2/7 in a massive Catch-Up post that must be broken down in Seven like Voldemort's Soul.
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.
Before I say anything more about this interview, I would like to confess, yes, I am a Potter fan. A bit of a Joanna-Come-Lately, (I've only seen the three most recent films in theatres, and didn't begin reading them until shortly before Half-Blood Prince was released).
Also, I saw this film in IMAX 3-D and if you can do so as well, I highly recommend it.
I will do my best to keep it as spoiler-free as possible.
I was never a fan of Order. Goblet was one of my favorites (of the books), and despite my love for Mike Newell as well, I felt the entire thing was mishandled; especially after Cuaron's refreshing change in Prisoner after two Chris Columbus films that felt like xeroxes of the books.
As soon as the film started I was sucked in. The tone of the latter three books was caught perfectly from the beginning: a strange sense of absolute horror and and a weird bit of silliness. This is best executed in Harry's arrival at 12 Grimmauld Place, there's something very cloak-and-dagger going on, nothing looks quite right, but Gary Oldman seems pretty happy and as soon as the twins show up and start apparating, there's a (very very creepy!) sense of levity about the place.
And then I realized something wonderful; the reason why this film had such a better (pardon the hippie jargon, folks) vibe compared to the four films preceding it. It was not adapted by Steve Kloves, but by Michael Goldberg. In the other films, I would often picture Mr. Kloves skimming the tome in question, highlighting scenes that were MAJOR PLOT POINTS or THINGS PEOPLE WANT TO SEE and making a point to get those in for the fans. Mr. Goldberg, however, allowed us to take our time (I'm not saying things weren't cut out, I was a little miffed that the fireside chat with Sirius and Lupin RE: abusing Snape as teens was omitted) and feel like the characters were part of a story, that they were active participants and not being shoved into these things that had to happen. For those who disagree with me, have no fear, Mr. Kloves will return for the final two films.
I'm also sure many of you will argue that I'm placing too much weight on the role of the screenwriter. (I admit, I'm biased.) David Yates, the director, also brought much to this film. I'm sure it wasn't Goldberg's idea to make sure that any time Ginny and Harry were in a scene together she was standing directly behind him. His repetition of images (explosions!) was a pattern I came to really enjoy (and makes me want to see it again) and he brought out great scenes I could see being lost in less capable hands.
The "emotional range of a teaspoon" is completely superfluous, and not that long, but that time could have been saved for a longer Death Eater battle royale. But the way that Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint play off each other in that scene feels so natural (yes, I know, five films together, got it) and simple. The DA montage is interesting, and unusual in that I found myself kicking my feet with delight and saying silly things under my breath; I cheered when Neville mastered "expelliarmus!" and found Ron's puppy patronus completely adorable. By the time the aforementioned smackdown was going on, I was amazed that I wholeheartedly was rooting for the good guys. It's always so tempting to want the bad guys to get just a little bit (anyone else remember Lucius' attempt to Avada Kedavra Harry outside Dumbledore's office in Chamber? Awesome!) but here I could care less about them.
Which brings us to the inevitable spoiler. I heard Brad Pitt say once (I believe on the "Fight Club" commentary), "No one dies like Gary Oldman." As for his death itself, I was a little underwhelmed. But his last words made everything so worth it.
I feel like I'm leaving out a ton, but I still have five movies to review.
GRADE: A+
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Catching You Up, 1/7: Ratatouille.
Greetings, faithful reader I begged to remember my blog! I trust you are well, so am I. Since my last review I've hunted and successfully landed a new job, and landed myself in a new city. I did manage to catch a few movies along the way (try six) and I'm here to fill you in on them, should you manage to snatch them up before it's too late! Also I beg your forgiveness as it has been some time since I have seen some of these and notes were mislaid.
That said, please expect this page to be updated by 12:00:07 AM on Tuesdays.
That said, let us move on to our reviews.
Ratatouille.
Overall, a decent movie. I'm always interested with what Pixar serves up, and with the exception of Finding Nemo (hate me all you want, but it really was just a movie about fish, which, sad to say, will never fascinate me, no matter how much you say "he will be my squishy"), I have always been fascinated. I have become somewhat distressed by the recent hype with Pixar, DreamWorks, and other similar animation studios hyping how "lifelike" their animation can be. And, when your film deals with rats (rats running a restaurant, no less), lifelike may not be what you want to really want to go for. And damn, were those rats lifelike. The few scenes where they move about en masse made me squirm, especially because these were moments involving lots and lots of food. In spite of all of this "lifelike" hype and reviews I read condemning the plot, there was one thing that could not keep me away from this film:
Peter O'Toole.
Peter O'Toole is like salt to meat, a killer bass line to a rock song, terza rima to an epic poem; he brings out the best in everything. And even though he only lent his voice to this, it made it that richer. In the words of my high school Spanish teacher, "he made it suena." I took great relish anytime his character, Anton Ego, graced the screen, and squealed with delight at his coffin-shaped room and his exceedingly grim appearing typewriter.
As for the story, it being Pixar, Pixar being Disney, it had its morals of being yourself, being all you can be, grrl power (I was really happy to see that's normal for Disney now, but that's a rant for another day), honoring your past while striving towards your future, and all such things. However, I feel like the film was suffering from what I've come to refer to as Corpse Bride Syndrome (or CBS): It was so caught up in its technology (stop motion, ratty looking rats) and its message (love the one you love, not the one you're with; and the aforementioned themes) that plot seemed a little thin, especially compared with Brad Bird's last work with Pixar; The Incredibles: by comparison I found the characters more believable (fuller, perhaps) and while still pretty heavy on the lesson to be learned, I had more fun getting there than I did here.
But, all that said, I found the film (much like the dishes served) eminently satisfying and great with a light sauvingnon blanc.
GRADE: B
That said, please expect this page to be updated by 12:00:07 AM on Tuesdays.
That said, let us move on to our reviews.
Ratatouille.
Overall, a decent movie. I'm always interested with what Pixar serves up, and with the exception of Finding Nemo (hate me all you want, but it really was just a movie about fish, which, sad to say, will never fascinate me, no matter how much you say "he will be my squishy"), I have always been fascinated. I have become somewhat distressed by the recent hype with Pixar, DreamWorks, and other similar animation studios hyping how "lifelike" their animation can be. And, when your film deals with rats (rats running a restaurant, no less), lifelike may not be what you want to really want to go for. And damn, were those rats lifelike. The few scenes where they move about en masse made me squirm, especially because these were moments involving lots and lots of food. In spite of all of this "lifelike" hype and reviews I read condemning the plot, there was one thing that could not keep me away from this film:
Peter O'Toole.
Peter O'Toole is like salt to meat, a killer bass line to a rock song, terza rima to an epic poem; he brings out the best in everything. And even though he only lent his voice to this, it made it that richer. In the words of my high school Spanish teacher, "he made it suena." I took great relish anytime his character, Anton Ego, graced the screen, and squealed with delight at his coffin-shaped room and his exceedingly grim appearing typewriter.
As for the story, it being Pixar, Pixar being Disney, it had its morals of being yourself, being all you can be, grrl power (I was really happy to see that's normal for Disney now, but that's a rant for another day), honoring your past while striving towards your future, and all such things. However, I feel like the film was suffering from what I've come to refer to as Corpse Bride Syndrome (or CBS): It was so caught up in its technology (stop motion, ratty looking rats) and its message (love the one you love, not the one you're with; and the aforementioned themes) that plot seemed a little thin, especially compared with Brad Bird's last work with Pixar; The Incredibles: by comparison I found the characters more believable (fuller, perhaps) and while still pretty heavy on the lesson to be learned, I had more fun getting there than I did here.
But, all that said, I found the film (much like the dishes served) eminently satisfying and great with a light sauvingnon blanc.
GRADE: B
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Hoist the Colours: or, Finally, a Positive Review of Pirates.
When I began this review, my friend IMs me, "At last the pirate novelty is gone!"
I've just returned from seeing "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End." I vowed to try to update this as new films came out, seeing them their opening weekend. A senior spring sort of detained me from this task, and this was the first film to inspire me to actually say something. I remember how I saw the first two movies: I caught "The Curse of the Black Pearl" down the shore with three new friends, going out of our way to see it, all of us calling people who couldn't make the trip with us, telling them to go. I saw it at least three more times before I began college. My first two weeks on campus, everyday I overheard the words "Johnny Depp" in someone else's conversation.
Last summer I caught "Dead Man's Chest" in a packed theatre in a city with a friend from work, then went back to my campus to see it with my friend (the same who still, as I type this, can't believe I enjoyed this film). It took me until its DVD release this past December, and the perspective lent to me by my brother, to be able to remotely enjoy the film.
However, I absolutely loved "At World's End." I can't even say how much. From the beginning I was riveted and could not believe that it was a Disney film. (If you make through the first two minutes, I believe you will understand. Also: Never underestimate the creep factor of large groups of people singing angrily. Eeep. And Another Note: Those of you hoping this film's song would be "Hoist That Rag"? No -- but you're close.)
I will do my best to keep this review spoiler free.
Thank GOD Elizabeth Swann is doing something with herself outside of making bad jokes about women's undergarments (or participating in jokes about her lack thereof, hem hem). I was equally shocked to find Keira Knightley in the two scenes that brought me closest to tearing up. I retract in this public domain anything slanderous I said about her talent privately.
Also, hurrah for Keith Richards! His role as Captain Teague definitely won my heart, even if my mother and I were the only people in the small crowd to recognize him. (To be fair, up until he had appeared onscreen, I'd forgotten that he was even involved.)
Again, I cannot emphasize, THIS IS NOT A KIDS' MOVIE. In the first two minutes, you'll sit there screaming in your head "No they won't," and oh yes, they do. Also, more dirty jokes. Not only are they more frequent, but they're dirtier. It's darker than the other two. It's waaay weirder than the other two.
Davey Jones Locker is like the Black Lodge in the Series Finale of "Twin Peaks" (you really didn't think I'd get through this review without a reference, did you?), only... um, nautical...ish.
I will give you one hint: doppelganger! And, as always, Johnny Depp's performance as Cap'n Jack Sparrow won its way into my heart within the first thirty seconds he was onscreen.
Great performances from Bill Nighy (to be expected), Jack Davenport (but I love him already), Jonathan Pryce (Governor Swann, Jack Flash, et cet), and, of course, Jack the Monkey. The scene between Elizabeth and her dad is the sort of writing I've tried to get for the past semester. Now I have a new film to study. Also, Norrington rules.
Those of you who need the plot, I'll give what I can without giving away. When we last saw these characters (those who suffered through "Dead Man's Chest"), Jack was eaten by the Kraken, Will thought Liz had the hots for Jack but didn't know she killed him, and Barbossa came back from the dead. The crew agrees that they will try to save Jack. There, caught up for the really depressing singalong that kicks off "At World's End." The East India Trading Company is coming into power and making it impossible for pirates to exist in this world. The meeting of the Pirate Lords (aka The Brethren) is called to order, and so our usual crew come together to save Jack and bring him to Shipwreck Cove (on Shipwreck Island, also home to the town of Shipwreck) to convene with the other Pirate Lords (who, by the way, just from looking at them, rule). But of course along the way characters meet up with Davey Jones and Lord Cutler Beckett, and a great deal of backstabbing takes place, secrets revealed, and relationships altered. (cue dramatic cliffhanger music)
But yes, go in open, just to see a movie. I kind of enjoyed the last film, so that sort of gave me a leg up on some of my friends who disagreed. Go in expecting it to be crap, and you'll pick it apart. Going in to see something that could maybe possibly rule, and you'll enjoy it a little more.
Sneaking in a bit of your own grog can't hurt either!
I've just returned from seeing "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End." I vowed to try to update this as new films came out, seeing them their opening weekend. A senior spring sort of detained me from this task, and this was the first film to inspire me to actually say something. I remember how I saw the first two movies: I caught "The Curse of the Black Pearl" down the shore with three new friends, going out of our way to see it, all of us calling people who couldn't make the trip with us, telling them to go. I saw it at least three more times before I began college. My first two weeks on campus, everyday I overheard the words "Johnny Depp" in someone else's conversation.
Last summer I caught "Dead Man's Chest" in a packed theatre in a city with a friend from work, then went back to my campus to see it with my friend (the same who still, as I type this, can't believe I enjoyed this film). It took me until its DVD release this past December, and the perspective lent to me by my brother, to be able to remotely enjoy the film.
However, I absolutely loved "At World's End." I can't even say how much. From the beginning I was riveted and could not believe that it was a Disney film. (If you make through the first two minutes, I believe you will understand. Also: Never underestimate the creep factor of large groups of people singing angrily. Eeep. And Another Note: Those of you hoping this film's song would be "Hoist That Rag"? No -- but you're close.)
I will do my best to keep this review spoiler free.
Thank GOD Elizabeth Swann is doing something with herself outside of making bad jokes about women's undergarments (or participating in jokes about her lack thereof, hem hem). I was equally shocked to find Keira Knightley in the two scenes that brought me closest to tearing up. I retract in this public domain anything slanderous I said about her talent privately.
Also, hurrah for Keith Richards! His role as Captain Teague definitely won my heart, even if my mother and I were the only people in the small crowd to recognize him. (To be fair, up until he had appeared onscreen, I'd forgotten that he was even involved.)
Again, I cannot emphasize, THIS IS NOT A KIDS' MOVIE. In the first two minutes, you'll sit there screaming in your head "No they won't," and oh yes, they do. Also, more dirty jokes. Not only are they more frequent, but they're dirtier. It's darker than the other two. It's waaay weirder than the other two.
Davey Jones Locker is like the Black Lodge in the Series Finale of "Twin Peaks" (you really didn't think I'd get through this review without a reference, did you?), only... um, nautical...ish.
I will give you one hint: doppelganger! And, as always, Johnny Depp's performance as Cap'n Jack Sparrow won its way into my heart within the first thirty seconds he was onscreen.
Great performances from Bill Nighy (to be expected), Jack Davenport (but I love him already), Jonathan Pryce (Governor Swann, Jack Flash, et cet), and, of course, Jack the Monkey. The scene between Elizabeth and her dad is the sort of writing I've tried to get for the past semester. Now I have a new film to study. Also, Norrington rules.
Those of you who need the plot, I'll give what I can without giving away. When we last saw these characters (those who suffered through "Dead Man's Chest"), Jack was eaten by the Kraken, Will thought Liz had the hots for Jack but didn't know she killed him, and Barbossa came back from the dead. The crew agrees that they will try to save Jack. There, caught up for the really depressing singalong that kicks off "At World's End." The East India Trading Company is coming into power and making it impossible for pirates to exist in this world. The meeting of the Pirate Lords (aka The Brethren) is called to order, and so our usual crew come together to save Jack and bring him to Shipwreck Cove (on Shipwreck Island, also home to the town of Shipwreck) to convene with the other Pirate Lords (who, by the way, just from looking at them, rule). But of course along the way characters meet up with Davey Jones and Lord Cutler Beckett, and a great deal of backstabbing takes place, secrets revealed, and relationships altered. (cue dramatic cliffhanger music)
But yes, go in open, just to see a movie. I kind of enjoyed the last film, so that sort of gave me a leg up on some of my friends who disagreed. Go in expecting it to be crap, and you'll pick it apart. Going in to see something that could maybe possibly rule, and you'll enjoy it a little more.
Sneaking in a bit of your own grog can't hurt either!
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Initial Post.
Okay, so this is an attempt for me to discover if I have any sort of career in film reviews. I may as well get all of this out now while I can so years later people can look at what a strange little thing I was.
Regardless, this site (hopefully) will become home to my film reviews, and hopefully a place people can regard as some sort of place they can see how I feel while I vent my spleen on that which I find nearly offensive (like Tarantino's half of Grindhouse) or something everyone needs to note and bear witness (like Brick). Goodie.
So I'll start this off with not so much a review but a renewal of my anticipation for The Dark Knight. After Nolan's stab at renewing the Batman movie franchise, I've been curling into the fetal position and kicking my heels with childish delight to see how he's going to make the Joker any better than Nicholson's performance in Burton's initial go.
I admit when I first heard that Heath Ledger was taking the role, I was more than a little miffed. I was enraged, I railed against it for months until a friend showed me this site. Wow. He actually looks like an evil clown that enjoys the torture and murder of innocent people, way to go.
Then last night, I found this lovely image. (Thanks, Ted!) It's a still from The Man Who Laughs. Those of you less familiar with Victor Hugo/Films from 1928, here's a brief synopsis:
Mr. Nolan, thank you for doing your homework. There are no words for how much I'm looking forward to this.
Regardless, this site (hopefully) will become home to my film reviews, and hopefully a place people can regard as some sort of place they can see how I feel while I vent my spleen on that which I find nearly offensive (like Tarantino's half of Grindhouse) or something everyone needs to note and bear witness (like Brick). Goodie.
So I'll start this off with not so much a review but a renewal of my anticipation for The Dark Knight. After Nolan's stab at renewing the Batman movie franchise, I've been curling into the fetal position and kicking my heels with childish delight to see how he's going to make the Joker any better than Nicholson's performance in Burton's initial go.
I admit when I first heard that Heath Ledger was taking the role, I was more than a little miffed. I was enraged, I railed against it for months until a friend showed me this site. Wow. He actually looks like an evil clown that enjoys the torture and murder of innocent people, way to go.
Then last night, I found this lovely image. (Thanks, Ted!) It's a still from The Man Who Laughs. Those of you less familiar with Victor Hugo/Films from 1928, here's a brief synopsis:
Gwynplaine, son of Lord Clancharlie, has a permanent smile carved on his face by the King, in revenge for Gwynplaine's father's treachery. Gwynplaine is adopted by a travelling showman and becomes a popular idol. He falls in love with the blind Dea. The king dies, and his evil jester tries to destroy or corrupt Gwynplaine. Unlike in the original story by Victor Hugo, the lovers escape to France.The imdb's trivia page for this film also credits that Gwynplaine was the inspiration for the Joker within the comics. Which really, really, freaks me out.
Taken from the venerable imdb
Mr. Nolan, thank you for doing your homework. There are no words for how much I'm looking forward to this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
