Bookish Fun: Battle of the Snow Whites

It seems that the powers that be in Hollywood have decided vampires are, like, so 2010 and have moved on... to fairy tales. We've already seen new versions of Red Riding Hood and Beauty and the Beast (in the Vanessa Hudgens vehicle Beastly), but it looks as though Snow White is really where it's at. Because they're making not one but TWO versions of it at the moment - and they both look kind of awesome.

Sorry, Snowie, you're old news.

Film 1: The Brothers Grimm: Snow White (working title). According to the studio Relativity Media, it will be "a spectacular reimagining of the classic fairy tale - an evil queen steals control of a kingdom, and an exiled princess enlists the help of seven resourceful rebels to win back her birthright in a spirited adventure comedy filled with jealousy, romance, and betrayal that will capture the imagination of audiences the world over." There's even a love triangle - between the evil queen, the innocent princess and, of course, the handsome prince.
The date: Release is currently set at March 16, 2012.
The stars: Lily Collins (Phil's daughter) will play Snow White, while the prince who captures her heart will be played by none other than my Gatsby, Armie Hammer - who you might recognise as the Winklevii from The Social Network. Julia Roberts, meanwhile, will get to use her grin for the greater evil as the queen, and Sean Bean will be her king.
The sneak peek: So far, only a shot of Lily as Snow White has been released. She looks very pretty, and very much the fairy tale princess.

Film 2: Snow White and the Huntsman, which IMDb says is "a twist to the fairy tale - the huntsman ordered to take Snow White into the woods to be killed winds up becoming her protector and mentor in a quest to vanquish the evil queen."
The date: US release is set for June 1, 2012.
The stars: Kristen Stewart tackles this version of Snow White, while the titular huntsman will be played by Aussie spunk and Thor star Chris Hemsworth. Charlize Theron will play the evil queen, and Sam Clafin of Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides fame will represent the prince - looking decidedly more creepy than handsome here.
The sneak peek: Here's a glimpse of all the key players, which suggests that despite being based on the same story, this will be a very different film to the Collins version.

I'm excited for both films - they both seem to have great casts and unique takes on the tale. The fact that I'm not a fan of Kristen's acting makes me lean towards the first version, but then I also dislike Julia Roberts. But judging from the tidbits of the stories that have been released, the latter film does intrigue me a little more. What do you think?

Booking Through Thursday: Stand-alone vs Series

Booking Through Thursday is a weekly meme that centres around book-related questions.This week's question is: Series or stand-alone books?

It's a pretty tough one to answer! I find it difficult to make decisions at the best of times, but I honestly do love both series and stand-alone books. They're totally different reading experiences. So because I can't choose, I've decided to let them battle it out and see who comes out winning (in no way associated with Charlie Sheen).

Round 1: Plot potential

Obviously, stand-alone books can have amazingly intricate plots, but a series just has so much more room for expansion, development and, well, just about everything.

Series 1 

Stand-alone 0

Round 2: Character development

Once again, a stand-alone book can have fantastic character development, while series - despite their length - can sometimes have little to none. But good series allow you to really get to know characters and grow and develop with them, and stand-alone books can't really compete in this area.

Series 2 

Stand-alone 0

Round 3: Commitment

If a book looks too daunting (specifically too long), it can be hard to feel motivated to read it. Sadly, books that look like they require too much commitment are often left languishing on the shelf until I have a decent amount of spare time (which is approximately never). This applies to both mega-sized stand-alones (Shantaram, anyone?) as well as series in general. Series can sometimes trick you if you aren't aware that they ARE in fact series, and instead of reading one book as you intended, you end up reading 10. Then there's series like The Twilight Saga which you can knock out within a (very intense) few days. Still, on the whole, series require way more commitment from a reader, which isn't always a bad thing, but in this case it's a weakness.

Series 2 

Stand-alone 1

Round 4: Enjoyment factor

This all depends on the writing, really. If it's no good, a stand-alone can be just as torturous as a trilogy. However, series risk inconsistency and while you might adore one book, its sequel might make you want to scream. And that can be even more frustrating than if you'd just read one terrible stand-alone story. So, while series can provide more opportunity for enjoyment, there's also a helluva lot more potential for irritation.

Series 2 

Stand-alone 2

Final Round: Closure

If we were comparing an individual book from a series with a stand-alone tale, chances are the latter would definitely win this round. Too often, it seems, series leave a bunch of questions waiting to be answered in subsequent books. But by the time you get to the last book, everything should be effectively resolved. Meanwhile, a stand-alone book can leave you, if not with questions, then at the very least wanting more. Again, this isn't necessarily a bad thing, but when it comes to a sense of satisfaction and closure, series tend to win out.

Series 3

Stand-alone 2

The winner is... series!

OK, I can live with that.