So I finally saw the film adaptation of John Green's The Fault in Our Stars yesterday, and as I watched, I started thinking about what it is about this movie/book that people love so much. For me, there's a lot about the novel (and subsequently the movie) that resonated false, but I can also understand and appreciate the connection that others feel to this story and the characters. What I'd like to do in this post is explore my feelings on both the oft gushed about movie and the beloved novel.
Be forewarned. This reflection/review contains multiple spoilers.
The Good
1. This is a fairly realistic interpretation of teens. Yes, Augustus and Hazel think of themselves as more intelligent than your average teen, and in a lot of ways they are, but they don't act in ways that seem too intelligent for kids their age. Rather, they act like teenagers who think they know everything, but meanwhile the reader knows better (unless you're a teen yourself and you're reading this. Then you probably don't know better. Sorry). I really appreciated this. Too often characters in YA novels are written lazily and don't have believable flaws (I'm looking at you, Twilight). For the most part, these kids seem real. Sometimes annoyingly so, but I'm okay with that.
2. For once in a teen romance novel, you can actually see the romantic connection between the two characters. In both the film and the novel, the connection between these two characters seems pretty legit. There's chemistry written in there. I hate to bring up Twilight again, but if you were going to have a spectrum of chemistry in YA novels, Twilight would be on one end, and The Fault in Our Stars would be on the other. These two characters clearly enjoy each other's company, they do stuff together besides staring longingly into each other's eyes, and they have interests in things that don't involve the other person. They are fully realized characters that make sense together.
3. Both the novel and the movie make interesting and unique points about what it's like to be a young person on the brink of death. I'm always impressed when an author who hasn't experienced these things is still able to talk about them in such a believable way. John Green really nailed that for me, and this issue came across in the film version as well. I was especially touched by Hazel's mother's reflection on her daughter's potential death: "I'm not going to be a mom anymore." I read some stuff online that said this was a little hokey, and sure I can see that. But I think what made this such an important moment for me in both the film and the novel was the guilt Hazel felt about this. It's something I think doesn't get acknowledged often, but in The Fault in Our Stars, we really get to see how the kids on the brink of death are torn apart about the people they're leaving behind and what their absence will do to them. I thought this was nicely handled.
The Bad
1. Cool. Now that I got the positives out of the way, let's get into why I was not so into this novel or this book. Hazel Grace and Augustus Waters? You guys are pretentious and I would hate you in real life. Seriously. Like I stated earlier, they think they know everything and that they're smarter than everyone else. Augustus, you are reading novelizations of video games. You are not as cool and worldly as you think you are. And while yes, I also sort of listed this as good in the last section because they are realistic teens, I just didn't find either of these kids likable.
2. Their love story is a bit too perfect. Yes, you could argue that Augustus dies at the end of the story (spoiler alert), but up until then, everything's pretty peachy, isn't it? They just walk around being adorable together all the time and loving each other. There is no true conflict in their relationship. This stuff might work for young people who haven't experienced a real relationship and want to live vicariously through these characters, imagining that they have their very own Augustus Waters or whatever, but for grown ass adults? Nope, we don't care. Now, you might argue that this is YA and therefore it's not FOR adults. I'm sorry, no. I don't let that argument fly. Ever. Awesome YA is awesome for all ages and transcends genre. Think books like The Hunger Games and Harry Potter. Even though these are young adult novels, they're still enjoyed by people of all ages (I still have problems with The Hunger Games, mind you, but that's a post for another day). I don't think The Fault in Our Stars will connect with as wide of an age group as these other YA novels because of the lack of conflict. I'm a grown up. I have had screaming and crying fights with my loved ones at this point in my life. I don't care to hear about young people's perfect romances. Sorry to be cynical, but I can't connect to that anymore. I connect to heartbreak. I think most adults do. The death does not count as a conflict because it is not something the couple has to overcome and resolve. The perfect relationship continues after death as it was and it never had to grow or become anything more mature.
I am glad they hooked up though. High five, dudes.
3. The whole Amsterdam storyline. I don't know. I just don't get it or believe it. It's sweet, but it was too easy for Augustus to get in touch with this author. It was too easy for them to fly over and meet him. I don't think it really added anything from the story and to bring up conflict again, it seemed to me like just a crappy way for John Green to extend the story without having the characters come up against any real conflict with one another. Instead, they got to get mad at some author who frankly doesn't owe them anything.
The Unforgivable
1. Augustus's cigarette "metaphor." I've seen other people bring this up as well. Our leading man in The Fault in Our Stars likes to have a cigarette dangling from his lips while never lighting it. Why does he do this?
Be forewarned. This reflection/review contains multiple spoilers.
The Good
1. This is a fairly realistic interpretation of teens. Yes, Augustus and Hazel think of themselves as more intelligent than your average teen, and in a lot of ways they are, but they don't act in ways that seem too intelligent for kids their age. Rather, they act like teenagers who think they know everything, but meanwhile the reader knows better (unless you're a teen yourself and you're reading this. Then you probably don't know better. Sorry). I really appreciated this. Too often characters in YA novels are written lazily and don't have believable flaws (I'm looking at you, Twilight). For the most part, these kids seem real. Sometimes annoyingly so, but I'm okay with that.
2. For once in a teen romance novel, you can actually see the romantic connection between the two characters. In both the film and the novel, the connection between these two characters seems pretty legit. There's chemistry written in there. I hate to bring up Twilight again, but if you were going to have a spectrum of chemistry in YA novels, Twilight would be on one end, and The Fault in Our Stars would be on the other. These two characters clearly enjoy each other's company, they do stuff together besides staring longingly into each other's eyes, and they have interests in things that don't involve the other person. They are fully realized characters that make sense together.
3. Both the novel and the movie make interesting and unique points about what it's like to be a young person on the brink of death. I'm always impressed when an author who hasn't experienced these things is still able to talk about them in such a believable way. John Green really nailed that for me, and this issue came across in the film version as well. I was especially touched by Hazel's mother's reflection on her daughter's potential death: "I'm not going to be a mom anymore." I read some stuff online that said this was a little hokey, and sure I can see that. But I think what made this such an important moment for me in both the film and the novel was the guilt Hazel felt about this. It's something I think doesn't get acknowledged often, but in The Fault in Our Stars, we really get to see how the kids on the brink of death are torn apart about the people they're leaving behind and what their absence will do to them. I thought this was nicely handled.
The Bad
1. Cool. Now that I got the positives out of the way, let's get into why I was not so into this novel or this book. Hazel Grace and Augustus Waters? You guys are pretentious and I would hate you in real life. Seriously. Like I stated earlier, they think they know everything and that they're smarter than everyone else. Augustus, you are reading novelizations of video games. You are not as cool and worldly as you think you are. And while yes, I also sort of listed this as good in the last section because they are realistic teens, I just didn't find either of these kids likable.
2. Their love story is a bit too perfect. Yes, you could argue that Augustus dies at the end of the story (spoiler alert), but up until then, everything's pretty peachy, isn't it? They just walk around being adorable together all the time and loving each other. There is no true conflict in their relationship. This stuff might work for young people who haven't experienced a real relationship and want to live vicariously through these characters, imagining that they have their very own Augustus Waters or whatever, but for grown ass adults? Nope, we don't care. Now, you might argue that this is YA and therefore it's not FOR adults. I'm sorry, no. I don't let that argument fly. Ever. Awesome YA is awesome for all ages and transcends genre. Think books like The Hunger Games and Harry Potter. Even though these are young adult novels, they're still enjoyed by people of all ages (I still have problems with The Hunger Games, mind you, but that's a post for another day). I don't think The Fault in Our Stars will connect with as wide of an age group as these other YA novels because of the lack of conflict. I'm a grown up. I have had screaming and crying fights with my loved ones at this point in my life. I don't care to hear about young people's perfect romances. Sorry to be cynical, but I can't connect to that anymore. I connect to heartbreak. I think most adults do. The death does not count as a conflict because it is not something the couple has to overcome and resolve. The perfect relationship continues after death as it was and it never had to grow or become anything more mature.
I am glad they hooked up though. High five, dudes.
3. The whole Amsterdam storyline. I don't know. I just don't get it or believe it. It's sweet, but it was too easy for Augustus to get in touch with this author. It was too easy for them to fly over and meet him. I don't think it really added anything from the story and to bring up conflict again, it seemed to me like just a crappy way for John Green to extend the story without having the characters come up against any real conflict with one another. Instead, they got to get mad at some author who frankly doesn't owe them anything.
The Unforgivable
1. Augustus's cigarette "metaphor." I've seen other people bring this up as well. Our leading man in The Fault in Our Stars likes to have a cigarette dangling from his lips while never lighting it. Why does he do this?
"They don't kill you unless you light them," he said as Mom arrived at the curb. "And I've never lit one. It's a metaphor, see: You put the killing thing right between your teeth, but you don't give it the power to do its killing."
While I see his point, I guess what I can't really get over is despite his trying to stick it to cancer by putting the "killing thing" in his mouth, he still goes out and buys cigarettes fairly often. And since money is power, he is in fact giving power to the killing thing by helping to keep cigarette companies in business.
All that aside, I was able to shrug off the metaphor for the most part in the novel. However, in the film, Augustus Waters looked like a giant douche bag every time he stuck one of these in his mouth. I found myself rolling my eyes every time it happened and it pulled me out of the movie. Seriously, why doesn't anyone tell him he looks like an idiot? You might think this is a small detail. Maybe it is. But sometimes it just takes little things like this for me to have difficulty taking a work seriously.
2. The emotional manipulation. I'm not going to lie to you. I cried a lot at the end of this book. Then when I saw this movie, I cried again. I don't have a heart made of ice. I'm a human being. I couldn't help but cry. But the whole time I did so, especially during the movie, I felt angry at how the story was manipulating me. I wasn't crying because of the story because I didn't feel like there was much of one (no conflict, remember?). I wasn't crying because of my deep connection with the characters (I hate these guys, remember?). I was crying because I have a brother who has cancer and I connected what was happening to my own experiences and how I would feel if this were my family member. Sadly, I think most people have a connection to cancer in some way or another. I think the reason this story is so sad for most of us is because of our emotional connection to cancer rather than our emotional connection to this story in particular. In that way, this story seemed manipulative to me and I was annoyed that I was so sad after reading/watching it. Damn you, John Green.
As you can see, my feelings about the merits of this story (both the novel and the film) are conflicted. I also have major issues with Shailene Woodley because she's a freaking idiot. But that's also a story for another post, probably. And in conclusion, the end.
While I see his point, I guess what I can't really get over is despite his trying to stick it to cancer by putting the "killing thing" in his mouth, he still goes out and buys cigarettes fairly often. And since money is power, he is in fact giving power to the killing thing by helping to keep cigarette companies in business.
All that aside, I was able to shrug off the metaphor for the most part in the novel. However, in the film, Augustus Waters looked like a giant douche bag every time he stuck one of these in his mouth. I found myself rolling my eyes every time it happened and it pulled me out of the movie. Seriously, why doesn't anyone tell him he looks like an idiot? You might think this is a small detail. Maybe it is. But sometimes it just takes little things like this for me to have difficulty taking a work seriously.
2. The emotional manipulation. I'm not going to lie to you. I cried a lot at the end of this book. Then when I saw this movie, I cried again. I don't have a heart made of ice. I'm a human being. I couldn't help but cry. But the whole time I did so, especially during the movie, I felt angry at how the story was manipulating me. I wasn't crying because of the story because I didn't feel like there was much of one (no conflict, remember?). I wasn't crying because of my deep connection with the characters (I hate these guys, remember?). I was crying because I have a brother who has cancer and I connected what was happening to my own experiences and how I would feel if this were my family member. Sadly, I think most people have a connection to cancer in some way or another. I think the reason this story is so sad for most of us is because of our emotional connection to cancer rather than our emotional connection to this story in particular. In that way, this story seemed manipulative to me and I was annoyed that I was so sad after reading/watching it. Damn you, John Green.
As you can see, my feelings about the merits of this story (both the novel and the film) are conflicted. I also have major issues with Shailene Woodley because she's a freaking idiot. But that's also a story for another post, probably. And in conclusion, the end.