find out what really happens.

We never meet the baby, we never see whether the child gets useful answers, or if he does, in fact, love the baby sibling or (and?) if it really does ruin his life.

It’s basically a “how NOT to prepare your child for a sibling” book.

WHAT A GREAT BOOK I AM SO GLAD WE READ THAT.

I have seen this book in book stores since, so it actually seems to be selling. Who is buying this book? Who thought it would be good to prepare a child for a sibling?

I’m happy to report that Owl loves Fritter and hasn’t shown much resentment, so I think the stuff we did to prepare him worked. This book had NO ROLE IN THAT.

Mockingjay, Part 1: Philip Seymour Hoffman Does It Again, But For The Last Time…

Tags

book, mockingjay, movie, philip seymour hoffman, review, suzanne collins

Well, PH and I got to Mockingjay last night. As you may remember, we LOVED Catching Fire, which you folks are simply not used to hearing after I’ve gone to see a book-to-movie film. 

We went in extremely hopeful. We were disappointed with the original Hunger Games movie, although it was acceptable, but then Catching Fire actually had us slow-clapping when the credits rolled.

Our hope was that the presence of Philip Seymour Hoffman would keep the good ball rolling (we’re convinced that he somehow infused his essence into Catching Fire, thus perfecting it).

Overall, I’m happy to report that it did.

Critics have complained that there is too much exposition in this movie. I personally disagree. I LIKE exposition.

One of the things that frustrates me is when movies skip over extremely important plot points because they assume their audience will be too stupid to sit through two more minutes of dialogue.

Besides, it actually has a lot LESS exposition than the book. One of the best things about translating a first-person narrative into a movie is that they can show you things that you don’t get to see in the story because the main character didn’t see those things.

Mockingjay Part 1 actually SHOWS the effect of Katniss’s “propos” in the districts. There are multiple very-cool, very-exciting rebellion shots which you totally don’t get to see in the book, because Katniss is too busy moping in an underground bunker.

Critics have also complained that the movie just builds towards Part II, but I disagree there, as well.

The focus of the first movie is on Katniss’s concern for Peeta, and to me, getting Peeta back seems like the obvious goal and building-point.

Those of you who have read the book know how well THAT goes, and I think the movie ends on a great “what next?” note.

Overall, much of the dialogue is word-for-word, which I value. The sentiments of the movie are very well expressed. The desolation of District 12 is not understated.

They leave in stuff I thought they’d cut, like the Hanging Tree song (VERY NICE), and the white rose in Katniss’s house. They even left in Buttercup chasing the light in the bunker.

Other than removing some of the best Boggs lines, the only things that got cut were very specific – they cut everything that shows District 13 and/or President Coin in a negative light.

Which I thought was a little odd.

The prep team? Gone. Instead Effie Trinket is there, which I accept because the first movie basically eradicated the Prep Team when they should have left them in. So Effie is there instead as damage control. But she is treated very well – no complaints there.

The restrictive lifestyle, Coin’s coldness… all of that is cut.

It struck me as an interesting choice. Are they trying to build up our trust in 13 and Coin, only to tear it down? Or have they decided to wipe out that whole aspect of the storyline (surely they can’t??).

If the first option is correct, then they had better do it fast and well in Part II, that’s all I can say.

And with Philip Seymour Hoffman lost to us, I don’t know how much faith I have in their ability to do so…