Gale Hawthorne in The Hunger Games
He was entirely too reckless for me to fully like, he was partially responsible for the death of a character I loved, and I was always a Peeta fan, so oh well.
Farid in Inkheart
I didn't mind him in Inkheart, but as the series of books progressed, he got stranger, his possessive love towards Meggie and his very weird obsession with Dustfinger really threw me off. Inkdeath made me happy on many levels, one of them being that Meggie choosing a much, much healthier match.
Sirius Black in The Harry Potter Series
He was a bad influence, a bully, and I didn't like him. In fact, his behavior, which I found deplorable, made me much more a Snape fan than I would have been otherwise.
Colonel Brandon in Sense and Sensibility
I actually feel bad about this one because I know that I should connect to him and I even like Alan Rickman. But I never click with Brandon, he was just sort of there, and that was it. He was nice and all that, but I felt like there should have been something else, something more. Plus, I never saw it working out between him and Marianne and I still hold to that belief. If there were ever a sequel written, I'm sure they would have been miserable.
Mary Poppins in, well, Mary Poppins
I feel good about adding her to this list because I'm talking about the literary character, not Julie Andrews who pretty much everybody loves, and rightly so. Mary Poppins in the book is self-centered, vain, and just all around unpleasant. It was quite an eye-opener and no mistake.
Galadriel in The Lord of the Rings
And when I say Galadriel, I really do mean both book and film. It's not that I ever disliked her, but I never fully understood her either, her motivations or her intent. We just never clicked, and she's one of the very few characters Tolkien wrote where I feel this disconnect. I even connect to Tom Bombadil!
Thomas in The Maze Runner
I've read the first two books in the series and LOVE the movie. I don't know how such a bland lead character could suddenly have depth, but I suspect Dylan O'Brien had much to do with it. All of the male characters in the book felt much the same, reacting the same, speaking the same, etc. Thomas at least should have stood out from the rest, but he just didn't for me. The movie really helped!
Mycroft Holmes in Sherlock Holmes
And by Mycroft, I mean the character in the actual stories as written by Arthur Conan Doyle. None of the film adaptations that move him out of his time or change his personality. Mycroft and Sherlock are at once similar and dissimilar. I dislike Mycroft's lack of action. Yes, he's brilliant, but what use is that brilliance if he spends most of his time sitting in his gentleman's club? Sherlock at least gets out, solves crimes, and saves people's lives. He's active whereas Mycroft is passive and I'm less inclined to like passive characters unless I'm given a very good reason for doing so.
Young Caspian in Prince Caspian
I felt a complete and total disconnect from Caspian in his first book. I don't know if it was because he was a child, or simply the circumstances of the book, but Prince Caspian is one of my least favorite Narnian novels. As soon as Caspian grew up and started his Voyage of the Dawn Treader, I loved him. But he just didn't work in Prince Caspian for me.
Edward Rochester from Jane Eyre
Now, to be fair, I've only read half of this novel, and I was barely twenty when I did so. My perspective may have changed since then. But he seemed so arrogant and cold, and I could not stand his nickname for Jane, always calling her Janet. I don't mind him in film adaptations, sometimes even loving him like with Toby Stephens, so it's something about the way he's written in the novel that doesn't sit right with me. I'm planning to fully read it next year so my opinion may change, hopefully.
Galadriel in The Lord of the Rings
And when I say Galadriel, I really do mean both book and film. It's not that I ever disliked her, but I never fully understood her either, her motivations or her intent. We just never clicked, and she's one of the very few characters Tolkien wrote where I feel this disconnect. I even connect to Tom Bombadil!
Thomas in The Maze Runner
I've read the first two books in the series and LOVE the movie. I don't know how such a bland lead character could suddenly have depth, but I suspect Dylan O'Brien had much to do with it. All of the male characters in the book felt much the same, reacting the same, speaking the same, etc. Thomas at least should have stood out from the rest, but he just didn't for me. The movie really helped!
Mycroft Holmes in Sherlock Holmes
And by Mycroft, I mean the character in the actual stories as written by Arthur Conan Doyle. None of the film adaptations that move him out of his time or change his personality. Mycroft and Sherlock are at once similar and dissimilar. I dislike Mycroft's lack of action. Yes, he's brilliant, but what use is that brilliance if he spends most of his time sitting in his gentleman's club? Sherlock at least gets out, solves crimes, and saves people's lives. He's active whereas Mycroft is passive and I'm less inclined to like passive characters unless I'm given a very good reason for doing so.
Young Caspian in Prince Caspian
I felt a complete and total disconnect from Caspian in his first book. I don't know if it was because he was a child, or simply the circumstances of the book, but Prince Caspian is one of my least favorite Narnian novels. As soon as Caspian grew up and started his Voyage of the Dawn Treader, I loved him. But he just didn't work in Prince Caspian for me.
Edward Rochester from Jane Eyre
Now, to be fair, I've only read half of this novel, and I was barely twenty when I did so. My perspective may have changed since then. But he seemed so arrogant and cold, and I could not stand his nickname for Jane, always calling her Janet. I don't mind him in film adaptations, sometimes even loving him like with Toby Stephens, so it's something about the way he's written in the novel that doesn't sit right with me. I'm planning to fully read it next year so my opinion may change, hopefully.
Hmm, well, I haven't read all of Inkspell or Inkdeath, but I do like Farid. That is, I like him in the movie, because he's Slightly Adorable in the movie, but yeah, not so much the book, I suppose. (And in the movie--"I stole photo from Silvertongue's pocket." Well. That's not weird at all.) But yes, I have to admit that overall, I do like him as a character. Maybe he goes really downhill in Inkspell and Inkdeath, though...
ReplyDeleteAnyway, good choices!:D
Ooooh, reading back over that part of this post, I wasn't very nice about him or readers who like him. My bad! Usually I'm not that sarcastic and, well, mean. I'm so sorry.
DeleteAbout Farid, he's not bad in the first book. He's adjusting to life in this new world and he's developing a crush on Meggie and sticking like glue to Dustfinger (which is both funny and weird).
He gets a lot more possessive in Inkspell down to being jealous of Dustfinger's wife (which I thought odd) and falling in love with Meggie. He has some good points, like his lack of fear in trying new things, but he got stranger as the series progressed, less healthy, if that makes any sense. By Inkdeath, I was so happy to see Meggie disconnecting from him because it was simply better for her to do so.
It's totally fine! Don't worry, I wasn't offended at all!
DeleteAhhhh, yes, I seem to remember that part about him being jealous of Dustfinger's wife in the second book... Yikes, yes. I'd have to read the whole trilogy again to really form a solid opinion of him, but I definitely understand yours!
As I'm reading Inkdeath, I'm trying to get inside Farid's head. Part of his Dustfinger obsession is simply that he never had anyone care about him before. So he latched onto the first person who took a genuine interest in sharing knowledge and experience. His grief really drives him wild in this final book and he makes some poor decisions, but I'm kind of understanding why he is. I'll see if I can articulate it in a post for the chapter reads.
DeleteI must agree with Gale in The Hunger Games - Peeta all the way!
ReplyDeleteI never could understand the world's fascination with Gale!
DeleteJust being nosey on your blog, agree with a few of these accept I love Rochester (and Gale!) Colonel Brandon annoys me because he's a drama queen and takes himself a bit too seriously - but in that way he's EXACTLY like Marianne so I think they'd work. Brandon's the true romantic, not Willoughby :)
ReplyDeleteI love it when people find my blog so be nosy all you like!
DeleteI think with Rochester, my opinion may change when I finally do read the entire book. At least I hope so. I still really love him in the films, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
I never considered that Colonel Brandon was actually a romantic at heart, but that's pretty true. He's the one who's suffering and pining for love and it's just sort of sad. I should re-read the novel one of these days, when my reading list permits!