Davida Chazan: The Timothy Sexton Interview

Davida Chazan is one of the more interesting figures to be found on the Yahoo Contributor Network. She covers the waterfront, but it is her reviews of movies and books that really bring her the attention she so rightly deserves. Get to know here with this exclusive interview.

Q: Tell us a little something about The Chocolate Lady.

David Chazan: On a personal level, I’m married to a wonderful man named Alon and have three fantastic kids, two boys aged 26 and 21 and a girl aged 18. When I was young, I wanted to be a poet, but of course there’s no money in that. So I worked as a secretary and did my writing on the side. I did get some of my poetry published (and even got paid for some of them). The internet helped me find sites like this as well as consumer review sites, where I’ve been writing reviews for many years now. I now work for a non-profit organization as their Resource Development Coordinator which means writing grant proposals, reports to donors and researching new funding resources. This means I can combine writing with doing something good. As for my hobbies outside of writing, there’s reading, movies, music (anything from heavy Rock to Opera), cooking (especially baking, and I try to make healthy foods taste good), and I also am on a bowling league. Finally, there’s the chocolate thing. I consider myself a chocolate gourmet, not a chocoholic. This means I am willing to pay to eat only the finest chocolate, and not waste calories on the junk. Over the years I’ve learned a good deal about chocolate, and am quite a snob.

Q: You may well be the premier book/movie reviewer on the Yahoo Contributor network site. Which do you prefer: books or movies?

Davida Chazan: What a compliment. Thank you. Although I have far more movie reviews that I could post here, I probably prefer books. The reason for this is because I feel that content sites like this seem to think that reviewing books isn’t worthwhile area to invest in. Proof of this is the fact that there’s a Yahoo! Movies but no Yahoo! Books. This makes me sad because I get so much pleasure out of reading, and it feels like the Internet is trying to discourage this pastime. I’m hoping that the rising popularity of eBook readers will eventually change this.

Q: What is the one book that hasn’t been made into a movie yet that you would like to see filmed and what is the one book you hope Hollywood never gets the chance to destroy? Why?

Davida Chazan: Most of the books I love I would hate to see made into movies. However, there are several books that I can think of that I just liked and could imagine being made into films. For instance, I just finished reading Nick Hornby’s “Juliet, Naked” which was a really fun book that would translate well to the screen. I’m also just finishing Paul Torday’s “The Girl on the Landing” which is really well written, but could work well as a movie. Another favorite author of mine these days is the Irish novelist Maggie O’Farrell. I’ve read all her books so far and I think her book “My Lover’s Lover” could be a good book to turn into a movie. Seeing as she’s not an American author, that would mean a British production, and they are much better at adapting books to films than the Americans are, in my opinion.

As for a book that I would hate Hollywood to destroy, unfortunately, they’ve already done this several times over. One example is “Catch 22″ – a truly classic book that was a mediocre film. They totally ruined “The Time Traveler’s Wife” as well. I’d certainly hate to see them try to adapt any other Michael Ondaatje books – he’s one of my favorite authors, and his books are amazing, but I don’t think they translate well to the screen.

Q: The best chocolate in the world that the average American could afford to buy on a weekly basis to constantly have inside his house. What would it be? Why? What makes that brand so much better than the rest?

David Chazan: Sorry, but that just doesn’t exist. Mass-market chocolates always produce lower quality chocolate than the boutique and smaller chocolatiers. Moreover, chocolatiers from Europe who have broken into the American market use a different formula there than they do in their home country. This means that the Godiva you get in the US isn’t the same as the Godiva I can get. If I have to pick one that comes close to being at its original quality, while still being both available and mostly affordable in the US, I’d have to pick Lindt, but only their dark chocolates. Of course, I think milk chocolate is an abomination, and that white stuff shouldn’t even be called chocolate (as it has no cocoa solids), so no matter what, I couldn’t recommend any brand in those categories.

Q: Your Yahoo bio asserts that you were born in Illinois but now you choose to live in Jerusalem. While we can probably successfully infer from your name that you are of Jewish heritage, what other reasons do you have for preferring to live in Israel over the U.S. What can you get there as a writer that you can’t get in America. What can you get as a human being that you can’t get in America?

Davida Chazan: Being Jewish and proud of that fact that I am is certainly a large part of it. Combined with this is that I don’t look typically Jewish, and since my family was very liberal as far as religion was concerned, I lived basically assimilated with the rest of the population. However, I always felt that I needed to make sure people knew I was Jewish. That meant that I felt like an outsider in many situations, and not only witnessed, but was the brunt of anti-Semitic actions, even as a child. Moreover, America is such a huge place, with so many people, I always felt insignificant. When I came to Israel on a tour just after high school, I suddenly felt like I belonged, and that this was a place where being one person really mattered, and I could make a difference, make things better. Sure, that’s idealistic, and terribly naïve, but that feeling never went away – even today I still believe that my place is here. This country needs me and wants me to be here. And despite all the problems (and yes, there are so many), I still feel that this is where I belong.

I should note that up until just recently, I disparaged about many trends in America. These Occupy Wall Street protests (which, by the way, are a slightly lamer version of the social welfare protests we are having here in Israel and we started a few months before you guys did) are a good thing, and remind me of the “good old days” when people who wanted change and saw that they were being ignored, took to the streets to get heard. It means to me that there still are people who have a social conscience in the US, and it’s about time they get proper representation. Of course, the biggest problem is apathy. They say you get the government you deserve, and if you don’t vote, you have no right to complain. If these 99% can find people who will run for office that will truly take them into consideration, perhaps democracy will work again. The big difference between your Occupy protests and our social welfare protests is how the two governments and businesses reacted to it. Yours has done zilch – but that’s probably because they haven’t got a clear platform or set of grievances that anyone can address. Our government put together a committee to investigate the complaints, which has already given in its findings and the government has already begun voting on the changes that the committee recommended. In addition, the businesses that were targeted by our protesters for their unruly price hikes on basic food products all lowered their prices on large amounts of the products they sell, and the supermarket chain that was also targeted took down prices on a slew of basic items, as well. Even though most of the population believes this is far from enough, at least something changed.

As for what I can get here as a writer that I can’t get in America, the answer is mostly nothing. I’m probably at a disadvantage living here because I have mild dyslexia and that means my Hebrew writing skills will never reach the same level as my English writing skills. On the other hand, there is a demand for good English writers and editors here, which means I do have some marketability, so there is that.

Q: While most of us know somewhere in the back of our minds that a great many American entertainers are Jewish, it always seems to come as a surprise to many that certain stars who’ve Americanized their once-kosher names are not good old-fashioned Christians. Which stars do you think the majority of Americans would be most surprised to learn are Jewish? And do you think it still makes sense for a person with a particularly obvious Jewish name to knock it down a notch?

Davida Chazan: Oh, there are so many, where does one start? The Gyllenhaal family and the Phoenix family are both technically Jewish, as is Scarlett Johansson, Shia LaBeouf, James Franco and none other than Harry Potter himself, Daniel Radcliffe, along with star of “The Closer”, Kyra Sedgwick although they all have non-Jewish fathers. Some that are fully Jewish that might surprise you are Gwyneth Paltrow, Lisa Kudrow and star of “The Good Wife”, Julianna Margulies. You also might not know that Lauren Bacall is not only Jewish, but she’s first cousin to Israel’s sitting President, Shimon Peres. Then there’s my personal favorite “Jewish” actor, who technically wasn’t Jewish at all (because his mother wasn’t Jewish), he just preferred to refer to himself as being Jewish, was Paul Newman. As for changing names to sound less Jewish, I don’t think that it matters one way or another – but that could just be me. Having a Jewish name didn’t harm people like Paul Newman. I don’t think that actors change their names because they want to sound less Jewish, but rather to be more marketable. Take for instance, Oscar and BAFTA award winning actress Natalie Portman, who was born in Israel to two fully Jewish parents. Her real last name is Hershlag – that doesn’t roll of the tongue so easily, now does it? If an actor with a difficult Jewish name wants to change it for their career, I can get it. Just as long as they don’t deny being Jewish.

Q: Mel Gibson? What should be done with him?

Davida Chazan: Tarred, feathered and run out of town on a rail – and the sooner, the better!

Q: One of those truisms that aren’t really true is that the book is always better than the movie. I can think of several times this wasn’t true such as “Jaws” and “The English Patient.” Which movie versions of books were actually good themselves most successfully surpassed their literary inspiration?

Davida Chazan: Ahem… I take it that you’ve never read “The English Patient” or you would know that the movie was one of the worst film renditions of an amazing book that has ever been made. [Note: Actually, I did read the book. And I still stand by my contention.] Yes, the film won an Oscar for Best Film, but that doesn’t mean it was better than the book. I personally believe that they should have given the film a different name in order to disassociate it from the book. This is what John Irving did when they wanted to make a film out of his masterpiece, “A Prayer for Owen Meany”. He knew that it wouldn’t work, and that if the film was called the same as the book, the lovers of his book would never go to see it. So he insisted on another name for the movie, and while it was less than perfect, it was certainly forgivable, since we knew they weren’t going to be the same from the get-go.

By the way, if you read my article here: you’d know I already wrote about this. But not regarding films that actually were better than the books.

The only films that I can think of that probably “surpassed their literary inspiration”, were the Harry Potter films. This is probably because the books themselves weren’t all that well written – especially the later ones that were so badly bloated they ended up being a struggle to read. (Where J.K.’s editor was when she submitted those to her publisher? But whoever it was wasn’t doing their job properly.) I’d also say that to a certain extent, the James Bond films are probably better than the books. I don’t find those novels are as readable today as they obviously were when they were first published. This is more to do with changing tastes than anything else, and even the new Bond books by other authors feel stymied and old-fashioned to me. I’m also sure there are plenty of books I haven’t read that were made into films that also might make this list.

For a really fine and well written book to be made into an equally good or better movie takes real artistry, but the magic of the written word never truly translates to the screen. By the way, I just heard from a very good source that all the hype about the film “The Help” is absolutely correct. I adored the book and was appalled to hear they were making it into a film, but who knows – this might be added to those films that didn’t totally ruin the book.

Oh, wait… I know one. One film that certainly far surpassed its literary inspiration was “The Bridges of Madison County”. You see, while the film was insipid and maudlin, and probably a low spot for both Streep and Eastwood, the book was one of the WORST I’ve ever read. The novel is very short, by the way, but the language bloat in that book was worse than even the last two Harry Potter novels.

Q: Okay, one last question: Let’s say it turns out that James Bond is actually of Jewish heritage, thus making him eligible to become Prime Minister. Which actor who stepped into the tuxedo would you choose to play Bond not as a spy, but as Israel’s real-life Prime Minister?

Davida Chazan: This is a tough call. Dalton probably looks the part best, but I think Moore could pull it off better. I could certainly see Moore playing Yitzhak Rabin in a film but if they ever did a movie about Menachem Begin, they’d have to take Daniel Craig for the part. He’s the only one ugly enough to match the real-life man.


People also view

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *