Author Liesel K. Hill's Musings on Fantasia...
Showing posts with label movie review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movie review. Show all posts
Monday, October 16, 2017
Why Some Films Tank While Others Fly: Learning From Hollywood
Has anyone else noticed how many
Hollywood films have tanked lately? I'd say the vast majority. There's a
specific reason for that, and we writers can learn a lot from it.
Disclaimer: While I am going to mention the political clime in a very general way, this is
not a political post. Not bipartisan. My own political beliefs will not be
mentioned. This is simply about good story-telling.
The political climate, both in the U.S. and around the world, is highly charged at the moment, and has been all year.
Probably won't calm down anytime soon either.
Unfortunately, many people continually try to force their beliefs on others. One way this is done
is through film. (Also through books, songs, commericals, social media, and many
other ways, but I'm just going to focus on films for this post.)
 |
| Source |
If you aren't aware, the Hollywood film that's done the best in past months is IT, adapted from Stephen
King's horror classic.
That may seem
counter-intuitive to those who refuse to see the film.
(If clowns traumatize you, I'm NOT going to recommend that you see this film. If you liked the book, I think you'll enjoy the movie. I thought they did an excellent job with it. They stayed away from gratuitous gore and some of the weirder (not in a good way) aspects of the novel. Truly it was more creepy than violent, which is how I prefer my horror.)
Even if you have no plans to
see the film, check out these facts below:
- IT has been at the top of the box office for longer than almost any other film of 2017.
- It's made over $300 million domestically.
- It's also popping all kinds of records internationally. (Source)
- It's being hailed as the Highest-Grossing R-Rated Horror Film of all Time (Source)
So why is it doing so well? There are several possibilities.
1. They
did such a great job making it. They really did! I know lots of people who love the 80s mini-series. If you do, more power to ya. I, personally,
was not a fan. It's probably because I only watched it a couple of years ago,
and it's really old. I didn't feel like it did the book justice. As with anything,
now that we have better technology and movie magic at our fingertips,
an update is just plain cooler.
 |
| Source |
2. It's a Stephen King Classic. Very
true. Even if pee-your-pants horror isn't your thing, or King's content is too
over-the-top for you, IT is one of the most well-written stories I've ever
read, which is the main reason I like it.
On the other hand, many of
Stephen King's books have been made into films, and many of them have flopped
at the box office. So his name or stories alone don't guarantee box office
cha-ching, you know?
So what I am getting at here?
What does this have to do with the political clime I mentioned earlier?
The fact of the matter is that
many attempts have been made to cram various agendas down the public's
throats using film. No matter which way you lean politically, it simply
doesn't make for great story-telling. These types of things (film or otherwise) almost always
flop because they have an obvious agenda.
It's the first rule of writing:
tell a story. Don't preach to your audience.
I find it super-interesting
that of all the films put out this summer (and summer is usually a time for
blockbusters) the film that's blowing all others out of the water is story
about children fighting monsters.
(It makes me smile.)
- There are no well-known, A-List actors in it. Not a single one.
- While there is some great clown makeup happening, there aren't any massive, stuff-blowing-up, StarTrekkian special effects involved.
- The score is great. Very appropriate for the story. But no songs by the biggest pop or rock'n'roll band on the market right now.
It's simple, human, and
compelling.
No matter what a person's
political beliefs, when they want to be entertained (by film, books, music,
sports, anything else) they aren't looking for an agenda. They're looking for a
great story that will entertain them and cause an emotional catharsis.
In many ways, it's simply good business. It has nothing to do with belief or agendas. Give the customer what they want. And when they want to be entertained, they want great entertainment.
It's the first rule of writing,
so most writers already know this (we hope!) but we have proof of it playing
out around this film.
Give your readers the emotion,
not the agenda. And your story, too, will fly.
Thoughts?
Wednesday, March 2, 2016
Movie Review: Why Every Writer Should See "In the Heart of the Sea"
 |
| Source |
So I haven't been doing reviews much lately. I honestly just don't have the time, much as I wish I did. Most weeks I barely get a single blog post up. But I watched this film, In the Heart of the Sea a few weeks ago, and I loved it so much, I knew I'd have to review it.
And it really wasn't JUST about a great film. It was about how it relates to writing in general. This is a writer's movie. It tells the true story that an American literary classic, Moby Dick, was based on. But more than that, it ties in writing, authorship, inspiration, and chasing one's destiny (which just so happens to be writing) all in one film. There's some talk of Hawthorne in the show (A young Melville believes Nathaniel Hawthorne is a great writer and that he, Melville, will never equal him.) The film ends with a Hawthorne quote that just clinches everything, and totally made me melt.
So we get a great adventure story that Moby Dick mirrors in many ways, but there's more gritty reality and historical detail to it. We also get a very understated discussion about why you should always write what inspires you, and chase your dreams, writing or otherwise. What haunts you, what you feel inspired to learn and/or write about, will become your destiny. Created, of course, by you. Because only you can write the way you do.
I'm not gonna do a super detailed review, except to say that had I had no complaints at all. Great story. Great historical aspects. Great acting.
This is a film every writer should see, because every writer will appreciate and be inspired by it. Highly recommended.
Have YOU seen In the Heart of the Sea? What did you think of it?
Wednesday, October 7, 2015
Movie Review: Air
 |
| Source |
*FYI: Even though I talking about the ending in terms of whether it was fitting or not, I really do stay largely away from spoilers*
I'll admit the main reason I wanted to see this (other than the dystopian genres) was because of the actors. I really love both these guys and thought they did an excellent job. But I fully recognized that awesome actors can still do B movies, so I figured there was a good chance that it wouldn't be the awesomest film ever.
But actually, I REALLY liked this. Way more than I thought I would.
Plot: So basically something happened that brought the world to an end (typical post-apocalyptic stuff) and the surface is no longer able to sustain life. Somehow, society managed to save a handful of people. The ones they picked are the kinds of people who will be able to rebuild the world when it's inhabitable again. So scientists, botanists, etc. But they're all in these sleeping chambers. The two main characters, Bauer (Norman Reedus) and Cartwright (Djimon Hounsou) are just techs. They wake up ever six months, check on everything, make sure it's all working right, then go back to sleep for another six months. They only have two hours of air to get everything done before the system shuts down to conserve oxygen and they go back to sleep. This cycle will continue until the world is inhabitable again. But this time, things start to go wrong.
Characters: For such a short window to develop the characters, I thought they did an excellent job. We saw how they were casually with one another, how they were under stress. We saw their flaws, their pretenses, and their dichotomies. Cartwright (Djimon Hounsou) was the more solemn, thoughtful one, but he's keeping secrets. Bauer (Norman Reedus) was way more non-chalant about things, as though he didn't really care one way or the other what's going on (I think he only calls Cartwright by his name once. The rest of the time he just addresses him as 'Buddy.') but we quickly learn that he values loyalty, but also has a disloyal past that haunts him. Just really well-rounded characters for a story like this. I was really impressed. Even though one is obviously meant to be more the hero, and the other more the antagonist, I really couldn't love or hate either one of them. They were just so very human.
 |
| Dystopian screen cap from movie. |
Another thing I thought was interesting was that aging didn't seem to be a problem. At one point Cartwright talks about how it might take as little as 30 cycles for the earth to become inhabitable again, or as many as one hundred. They don't address the aging directly, but neither of them seems to be worried that they'll die before the hundred cycles are up. So I guess whatever gaseous substance they're using to put themselves to sleep must also slow down or stop the aging process. Obviously these two guys age a couple of hours each time they wake up, but that's it. The "Sleepers" as the other survivors are called, don't seem to age at all. Just kind of an interesting element to the story.
Ending: There's definitely some tragedy here, but that's typical of dystopians. Overall, I really liked the ending. I thought it was fitting for the characters, and it didn't leave me feeling like there should have been more.
Here's the thing: there are two kinds of dystopian stories out there: the kind that focus on how the best of the human spirit comes into play in extreme circumstances, and the kind with more of a Lord of the Flies bent where the worst parts of human beings come out in those same circumstances. I really don't like the latter stories. I'm always disappointed in them. And don't get me wrong, even the ones that focus on hope usually have a few characters that go to the darkest parts of their psyches and stay there, but I prefer to focus on the hope for the main characters.
This film was interesting because it was definitely a mixture of the two. Both these guys were decent and doing the best they could, but they still had some deep trust issues. And yet, those trust issues weren't unwarranted. I didn't find it to be unrealistic or unnecessarily dark. And overall, it definitely ended with hope, which made me like it. Thumbs up for the ending, even if there was some sadness to it.
Overall: Well it's a small sort of story, but still deep and thought-provoking. Don't go into it thinking it's gonna change your life or anything, but as I said, I liked it WAY more than I thought I would. I'd totally watch it again. :D
Has anyone else seen Air? Did you like it?
Wednesday, February 4, 2015
Movie Review: Fury
 |
| Source |
Fury is the story of the crew of a tank named Fury that wound it's way through Nazi-occupied Germany, just months prior to the end of World War II. The men of the crew, lead by Brad Pitt's Don "Wardaddy" Collier, are bleak and war-hardened. They all have haunted eyes who have obviously seen atrocities most of us can't conceive of. When a very young new driver, Norman Ellison (Logan Lerman) joins the team, his journey with them begins. When it ends, so will the film, but probably not in the way you'd think.
History: Fury is not based on one true story, but rather a collection of true accounts from veterans who spent their time during the war in tanks. I read that the director did everything he could to keep things as real as possible. Watching the film, you definitely get a feel for how things would have been behind enemy lines during this period of the war. We see the American soldiers doing what they can to help the innocent German people, but we also see them invading the homes of those same people and making use of their supplies, which wasn't particularly comfortable for either the people or the soldiers. Everyone kind of accepts it and makes due, though, and the sadness of a desolate countryside wracked by war is extant. In short, the history is real and well-shown.
 |
| Source |
 |
| Source |
Theme in a line: "Ideals are peaceful. History is violent." Spoken by Collier (Pitt) to Ellison (Lerman).
Comparisons: My brother's first question when we reached the end was whether I liked it better than other modern war films like Saving Private Ryan or We Were Soldiers. I had to answer no. While this was very powerful and I'm glad I watched it, I still don't think it topped any of my current favorites. That said, I think everyone should see it once, just to appreciate the message it's trying to get across. Be warned, though, they don't skimp on the gore or the tragedy, and parts of it are very hard to watch, in the way of WWII films.
 |
| Source |
Has anyone else seen Fury? What did you think of it?
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
Movie Review: The Battle of Five Armies
 |
| Source |
**While I'm careful not to blatantly give anything away, there may be some general spoilers for the story. If you aren't familiar with either film or novel, maybe just skim. :D**
Plot: My biggest complaints about film two (The Desolation of Smaug) was that 1) it ended on a TOTAL cliffhanger, and 2) we didn't actually get to see Smaug die in it (more on that later). The Battle of the Five Armies picked up right at the moment Desolation left off. Smaug attacks Dale and chaos ensues. From there, we go through the final battle for the mountain. We have elves, dwarves, orcs & goblins, the men of Dale, and eagles. Of course there are smaller factions everywhere, so exactly who the five armies are is sometimes unclear to the viewer.
One really fun thing about The Hobbit films that was at least less present in the original LOTR films is that Jackson makes extensive use of the appendices. That's always fun to see for Tolkien fanatics.
 |
| Source |
Adaptation: Back to Smaug not dying in film two. Okay, his death was an awesome, adrenaline pumping way to open up the third film, but as a story teller, I still think I'd rather he'd have died at the end of the 2nd film. I'm not sure what spurred this decision. Yeah, it allowed them to end the 2nd film on a cliffhanger, and maybe that's what they were going for, but even so. I'd rather have had a major climax for film two, and then film three could have focused completely on the battle. Also, the title The Desolation of Smaug implied that they'd get him the end. And they...didn't.
Let's put it this way: back in The Two Towers film, they completely put off doing Shelob's lair, partly for linear timing reasons, but mostly because they wanted Helm's Deep to be the climax of the film. Then, this time around, they took the climax large from film 2 and put two MAJOR events in film 3. Don't get me wrong: I wasn't completely put off by this, but I think if they'd have done it differently, it would have made more sense and been better.
Characters: I felt like the film stayed true to the characters and what compelling characters they are. I don't think I had a huge, overt emotional reaction to either of the first two films, other than just the average, "Cool." Of course I didn't see either of the first two films in theaters, either. (Let's face it: the in-your-face, surround-sound experience is a bit different than watching it at home.) Not so this time. I seriously bawled through the entire film. And not just at the tragic parts, but because the entire thing was so compelling. (Yeah, my twelve-year-old brother totally made fun of me. :/ ) That wouldn't have happened without compelling characters. Kudos to Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage as Thorin, Luke Evans, pretty much every dwarf, and Orlando Bloom for bringing our favorite characters to life. Even Legolas got a story line near the end that was brief, but surprisingly compelling.
 |
| Source |
Effects: Awesome. Just amazing. Best CGI dragon EVER! And who didn't totally go wild for Beorn leaping from an eagle's back and shifting into bear-form mid-air. Awesome! No complaints here.
Extras: Evangeline Lily's Tauriel is a big part of the films, but is a departure from Tolkien (she wasn't in the books). I've never minded her at all. I loved Lily in Lost and could totally see how they used her as a vehicle to deepen the story. I didn't love her, but I didn't mind her either. Just sort of meh. (My brothers would hate me for that. They're all completely in love with her.) Yeah, after film three, I've changed my mind. I freaking love her. The story they did with her and Kili was one of the most compelling of the film, and she had me completely in tears by the end.
Favorite scenes: I've already mentioned a few of my favorites above, but another I loved was the one where Galadriel went to save Gandalf and faced down the essence of Sauron. Greatest thing ever! Loved it! There was also a kind of sadness to see how powerful Saramon once was before he turned to the dark side. I loved that they showed him fighting alongside Gandalf, Galadriel, and Elrond. Cool, but also melancholy.
Ending: While I pretty much loved everything about the ending, I did wish they have given us a few more Easter eggs that pointed toward the later, LOTR series. For example, it would have been fun to actually see a teenage Aragorn. And I would have loved it if, when Bilbo returned to Bag End, a tiny little boy hobbit had run up to him yelling "Uncle Bilbo, Uncle Bilbo, you're back!" I don't even know if either of those things would have fit into the timeline, but they would have been fun. :D There was, however, mention of a young Aragorn, and an appearance by Ian Holm. I appreciated both.
Overall: Loved it. If you liked any of the previous middle earth films even a little bit, you'll love it. If you, like me, love all things Tolkien, you'll be ecstatic. If you hated all previous films, well, this one probably won't be much different for you.
(Such a sweet video. The second I heard The Last Goodbye during the credits, I knew I had to have this song in my life. :D)
What did everyone else think of the final middle earth film?
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
Movie Reviews: 47 Ronin and Non-Stop
Okay, I watched both of these last weekend and am just now getting around to reviewing them, so we'll call these mini-reviews. Probably not as much details as I usually do.
So I had two very strong opinions from family members about this movie. One brother loved it. The other hated it and thought it was totally stupid. It made me curious. So I had to be stuck home by myself for two days last weekend babysitting my niece. Therefore, I rented a couple of movies.
Plot: The story was actually really good. It was in the vein of The Last Samurai (though admittedly, The Last Samurai was much better). But think of it as the stuff of Japanese legend. It's about warriors, honor, tragedy, and doing something because it's right, even though it's ridiculously harsh.
While this seems like a typical oriental film, it's all in English, and it's not entirely realistic either. Because it's a legend, there's a touch of the fantastic (magic, witches, etc.) in it, which makes it more of a dark fantasy set in Japan. Interesting combination, I must say.
Film/Story Structure: One of the major problems was the setup. The first half hour of the film was downright boring, but that's because it took that long to get to the core of the story. Once it really got going, it was much better.
Acting: Okay, my buddy Keanu is often criticized for having exactly two facial expressions. While I don't necessarily disagree with that observation, it's never bothered me. He has an honest heir that just makes you like him. That said, neither he nor any of his co-workers were every going to get any award nominations for this film.
Effects: As with the acting, let's just call this a B movie and leave it at that.
Overall: I fell in between the opinions of my two brothers. I didn't hate it, but I didn't love it either. The story was really good, and I'm glad I got to hear it, but the film itself left some things to be desired.
Funny Story: My three-year-old niece watched it with me (i.e. played dolls and occasionally glanced up at the screen). When Keanu with his long hair and beard first appeared on screen, she asked if that was Jesus. I had to laugh.
I didn't get to see this in theaters, and I wish I could have. I loved this film, and it would have been all kinds of epic on the big screen!
Plot: Liam Neeson plays an air marshal who is afraid to fly. (Awesome right?) He finds himself on an international flight and starts receiving texts saying that if money isn't wired into a specific account, the texter will start killing one person an hour. People soon start dying, and Neeson can't figure out how it's being done. Meanwhile...they're on a flight!
Other Performances: Julianne Moore and Michelle Dockery both make memorable appearances. (I could have done without Julianne Moore's bug glasses, though. I think the eighties want them back. And it was kind of weird to see Dockery outside of Downton Abbey, but I thought she did a good job.)
Pacing: The tension was very high in this film. It was an edge-of-your-seat nail-biter. I couldn't look away from the screen. I thought it was fantastic.
Story: This works well because it plays on post 9/11 fear of flying, terrorism, fear, integrates technology with texting, and then there's the Liam Neeson action movie vibe that's been working for him for several years now. Not to mention, there are a finite number of people on the flight who might be in on the conspiracy, and the film keeps you (and Neeson) guessing about who it might be. Like I said, you can't stop watching it.
Overall: Yeah, don't have much more to say (I don't want to give any spoilers) except that I loved it. Highly recommended. Even if you aren't particularly into Neeson's action films, give this one a try. I think you'll like it anyway. :D
Has anyone seen either of these films? What did you think of them?
 |
| Source |
47 Ronin
So I had two very strong opinions from family members about this movie. One brother loved it. The other hated it and thought it was totally stupid. It made me curious. So I had to be stuck home by myself for two days last weekend babysitting my niece. Therefore, I rented a couple of movies.
Plot: The story was actually really good. It was in the vein of The Last Samurai (though admittedly, The Last Samurai was much better). But think of it as the stuff of Japanese legend. It's about warriors, honor, tragedy, and doing something because it's right, even though it's ridiculously harsh.
While this seems like a typical oriental film, it's all in English, and it's not entirely realistic either. Because it's a legend, there's a touch of the fantastic (magic, witches, etc.) in it, which makes it more of a dark fantasy set in Japan. Interesting combination, I must say.
Film/Story Structure: One of the major problems was the setup. The first half hour of the film was downright boring, but that's because it took that long to get to the core of the story. Once it really got going, it was much better.
Acting: Okay, my buddy Keanu is often criticized for having exactly two facial expressions. While I don't necessarily disagree with that observation, it's never bothered me. He has an honest heir that just makes you like him. That said, neither he nor any of his co-workers were every going to get any award nominations for this film.
Effects: As with the acting, let's just call this a B movie and leave it at that.
Overall: I fell in between the opinions of my two brothers. I didn't hate it, but I didn't love it either. The story was really good, and I'm glad I got to hear it, but the film itself left some things to be desired.
Funny Story: My three-year-old niece watched it with me (i.e. played dolls and occasionally glanced up at the screen). When Keanu with his long hair and beard first appeared on screen, she asked if that was Jesus. I had to laugh.
 |
| Source |
Non-Stop
I didn't get to see this in theaters, and I wish I could have. I loved this film, and it would have been all kinds of epic on the big screen!
Plot: Liam Neeson plays an air marshal who is afraid to fly. (Awesome right?) He finds himself on an international flight and starts receiving texts saying that if money isn't wired into a specific account, the texter will start killing one person an hour. People soon start dying, and Neeson can't figure out how it's being done. Meanwhile...they're on a flight!
Other Performances: Julianne Moore and Michelle Dockery both make memorable appearances. (I could have done without Julianne Moore's bug glasses, though. I think the eighties want them back. And it was kind of weird to see Dockery outside of Downton Abbey, but I thought she did a good job.)
Pacing: The tension was very high in this film. It was an edge-of-your-seat nail-biter. I couldn't look away from the screen. I thought it was fantastic.
Story: This works well because it plays on post 9/11 fear of flying, terrorism, fear, integrates technology with texting, and then there's the Liam Neeson action movie vibe that's been working for him for several years now. Not to mention, there are a finite number of people on the flight who might be in on the conspiracy, and the film keeps you (and Neeson) guessing about who it might be. Like I said, you can't stop watching it.
Overall: Yeah, don't have much more to say (I don't want to give any spoilers) except that I loved it. Highly recommended. Even if you aren't particularly into Neeson's action films, give this one a try. I think you'll like it anyway. :D
Has anyone seen either of these films? What did you think of them?
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
Movie Review: Blended
 |
| Source |
Plot: So Blended is the latest Drew Barrymore/Adam Sandler collaboration. It features a potential couple who (naturally) hate each other at first due to lack of communication and misunderstanding. Both have children from previous marriages, so if they go long term with their relationship, it will result in a blended family.
They conveniently end up on the same African vacation with all their kids, which means both they and their families will have a lot of time to spend together.
Drew Barrymore (Lauren), who has three boys and doesn't know how to deal with them heading into puberty, bonds with Jim's (Adam Sandler's) girls, who desperately need a mother figure. Meanwhile, Jim becomes the reliable father figure her children don't have. (Her ex is still in the picture and constantly disappointing his boys.)
Ending: I won't spoil, but it has a typical, feel good ending we've come to expect from most Sandler films. Nothing ground-breaking, but sweet and satisfying overall.
Overall: It's a really fun, entertaining, but ultimately fairly predictable Sandler/Barrymore story. I actually liked it more than I thought I would, just because I laughed a lot and thought the end was actually very touching. That said, don't expect anything groundbreaking. If you were a big fan of the Wedding Planner and 50 First Dates, you'll like it. There are plenty of puns and cameos from other Sandler films. If not, you may not be very entertained by this one either.
I liked it myself.
Favorite line: Dad does little girl's makeup. She says he's a good daddy. Then she looks in the mirror, starts screaming and says, "He's a bad daddy. He made me look like the walking dead!!!" *LMAO* Poor kid.
Has anyone else seen Blended? What did you think of it?
Wednesday, August 6, 2014
Movie Review: Gravity
 |
| Source |
I got it from Redbox over the weekend and guess what? I loved this movie. I couldn't believe how much I liked it, how touching it was. See, I was thinking about it all wrong. This is not a film about people flailing around in space. It's actually a story about an intensely spiritual experience, that just happens to be set against the backdrop of a tragedy that happens in space.
It's all about the main character facing a set of mind-blowingly tragic circumstances, and how it changes her. In ninety minutes, everything she knows changes. She re-examines the darkest parts of her life, and how she has let her past stagnate her. She loses friends and colleagues, goes from determination to live to darkest despair when she believes she's about to die and there's nothing to be done, and then back to determination and acceptance of whatever comes. No wonder this story got so much attention. It was fantastic! Sandra Bullock did SUCH a good job.
Most crazy tragic lines of the film:
"I know, we're all gonna die. Everybody knows that. But I'm going to die today. Funny that... you know, to know. But the thing is, is that I'm still scared. Really scared. Nobody will mourn for me, no one will pray for my soul. Will you mourn for me? Will you say a prayer for me? Or is it too late... ah, I mean I'd say one for myself but I've never prayed in my life. Nobody ever taught me how... nobody ever taught me how..."
Yeah, I was totally in tears during this scene.
Anyway, I was totally wrong about this film. If you haven't seen it, do! It's deep, intense, and totally inspiring.
Has anyone else seen Gravity? What did you think of it?
Wednesday, July 23, 2014
Movie Review: Robocop
 |
| Source |
Plot: Murphy is is a hardened cop with a wife and son, who doesn't mind taking risks to get the bad guys. When he angers the wrong people, a car explosion leaves him--for all intents and purposes--dead. Until he's chosen to become Robocop, of course. He's haunted by memories of his past, especially his own murder, and memories of his happy life with his wife and son. Inevitably, he has trouble differentiating himself from the machine.
Now, I don't by any means remember the ins and outs of the 80's Robocop films, but it seems to me that they didn't do anything groundbreaking with the plot. Most of the same conflicts that existed in the earlier films existed here, without much that was new. I think his wife (Abby Cornish) and son played a larger role than in the original, but that was about it. Not that the plot here was bad by any means, but I really wasn't wowed by it. Which is perhaps why the film didn't get as much attention as I would have predicted.
*One thing of interest is that in the original, Detroit was in a futuristic dystopian state. This Robocop is still futuristic (2029) but there's not much mention of dystopia. Could it be that Detroit today has degraded enough to become a dystopia, so that's not a point that needs to be pretended for a film?*
Wednesday, July 2, 2014
Movie Review: Winter's Tale
 |
| Source |
I read somewhere that Scorsese was once attached to the project, but backed out because the story was "unfilmable." After seeing it, I think I know what he was referring to, but obviously "unfilmable" it wasn't.
Plot: Peter Lake (Colin Farrell) is a thief with no parentage to speak of. When he tries to rob a rich mansion, which he believes to be empty, he finds the family's daughter, Beverly, at home. They strike up a conversation, and their love story begins. Beverly Penn is dying from a strange form of consumption that leaves her body constantly giving off more heat than is healthy. She sleeps in a tent on the roof of her home, even in winter, to keep her body heat down. Too much strenuous activity--such as dancing--could easily kill her.
Meanwhile, a demon named Pearly Soames (played by Russel Crowe) is chasing Peter around town. The premise is that every human being is allowed one miracle. Soames' entire mission is to stop these miracles from occurring. He seems to have a personal vendetta toward Peter and wants to keep him from getting his miracle, which he assumes is to save Beverly.
As per usual, things don't work out for anyone as planned, and Peter finds himself in present day, though he has no idea why. It seems perhaps the miracle he is destined for is not the one he always assumed it would be.
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
Movie Review: Maleficent
 |
| Source |
It was a fun experience, not only for the film itself but because my niece hasn't been to a movie since she was little enough to sleep through it (since she was an infant, in other words). It was fun to experience what is essentially her first film in a movie theater with her. When we went in, for some reason the lights were all the way down, even though the movie didn't start for another ten minutes. She was afraid because it was so dark. Then I put her up on one of the seats. (You know, the fold-up theater-style seats?) Now, my niece is very tall for her age, and skinny as a whip. She only weighs about 34 pounds. I put her in the seat and it folded up on her. She started screaming and asked to go home. LOL. Poor thing. Ah the trama of childhood. Anyway, we got her a booster seat which helped keep the seat from folding, and gave her some popcorn and she felt better. She sat through the movie fairly well, though the surround sound was too loud for her and she got afraid a few times. Every time she did, she would grab my hand with her little fingers and my heart melted a little bit.
Okay, onto the movie review. I am going to talk about the film a bit, but I'll keep things largely spoiler-free.
Wednesday, March 26, 2014
Divergent: Movie Review
 |
| Source |
Plot: If you want to know the plot of the film, read the plot of the book. They're exactly the same. There's always some worry when a great book gets made into a film that Hollywood will totally slaughter it. Of course it's exciting to see your favorite characters and worlds on the big screen, but what if the film is terrible? And then all those who see it but have never read the book believe the book was also terrible? Ugh. Don't they know what they do to us?
Luckily, that was not the case here. Not only did the film stick pretty closely to the plot of the book, but they did a spectacular job of bringing it all together and making it jump off the screen!
Characters: I was always okay with Shailene Woodley as Tris, even if her coloring isn't quite right. I really wasn't sure about Theo James as Four. He's not at all how I pictured Four to be, and the only thing I knew the actor from was a small (1 episode) stint on Downton Abbey, where he played a foreign man-whore who died in our leading lady's bed after seducing her in a most un-romantic fashion. Didn't exactly endear him to me for the romantic hero, you know? Luckily, he did a terrific job. I really liked him in the role and am totally won over as to this guy's star power.
Others, including Ashley Judd, Kate Winslet, Jai Courtney and Tony Goldwin, all played their parts well and I thought the film was well-cast overall.
 |
| Source |
1) Tris's relationship with her father was better. She had an okay relationship with him in the book, but not a close one. He was kind of cold and distant, and was downright livid after what happened at the choosing ceremony. In the film, you have more sympathy for him because he came across as a loving father who was truly heartbroken after Tris and Caleb's choices.
2) The Al story wasn't nearly as prominent. It was one aspect of the book I truly didn't like because it was just so dang depressing! It was much more minor in the film, which made it much less tragic.
What's the same: Pretty much everything else. The Choosing ceremony, Dauntless jumping from trains, Tris and her first trampoline experience, the Ferris Wheel scene, her romance with Four, and the height of the action where Jeanine makes her move. All of it was fantastic. High action, high adrenaline. Makes you really want to rebel against an oppressive regime after watching it. (Which is why I love dystopians! :D)
Overall: Totally loved it! They did an excellent job. Anyone who loved the books will likely love the movie. I'm so stoked that it did well at the box office. That means we can look forward to hearing about the commencement of the Insurgent film sometime soon.
Did anyone else get to see Divergent? What did you think of it?
Monday, February 10, 2014
Movie Review: Captain Phillips
 |
| Source |
This is the true story of a naval captain (played by Tom Hanks) who finds his ship full of cargo ambushed by Somali pirates with guns. He has to find a way to keep his crew safe and himself alive, while also dealing with these uneducated but brutal pirates.
Overall, I really loved this film. More than I thought I would. There's not a lot to say except that it's an amazing story. I won't go into the logistical details, because they'd be mundane in a review, but this man, Captain Phillips, is brave and selfless. He nearly gives his life for his crew and endures a traumatic, horrific ordeal. A true story of human greatness in the face of a terrible situation.
I gotta say, this might be the best acting I've ever seen Tom Hanks do. Better than Castaway. Better than Saving Private Ryan. I was just so impressed. He had me in tears at the end. I understand why he was up for so many awards. Plus, it was pretty much a one-man show. Of course there were the crew members and the bad guys, but they weren't even really supporting roles. Tom Hanks had to carry this move all by his lonesome. And trust me, he did it well.
I always love when, at the end of true stories, they do a quick afterward using on-screen captions to tell what happened to the characters afterward. The ones at the end of this movie just made me smile and think, "what a great film."
I'd highly recommend it to anyone who needs a deep, but ultimately uplifting story about the human spirit. Such a great movie!
Has anyone else seen Captain Phillips? What did you think of it?
Wednesday, December 18, 2013
Movie Review: The Mortal Instruments
 |
| Source |
I think I've told this story before, but when this movie came out, I was very excited to see it. I'd just recently read the books and really liked them. But, for the first few weeks it was in theaters (and by few, I mean something like six or eight) I was either too busy or didn't have the funds to go see it.
One weekend, my sister (who is also a fan of the books) and I realized we were free and could go see it. Finally. Yeah, it had left the theaters by then. We were SO disappointed!
But, it's okay. It's on DVD now and I finally got to watch it. I will admit that the first time I watched it, I had some issues with it. I think it's because I spent most of the movie cataloging what they differently from the books. But, each time I watch it (I've seen it three times now) I like it a little bit better. It's kind of won me over.
Wednesday, November 13, 2013
Movie Review: Ender's Game
So my NaNoWriMo is progressing nicely. I wrote 3759 words yesterday, which puts me at 16062 words for NaNo and 29756 for Desolate Mantle. It's coming along beautifully and as I speed toward the climax, I get more and more excited about it.
Meanwhile, I actually managed to see not one but two movies this weekend. One, Ender's Game, is reviewed below. The other, Thor: Dark World, is reviewed HERE, on my other blog, if you want to check it out.
I'm not going to go into the plot, as I just reviewed the book yesterday and talked a lot about that. (Book review here.) I'm just going to discuss how they did with the film
With what was there, they mostly did a good job. I liked all the actors who portrayed the characters, and the battle room where all the mock battles were held was definitely awesome. Of course, lots of those battles and Ender's strategies got cut, but that's to be expected. Some of it is really hard to translate onto the screen (internal dialogue always is) and then there's the fact that it was a two hour film, so not all the detail would have made it in, anyway.
The one scene I wish they would have spent more time on was the scene where Valentine and Ender talk at the lake. It was such a poignant scene (totally cried while reading it) and it felt like they glossed over it. It was still kind of sad in the film, but it just wasn't as deep or moving as is in the book. In fact, in the book, both she and Ender knew she was only supposed to be there to talk him into what Graff wanted. Luckily, they ended up making a much bigger emotional connection to one another. In the film...yeah, she was just there to make him do what Graff wanted. I felt like it really cheapened the scene and short-changed the characters.
The other thing I didn't really like, though I suppose it's to be expected, is that they really toned down the brutality. Ender didn't get beat up nearly as much in the film as in the book. I suppose it was a kubaya, anti-bullying thing, which I get, but the story just doesn't pack near as much emotional punch if we don't get to see Ender claw through his trials. This to me felt like a case of the film makers showing us what they think we most want to see, rather than what the story actually said. I could go off about how we seem to be coddling our kids these days, even in the stories we put in front of them, but that's a discussion for another day, so I'll leave it alone. Just know if you're looking for the profound emotion of the book, it won't be there. Read about it instead.
But, like I said, what actually made it into the film was usually pretty good. Except...for the end. It wasn't that anything was vastly changed. All the plot twists were there, and they didn't take much away, but I still wasn't a huge fan of how they did the ending. It had to do with Ender's reaction, and his argument with Graff afterward. They even kept in a lot of the lines from the book, but I wasn't a fan of the way they interpreted them.
The way they did it made Graff seem profoundly undignified, and the human race as a whole monstrous. Now, I don't necessarily think that what was done in the story was completely correct--that's sort of the point--but at least in the book it's stressed that the leaders felt like it was their only choice. I felt like the movie was a bit Hollywoodized, in a bad way. It made it feel like the entire human race wanted genocide and got it, just based on their own pride and egos, and not for any other reason. I felt like it did a profound disservice to the characters and the story. Graff in particular, but all around, too. Of course, details from the book like the afterward were left out of the movie, but how could they not be? With an ending like that, the afterward, in which Graff is honored, wouldn't make much sense to the audience. I felt like that final exchange between Graff and Ender in the film really changed the meaning of the ending. And I didn't like it.
So, overall it was valiant effort, and despite all the negative things I've said, I really didn't hate it. I just want those who loved the book to be prepared. There were many aspects of it that were cool and fun to watch. As it's very family friendly, it would be a great one to take the kids to. They'd think the battle school and simulators were really cool. I'm glad I got to see it, though in all honesty, I doubt I'll see it again. I just wish, with all the technology we have, Hollywood could figure away to get closer to the purity of an author's story. But, I suppose that's wishful thinking.
Has anyone else seen Ender's Game? What did you think of it?
 |
| Source |
I'm not going to go into the plot, as I just reviewed the book yesterday and talked a lot about that. (Book review here.) I'm just going to discuss how they did with the film
With what was there, they mostly did a good job. I liked all the actors who portrayed the characters, and the battle room where all the mock battles were held was definitely awesome. Of course, lots of those battles and Ender's strategies got cut, but that's to be expected. Some of it is really hard to translate onto the screen (internal dialogue always is) and then there's the fact that it was a two hour film, so not all the detail would have made it in, anyway.
The one scene I wish they would have spent more time on was the scene where Valentine and Ender talk at the lake. It was such a poignant scene (totally cried while reading it) and it felt like they glossed over it. It was still kind of sad in the film, but it just wasn't as deep or moving as is in the book. In fact, in the book, both she and Ender knew she was only supposed to be there to talk him into what Graff wanted. Luckily, they ended up making a much bigger emotional connection to one another. In the film...yeah, she was just there to make him do what Graff wanted. I felt like it really cheapened the scene and short-changed the characters.
The other thing I didn't really like, though I suppose it's to be expected, is that they really toned down the brutality. Ender didn't get beat up nearly as much in the film as in the book. I suppose it was a kubaya, anti-bullying thing, which I get, but the story just doesn't pack near as much emotional punch if we don't get to see Ender claw through his trials. This to me felt like a case of the film makers showing us what they think we most want to see, rather than what the story actually said. I could go off about how we seem to be coddling our kids these days, even in the stories we put in front of them, but that's a discussion for another day, so I'll leave it alone. Just know if you're looking for the profound emotion of the book, it won't be there. Read about it instead.
But, like I said, what actually made it into the film was usually pretty good. Except...for the end. It wasn't that anything was vastly changed. All the plot twists were there, and they didn't take much away, but I still wasn't a huge fan of how they did the ending. It had to do with Ender's reaction, and his argument with Graff afterward. They even kept in a lot of the lines from the book, but I wasn't a fan of the way they interpreted them.
The way they did it made Graff seem profoundly undignified, and the human race as a whole monstrous. Now, I don't necessarily think that what was done in the story was completely correct--that's sort of the point--but at least in the book it's stressed that the leaders felt like it was their only choice. I felt like the movie was a bit Hollywoodized, in a bad way. It made it feel like the entire human race wanted genocide and got it, just based on their own pride and egos, and not for any other reason. I felt like it did a profound disservice to the characters and the story. Graff in particular, but all around, too. Of course, details from the book like the afterward were left out of the movie, but how could they not be? With an ending like that, the afterward, in which Graff is honored, wouldn't make much sense to the audience. I felt like that final exchange between Graff and Ender in the film really changed the meaning of the ending. And I didn't like it.
So, overall it was valiant effort, and despite all the negative things I've said, I really didn't hate it. I just want those who loved the book to be prepared. There were many aspects of it that were cool and fun to watch. As it's very family friendly, it would be a great one to take the kids to. They'd think the battle school and simulators were really cool. I'm glad I got to see it, though in all honesty, I doubt I'll see it again. I just wish, with all the technology we have, Hollywood could figure away to get closer to the purity of an author's story. But, I suppose that's wishful thinking.
Has anyone else seen Ender's Game? What did you think of it?
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)