It's kind of a funny story.

WALL OF WORDS!

GUYS! I'm supposed to be studying for my midterm right now, but I was watching a video of Jesse Eisenberg reading from It's Kind of a Funny Story by Ned Vizzini, and I thought something must be up because I was paying more attention to what Jesse was reading than to Jesse, so I started Googling and discovered that the book was made into a movie in 2010. Cue more Googling. Cue procrastination. Cue "You have watched 72 minutes of video today." Cue blog posting.

Now, I've got copies of Never Let Me Go and Fight Club winging their way to me from Barnes and Noble right now (my uncle didn't want his gift card, and I've got Ender's Game coming too, but I've actually read it before, unlike the other two), but I like the 72 minutes of It's Kind of a Funny Story that I've seen so far (especially the soundtrack), and I really like the excerpt that Jesse Eisenberg read.

So here's my current reading list, unordered:

• Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro
• Fight Club by Chuck Palahniuk
• Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card (reread)
• It's Kind of a Funny Story by Ned Vizzini
• Good Omens by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman
• Eleemosynary by Lee Blessing
  
• Angels in America: A Gay Fantasia on National Themes by Tony Kushner
• The Pillowman by Martin McDonagh

My current to-watch list, which I doubt I'll follow because filmed things require so much less deliberation to commit to consuming:

• more Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip
• Moulin Rouge (rewatch)
• 127 Hours
• A Single Man
• All the President's Men
• Full Metal Jacket
• Se7en
• The Golden Compass

I thought I'd have more of an aversion to watching movies before reading their book counterparts, but I think I overestimated myself. They're so separate. It's one thing to read the screenplay before watching a movie, but I think books are entirely separate. Like the 2009 draft of The Social Network is wildly different from the 2010 version that they eventually edited for film. Mark and Eduardo's relationship makes so much more sense and is more accessible and less ambiguous, and Mark's character is easier to read, and his motivations are pretty much laid bare. But I like the ambiguity that ended up in the actual film version. It makes it less talk-y (which I suspect is a better thing on paper than film) and more compelling to watch.

The point of that The Social Network brainbarf was to say that it's hard to read the 2010 version of the screenplay without thinking of the movie. But it's not like The Accidental Billionaires (the book the screenplay was based on) will be affected in the same way, because it's an entirely different medium.

In other news, here's an outfit from January 28th (punctuality fail):

Red polo: Ben Sherman, from Christine. Cashmere sweater: (the qualifier is necessary) gift. Jeans: Levi's. Shoes: Harajuku Lovers. Photogeny/photogenicity/photogenicia: well-kept family secret.

In other other news, Bella from plastic barettes interviewed me and I talked too much.

Also, I've been alternating between two Microsoft Word documents for a couple days: ling120-midtermstudyguide.doc and grrrl.doc, the latter of which is for Bella's zine, Grrrl Fashion Journal. The first issue will be about "traditional femininity." If you're interested, you can read more about it and find out how/what to contribute on Bella's blog, plastic barettes. There's even more info and submission ideas/guidelines at the zine's tumblr, or you can follow the zine on twitter.

DO ITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT! The submission deadline is March 20th, so get cracking! THIS IS GOING TO BE SO. MUCH. FUN, YOU GUYS.

(Bella is being a slave driver and making me write about Andrew Garfield. OH, THE HUMANITY. THIS IS PURE TORTURE.)

And I think my "Please wait 30 minutes or click here to enjoy unlimited use..." is up, so... back to feeling guilty about having to Google whether Keir Gilchrist is legal yet.