The Academy Awards, the pinacle of movie-dom. This year, I was able to watch ALL of the best picture nominees, as well as all the nominated performances in the best actor and best actress and best supporting actor and best supporting actress categories! Below you will find mini reviews on all of these and my picks for tomorrow's ceremonies!
Best Picture Nominees -
The nominees in this category cover every base: musical, drama, foreign language film, and even a bit of comedy. It's a tough group this year and I think it will be a tight race.
Amour - The story of love and age and how they relate to each other. The movie was emotionally powerful and simplistically filmed. The characters were beautifully played and incredibly believable. The lack of background music (save for a few sequences of brilliant piano playing), really drives the reality of the story, but leaves a lot to be desired in the masking of chewing noises.
Django Unchained - This is an unconventional tale of a freed slave and his journey to find and free his wife while in the company of an intriguingly hilarious German bounty hunter. While it should be noted that this is a Tarantino film and with that comes lots of blood, violence, and spectacular explosions, the performances and story telling are well worth the gore.
Lincoln - The story that needs no introduction. It might not technically be the longest film on the list, but it felt like it. Daniel Day-Lewis does a good job at personifying the 16th President of the United States of America. Though the characterization and portrayal of Lincoln was well done, the length and pacing of the film as well as some of the creative choices really effected the overall impression of the whole thing for me.
Argo - One of two films nominated about daring military escapades, this movie is fast paced and very well put together. The casting, in relation to the real life people, was spot on and the cinematography brilliant. The supporting cast did a great job keeping the feeling light when necessary and the editing really brings the tension home.
Les Miserable - The struggles of Jean Valjean in 19th century France and the toll of the French Revolution on the people. An excellently cast, costumed, and put together film for anybody that likes period pieces or musicals. A truly moving performance by Anne Hathaway made this movie worth it for me.
Silver Linings Playbook - After completing mandatory facility treatment for bipolar disorder, Pat Solatano, superbly brought to life by Bradley Cooper, sets out to try and convince everyone, including himself that he is better and ready to get back to normal life. Just about everyone in this movie dove into their roles with such fervor and enthusiasm that it's not hard to understand why so many got nominated. The story was compelling, the filming done well, and the roles perfectly brought to life.
Beasts of the Southern Wild - A movie about life, love, and difficulties in the deep south of Louisiana the "bath tub". While I, personally, did not appreciate the filming style (I get motion sick pretty easily so the lack of a steadicam was not my favorite choice) I can understand why it is being praised. The mix of realism with the imagination of the youngest to ever receive a nomination for Best Actress was endearing and interesting.
Life of Pi - A shipwrecked Indian boy trapped on a life boat with a large Bengal Tiger...how can you go wrong? A beautifully crafted film with spectacular use of CGI and cinematography. I will say, though, why can't they ever get the motion of CGI animals right? With that being pretty much my only complaint, though, this movie would not completely surprise me if it took home the big award.
Zero Dark Thirty - The second of two war-time movies nominated, this film is incredibly tense and keeps you on the edge of your seat. While the drama is there, and the pacing definitely keeps you interested, the story itself left me a bit confused. It was hard to determine if this was the story of one particular person within this huge operation, or if it was the story of the operation itself.
My Pick - My favorite movie of the above would definitely be Silver Linings Playbook. I'll see it again and will probably own it.
What will win - This is tough, I feel that Argo, Les Mis, & Silver Linings have a shot but I honestly wouldn't be surprised if any of the films took it home; it truly is a tough category this year.
Best Actor Nominees -
From a prisoner in 19th century France, to the 16th President of the United States, to a man suffering from bipolar disorder, to a drunk pilot, to a veteran of World War II caught up in a fantastical cult..this category is quite diverse.
Bradley Cooper (Silver Linings Playbook) - I've seen Bradley Cooper in numerous roles over the years and, honestly, never been terribly impressed. It's not that he wasn't good, he just wasn't ever on my "oh, I need to see that movie because he's in it" list. His performance in this movie changed that for me. I feel that he truly submerged himself into the role and definitely deserves this nomination.
Joaquin Phoenix (The Master) - I saw a lot of movies preparing for this post but this was the weirdest. Despite my being really confused for a lot of the film, I have to give props to Joaquin Phoenix for his ability to pull off such a strange character. I understand the nomination and, though I would be surprised simply because of the film itself, I wouldn't be upset if he won.
Daniel Day-Lewis (Lincoln) - Ready your pitchforks...I wasn't that impressed. Call me crazy, but I feel that part of the job of an actor is to make me forget that I'm watching an actor play a part. While he did a great job, especially considering the whole accent thing, I still caught myself "seeing" DDL throughout the movie. With that said, I wouldn't be surprised if he won; he's a critics' fav (just not this one).
Denzel Washington (Flight) - I'll say this, good job on playing high and drunk. There was probably a lot that went into achieving that. At the same time, as with DDL, pretty much the whole movie I was thinking "he's really good at pretending to be drunk" and, if I'm thinking that, doesn't that sort of negate the compliment? I'm not sure. And I'm really not sure why this, of all the performances out there, was selected.
Hugh Jackman (Les Miserable) - Talk about a transformation for a role. The people in this movie went all out and they got rewarded for it. Hugh Jackman brought a frailty to this role that I think is what draws people in. While there were definitely aspects that I didn't necessarily like, the performance on the whole was incredible.
My Pick - Again, I think my favorite performance came from Silver Linings Playbook and Bradley Cooper.
What will win - I think it's a close race between Hugh Jackman and Daniel Day-Lewis but I wouldn't be that surprised if Bradley Cooper ended up with the statue.
Best Actress Nominees -
A war hero, a young girl, an emotionally troubled widow, a mother in the face of immense tragedy, and a wife struggling through illness...all these characters had quite the emotional toll on the audience and, I'm sure, the actors alike.
Jessica Chastain (Zero Dark Thirty) - I'm not quite sure what to say here. I get this nomination, politically, but I'm not sure that I get it from a performance stand point. The entire movie I was trying to figure out if this was a movie about Jessica Chastain's character, or if this was a movie about capturing Osama Bin Laden. I'm still not sure. Part of that unsureness stems from the fact that there was only one truly emotional scene with this actress in it...and it was at the end and the emotion portrayed was rather confusing.
Quvenzhane Wallis (Beasts of the Southern Wild) - Seeing as how she was six when she was cast, and could barely read...I understand this nomination. She was adorable and played her role well. Do I think it was an Oscar-worthy performance? Not really.
Jennifer Lawrence (Silver Linings Playbook) - I will admit that I first saw Jennifer Lawrence in The Hunger Games, but after that I saw her other major role in Winter's Bone and I was impressed. Going into this movie, I didn't think I was going to buy that she and Bradley Cooper's character were right for each other (I have weird age-related relationship "rules")....but I was convinced. I bought it and I'd buy it again.
Naomi Watts (The Impossible) - I honestly don't understand why this entire cast and film weren't nominated but that's beside the point. An incredible performance on such an incredibly large scale. I cried several times in this movie and I try not to do that (in public, at least)...it was unavoidable. This is another movie that I will buy simply so I can watch the special features and listen to commentaries. Highly recommended.
Emmanuelle Riva (Amour) - This actress made me believe she was a stroke victim and that she was miserable. But, that's easier to do when I've not seen her in anything prior, nor have I seen any interviews. She's the oldest person to be nominated in this category, though, and I do think she did a great job.
My Pick - Super tough for me, actually. As you might have guessed, Jennifer Lawrence tops my list but Naomi Watts was so incredible that I honestly can't choose.
What will win - Unfortunately, I think Jessica Chastain has a good shot at this but I really think Jennifer Lawrence could take it as well. I'd be really surprised if a different actress took it home.
Actor in a Supporting Role -
This category covers slavery from two viewpoints, the life of a cult leader, and the obsessive compulsion of an Eagles fan.
Alan Arkin (Argo) - A witty supporting character that played his role well. The issue I have with this nomination is how little screen time he actually had and how similar of a role he played to John Goodman's (who was not nominated).
Tommy Lee Jones (Lincoln) - For a character that basically just sat around Grumpy Catting (yes, I just made that a verb) for almost 3 hours..I'm a bit confused. His role was, technically, pivotal for the story but I'm not so sure that another actor couldn't have done the same thing he did.
Robert De Niro (Silver Linings Playbook) - As much as I love SLP, I'm not gonna lie...I was kind of surprised by this nomination. Don't get me wrong, he did a great job and I'd much prefer him to win than most of the rest nominated, I'm just not sure if this was that excellent of a role for him.
Philip Seymour Hoffman (The Master) - Again, this was an incredibly weird movie that I do not wish to see again (not even to attempt to figure out what exactly happened). That being said, with what he was given, he did a great job. He was creepy, believable, and when on screen you couldn't ignore him.
Christoph Waltz (Django Unchained) - This man is just so talented. He brought a lightness to the role that I'm not sure anybody else could pull off. I wanted him to succeed in all his murderous plots and was moved by his performance.
My Pick - No question: Christoph Waltz.
What will win - I think it's almost no question: Christoph Waltz.
Actress in a Supporting Role -
The wife of a cult leader, the wife of a president, a down-on-her luck mom turned prostitute, a sex therapist, and the mother of a bipolar and unstable son....these are the nominees.
Amy Adams (The Master) - As much as I like Amy Adams...I don't know. She did a good job with what she was given but I will be really surprised if she wins. She wasn't on screen all that much and spoke even less. There was maybe one or two scenes where her character said something really important and while her delivery was good and her acting convincing, it just wasn't Oscar-worthy to me.
Helen Hunt (The Sessions) - It took me forever to find this movie and I only just finished watching it a couple of hours ago. I give her props for playing such a...vulnerable role. I believed her emotions and her performance was compelling.
Sally Field (Lincoln) - This nomination truly confuses me. Maybe it's one of those "we're nominating you for this role, technically, but really it's a salute to your past work"? I could buy that. She did play crazy well, I guess.
Jacki Weaver (Silver Linings Playbook) - Much like Robert De Niro's nomination, I understand it but I'm not convinced it was that fantastic. She played stressed and concerned very well and I totally bought her in this role.
Anne Hathaway (Les Miserable) - Give this girl her Oscar. I'm not a fan of musicals and I'm not that big of an Anne Hathaway fan but...come on. That scene...worth the entire movie. Her role might be considered somewhat small, based on total screen time, but the performance was worth as many nominations as they can throw at her.
My Pick - Do you have to ask? Anne Hathaway.
What will win - Anne Hathaway.
This was definitely a challenge, seeing all these films in time, but I'm really glad I did it. Tune in tomorrow to see how wrong I am about it all!
Saturday, February 23, 2013
Wednesday, December 26, 2012
Les Miserables
Once again, I don't like musicals and, once again, I didn't read the book. There just wasn't enough time in the day to read one of the longest books ever...I wiki'd it, though. All that to say this: this film version is the only version I know in regards to the story line, so if there were inconsistencies there...don't expect to see them pointed out below.
Les Misérables
Directed By - Tom Hooper
Written By - Victor Hugo (novel), Claude-Michel Schönberg (book), Alain Boublil (book), & William Nicholson (screenplay)
Top Billed Cast - Hugh Jackman, Anne Hathaway, & Russell Crowe
The story is set during 19th century France. Things were rough, and the people were desperate. The main tale, woven throughout several years, is that of the ex-prisoner Jean Valjean (Jackman) and how he goes from a parole-skipper, to a legit business man in the eyes of all but the law. It's a story of pain, of fate, of immense sadness, and finally love.
Pros -
* It's a Tom Hooper film, the fact that "The King's Speech" was his last movie says a lot, I think.
* Since it was a Tom Hooper film, I knew going in that I would probably love the cinematography...I was right. The shots in this movie, and thinking about all the technical stuff that went into the way these sequences are captured...mind blowing.
* For a movie about prisoners and peasants, one might not expect to be commending the make-up artists, but I definitely am. Subtlety but thoroughness seemed to be their game-plan and it worked wonderfully.
* If Anne Hathaway does not at least get an Oscar Nod for this role, there is no hope left in the entertainment business. The amount of pain she shared with the audience during a single song made the whole movie worth it for me. It was just incredible.
* On the same note, the children in this movie were fantastic! The three main ones are all movie-newbies (stage productions are a completely different animal, in my opinion), and that is just impressive.
* For a movie that spans such a length of time, and covers so much content, I felt that it flowed fairly nicely.
* Casting, in general, was brilliant. I'm not typically a Russell Crowe fan but his performances were awesome, as were Jackman's and even, dare I say it?, Amanda Seyfried did a great job.
* I'll be the first to admit that though I am not a Sacha Baren Cohen fan, I'm not sure I can picture anyone else in that role. He and Helena Bonham Carter made a fantastically awful pair and the comedic relief in such an otherwise dark film, was very welcome.
* The fact that they filmed all the music LIVE, as in "here's an earpiece, he's going to play the piano part, just sing", should be respected. The amount of emotion they were able to capture and the rawness of it all, while in some parts might could have been better in a studio, for the majority of the movie it worked beautifully.
Cons -
* While I compliment the cinematography for the most part...there was something that bugged me throughout. I understood the filming style, and appreciated it in the majority of the film. However, when for several stansas of a song, the only part of the actor that is in focus is their right ear....that, to me, is an issue. It worked when the actor was moving about, and kind of came in and out of focus, but not so much when they were just standing there for five minutes. I learned a lot about Hugh Jackman's right ear.
* I'm just never going to be a fan of a false-ending. This may not have seemed like a false-ending to those that know the story but for those, like me, that are experiencing it for the first time...it was a bit confusing.
* While I marvel at the ability to get three people singing different verses of a song (or three different songs entirely) at the same time, it's not the best way to have your lyrics heard. I'm sure these scenes were very verbose and moving, I just have no clue what was said.
* This is mostly just a con for me because I don't like musicals but...I got bored. I fought the urge to zone out, though, and was happy I stuck with it. That doesn't erase the fact that the urge was there in the first place, though.
Now Mother..
This movie is rated PG-13, and I'm kind of surprised by that. There is a lot of violence, sexual innuendo (and some not so implied), "minor" language, and just intense suspense. Be prepared to talk about the French Revolution, the law versus what's right, desperation, and prison life.
Overall, it might seem like I'm not really giving this movie as glowing of a review as most. However, the fact that I could genuinely only think of the listed Cons, says a lot about my opinion of the film. The compliment the casting is to compliment the cast. Each performance, each part that was played in the making of this movie was played beautifully. The parts that bothered me were far outweighed by the parts I enjoyed, and I genuinely look forward to seeing all of the behind-the-scenes extras on the DVD when it comes out and an desperately hoping for some commentaries! I'm giving it 4/5 stars.
Saturday, November 3, 2012
Gollum Style
On occasion, I have some pretty amazing mental images. Today that image was of Gollum from Lord of the Rings doing the Gangnam Style song. This prompted me to make this image:
You are welcome.
You are welcome.
Monday, September 3, 2012
The Exact Formula
I think that TV shows set in the late 1800s-early 1900s must follow an exact formula and I believe I've nailed down the highlights and it is these highlights that I'm going to share with you.
In order to become a "successful" TV series set in this time you must have an episode about...
1. Fire - Either the barn, the house, the town, or all three need to catch fire. It is preferred that a child starts it, but it's usually first blamed on the town's "outsider" (we'll touch on this later).
2. Horse - Typically, these shows are set around people who don't have a lot of money so buying something like a horse is a big deal. Even if they have money and already have a horse, there will be an episode where one either gets gravely ill and makes a miraculous comeback OR it dies. It sort of depends on the time-slot and network as to which outcome the execs choose.
3. Epidemics - There's nothing like a life-or-death experience to bring a town together. In these series, the epidemic is typically concentrated on the children (smallpox, scarlet fever, measles, etc) but on occasion they can get a bout of typhoid that brings the whole town to its knees. In these episodes (which are often a 2-parter), you get to see the character that's afraid of the sick, the character that's going to pull on the Big Girl/Boy Panties and be the hero, and the character that's in love with the main character but too afraid until now to say anything. These episodes are very emotional and (again depending on time-slot and network) we sometimes see character death.
4. Snow/Weather - In this era, there's not a lot going on and weather is a big driver for life: when to plant, when to harvest, when to have barn raisings...etc. Generally, the "weather" episode is surrounding a snow storm; the heavier the blizzard, the more the drama. Usually, these storms are quite unexpected with only a few hours notice and, wouldn't you know, the main character has JUST set off on a trip into town and there's no way to reach him/her! So, sometimes, the character that loves him/her (but has kept it a secret) runs out into the impending weather apocalypse in order to attempt to save their life and their love. It's really intense.
5. Native Americans - You can't have a show set in this time without dedicating at least one episode to Native Americans. The way in which a series handles this content varies but rest assured that there will be at least one character that will have nothing to do with the Native Americans (typically a child so that they can be vocal without being considered AS prejudiced as if it were an adult) and at least one that thinks the way of life presented is the best thing since sliced bread. There's usually a vision quest and at least one character gets an "Indian name".
6. African Americans - This episode usually doesn't air until the show is certain to make it past the initial cut. Again, there is usually a child that doesn't want to be involved with the new characters who are typically a family from New York or Boston. Due to the nature of the topic, these episodes generally end with a party or community gathering of some sort where everyone comes together to welcome the new residents.
7. Babies/Abuse - I put these two together because they typically air in the same episode and, more often than not, are about the same character. Sometimes a young pregnant woman turns up in the woods, sometimes she stumbles into the church, sometimes she walks right in to the school already in labor...her entrances are varied but her story is usually one of two: 1. she got pregnant out of wedlock and her parents kicked her out, or 2. her husband beats her and she wants a better life for her child so she ran. This episode is really emotionally charged with all sorts of drama; the main character feels the need to care for the woman and/or baby and contemplates rushing into a family arrangement in order to make that happen. This episode is filled with all sorts of other "love" with the minor characters and typically happens in the spring.
8. Robbers - The thought of being held up at gun point and demanded money of is a scary one, the thought of being held up at gun point in the late 1800s is terrifying. No cell phones, no police cars cruising the area, no self-defense classes...you were pretty much a sitting duck. Robberies happened and I'm sure they happened often. Based on the amount of different types I've seen on TV alone, I couldn't imagine the fear involved in taking the honey-crop to the market. Don't worry, though, usually the thief is dealt with and belongings are returned at the end of the episode.
9. Writing - This is kind of a weird one when you first think about it but I'm sure you'll recognize just how common it is in a minute or two. It seems that in order to stand out in these small towns, one must become published. Now, it doesn't seem to matter whether that's in a national publication or just the local paper but, never-the-less, it's a big deal and an entire episode is dedicated to finding out who the town's best writer is.
10. Cheating - Even if the series in question is not surrounding children or a school...there is always an episode about cheating. Usually, the person being cheated off of is shy or always bullied so he/she doesn't stand up for themselves until the very end or never at all and it's the cheatER that ends up confessing all in a teary-eyed moment of humility. It's very moving and you're so happy that the character saw the error in his/her ways.
11. Kidnapping - Just like with robberies, according to what we see in these series, kidnapping was a common occurrence during this era. Whether the main character gets taken when out on a walk, in a storm, or whether he/she stumbles upon the kidnapper by accident varies from series to series. This is an episode that really brings out the courage and fortitude not only of the main character but also the supporting cast. These episodes usually end with the kidnapper seeing the error in his ways and surrendering.
12. Weddings - This is usually one of the last episodes of the season/series. It's not necessarily a wedding between the main characters or even the main supporting cast...it's just an episode who's sole purpose is to get the main character on the wedding thought-train. These series are usually following a woman who is either recently widowed or has never been married so, going along with the times, finding the right man is one of her most common thoughts. The wedding episode allows the writers to have an entire hour to devote to this topic where otherwise they wouldn't risk it due to fans not wanting to spend too much time away from the "real" story. 'Cause, you know, people who watch period series are watching it for the historical accuracies and not for the character drama and def not because they want to see the main character admit she's in love with the handyman...
13. The Cliff-Hanger - The sad truth is, period series typically don't last. Unless you're Little House on the Prairie...you're extremely fortunate to make it past two (abbreviated) seasons. The only hope these series have is to end in such a way as to make the few fans they have cry for more. The cliff-hanger is the cruelest of cruels. You never find out any real answers and if you aren't lucky enough to have your cries of injustice heard by the execs, the only place you can turn for speculation as to how it all turned out is...fanfiction. And that, my friends, is the slipperiest of slopes reserved only for those who are not faint of heart and the grammatically confident.
I love period series. They're super easy to follow and tend to not have the blood, lust, and general insanity that is in most other television today. That being said, the formula does get old and I do tire of having to weed through the atrocities of fan-written garbage to find a sliver-of-a-diamond in the pile of unremarkable (barely legible) junk.
In order to become a "successful" TV series set in this time you must have an episode about...
1. Fire - Either the barn, the house, the town, or all three need to catch fire. It is preferred that a child starts it, but it's usually first blamed on the town's "outsider" (we'll touch on this later).
2. Horse - Typically, these shows are set around people who don't have a lot of money so buying something like a horse is a big deal. Even if they have money and already have a horse, there will be an episode where one either gets gravely ill and makes a miraculous comeback OR it dies. It sort of depends on the time-slot and network as to which outcome the execs choose.
3. Epidemics - There's nothing like a life-or-death experience to bring a town together. In these series, the epidemic is typically concentrated on the children (smallpox, scarlet fever, measles, etc) but on occasion they can get a bout of typhoid that brings the whole town to its knees. In these episodes (which are often a 2-parter), you get to see the character that's afraid of the sick, the character that's going to pull on the Big Girl/Boy Panties and be the hero, and the character that's in love with the main character but too afraid until now to say anything. These episodes are very emotional and (again depending on time-slot and network) we sometimes see character death.
4. Snow/Weather - In this era, there's not a lot going on and weather is a big driver for life: when to plant, when to harvest, when to have barn raisings...etc. Generally, the "weather" episode is surrounding a snow storm; the heavier the blizzard, the more the drama. Usually, these storms are quite unexpected with only a few hours notice and, wouldn't you know, the main character has JUST set off on a trip into town and there's no way to reach him/her! So, sometimes, the character that loves him/her (but has kept it a secret) runs out into the impending weather apocalypse in order to attempt to save their life and their love. It's really intense.
5. Native Americans - You can't have a show set in this time without dedicating at least one episode to Native Americans. The way in which a series handles this content varies but rest assured that there will be at least one character that will have nothing to do with the Native Americans (typically a child so that they can be vocal without being considered AS prejudiced as if it were an adult) and at least one that thinks the way of life presented is the best thing since sliced bread. There's usually a vision quest and at least one character gets an "Indian name".
6. African Americans - This episode usually doesn't air until the show is certain to make it past the initial cut. Again, there is usually a child that doesn't want to be involved with the new characters who are typically a family from New York or Boston. Due to the nature of the topic, these episodes generally end with a party or community gathering of some sort where everyone comes together to welcome the new residents.
7. Babies/Abuse - I put these two together because they typically air in the same episode and, more often than not, are about the same character. Sometimes a young pregnant woman turns up in the woods, sometimes she stumbles into the church, sometimes she walks right in to the school already in labor...her entrances are varied but her story is usually one of two: 1. she got pregnant out of wedlock and her parents kicked her out, or 2. her husband beats her and she wants a better life for her child so she ran. This episode is really emotionally charged with all sorts of drama; the main character feels the need to care for the woman and/or baby and contemplates rushing into a family arrangement in order to make that happen. This episode is filled with all sorts of other "love" with the minor characters and typically happens in the spring.
8. Robbers - The thought of being held up at gun point and demanded money of is a scary one, the thought of being held up at gun point in the late 1800s is terrifying. No cell phones, no police cars cruising the area, no self-defense classes...you were pretty much a sitting duck. Robberies happened and I'm sure they happened often. Based on the amount of different types I've seen on TV alone, I couldn't imagine the fear involved in taking the honey-crop to the market. Don't worry, though, usually the thief is dealt with and belongings are returned at the end of the episode.
9. Writing - This is kind of a weird one when you first think about it but I'm sure you'll recognize just how common it is in a minute or two. It seems that in order to stand out in these small towns, one must become published. Now, it doesn't seem to matter whether that's in a national publication or just the local paper but, never-the-less, it's a big deal and an entire episode is dedicated to finding out who the town's best writer is.
10. Cheating - Even if the series in question is not surrounding children or a school...there is always an episode about cheating. Usually, the person being cheated off of is shy or always bullied so he/she doesn't stand up for themselves until the very end or never at all and it's the cheatER that ends up confessing all in a teary-eyed moment of humility. It's very moving and you're so happy that the character saw the error in his/her ways.
11. Kidnapping - Just like with robberies, according to what we see in these series, kidnapping was a common occurrence during this era. Whether the main character gets taken when out on a walk, in a storm, or whether he/she stumbles upon the kidnapper by accident varies from series to series. This is an episode that really brings out the courage and fortitude not only of the main character but also the supporting cast. These episodes usually end with the kidnapper seeing the error in his ways and surrendering.
12. Weddings - This is usually one of the last episodes of the season/series. It's not necessarily a wedding between the main characters or even the main supporting cast...it's just an episode who's sole purpose is to get the main character on the wedding thought-train. These series are usually following a woman who is either recently widowed or has never been married so, going along with the times, finding the right man is one of her most common thoughts. The wedding episode allows the writers to have an entire hour to devote to this topic where otherwise they wouldn't risk it due to fans not wanting to spend too much time away from the "real" story. 'Cause, you know, people who watch period series are watching it for the historical accuracies and not for the character drama and def not because they want to see the main character admit she's in love with the handyman...
13. The Cliff-Hanger - The sad truth is, period series typically don't last. Unless you're Little House on the Prairie...you're extremely fortunate to make it past two (abbreviated) seasons. The only hope these series have is to end in such a way as to make the few fans they have cry for more. The cliff-hanger is the cruelest of cruels. You never find out any real answers and if you aren't lucky enough to have your cries of injustice heard by the execs, the only place you can turn for speculation as to how it all turned out is...fanfiction. And that, my friends, is the slipperiest of slopes reserved only for those who are not faint of heart and the grammatically confident.
I love period series. They're super easy to follow and tend to not have the blood, lust, and general insanity that is in most other television today. That being said, the formula does get old and I do tire of having to weed through the atrocities of fan-written garbage to find a sliver-of-a-diamond in the pile of unremarkable (barely legible) junk.
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Ten ways to tell you're watching a Made-For-TV movie
Ever wonder why you missed seeing "Snow" in theaters? Or how on earth you missed seeing Katherine Heigl in a classic body-swap scenario?
Here's why: You never learned the art of Made-For-TV movie detection.
It's ok, it's a rare art that not many study these days. Never fear! I have a handy guide for you so that you never have to worry about it again. So, here we go!
You might be a watching a Made-For-TV movie if...
1. The background music is in WAY more than just the background
2. The main character is a recent widow/widower (9 times out of ten, if the spouse is dead, the main character is a man).
3. The movie is set in a small town, typically somewhere in the north so that "explains" why all the characters sound Canadian, where everyone knows one another.
4. One of the main characters is an animal or Santa...or Santa's daughter
5. The there is a child with a "terminal" illness...
6. The two main characters discover their love for each other while on a hike
7. One (or both) of the main characters are only in the small town temporarily (therefore putting a time crunch on the romance).
8. The female main character has always claimed she doesn't want kids but the male main character just so happens to have a precocious 9 year old that captures her heart.
9. At some point during the movie, the main characters discuss the make and model of the car they're in.
Annnnd number 10!
10. You might be watching a Made-For-TV movie if one of the characters drives (or flies) across the country to deliver a horse to the other main character at a photography exhibition.
Now that you know what to look for, what movie have you seen that you are now realizing qualifies? It's ok to admit it, no judgement here!
Now that you know what to look for, what movie have you seen that you are now realizing qualifies? It's ok to admit it, no judgement here!
Sunday, July 29, 2012
The Amazing Spider-Man
This year, I decided to set aside my "I don't watch superhero movies" rule in order to accomodate the hoards of remakes swinging into theaters. I always seem to forget why it is that I don't like superhero movies until the credits have rolled and I walk out. Alas, by that point...it's much too late!
The Amazing Spider-Man
Directed By - Marc Webb
Written By - James Vanderbilt, Alvin Sargent, & Steve Cloves; based on the comic books by Stan Lee & Steve Ditko
Top Billed Cast - Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, and Rhys Ifans
So, Spider-Man. I really hope this is the last set of movies on this subject for at least twenty years. I'm not sure if I can handle any more than that. We all know the story, right? Kid gets bit by a mutant spider and becomes a mutant himself. He gets caught up in all sorts of trouble and the police hate him so he's pretty much a self-made outcast. BUT, he's in love and he's gotta do his best to figure out how to balance his job and his personal life with the fewest number of casualties. You win some, you lose some.
Pros -
* Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield have great chemistry...then again, I think Emma Stone could probably have great chemistry with a rock or even Keanu Reeves.
* The shots that were real were great. I especially loved the cinematography leading up to the funeral; raindrops floating down taut umbrellas made for a fantastic visual.
* I often don't care for scores that incorporate lyrical songs but the scarce use and good choices for this film worked well with the sequences.
* For as little as he said, Garfield did a good job maintaining his accent. We all knew he could, but it still should be noted as possible (I'm lookin' at you Ewan McGregor...)
* Seeing as how this was a remake of sorts, I was worried about the pace and I'm happy to report that I shouldn't have been. There were a couple of laggy-bits but, for the most part, everything moved along nicely.
* I much prefer this movie's Aunt Mae and Uncle Ben over the previous film's. Hats off to casting.
* I was somewhat disappointed that the CGI for Dr. Connors' arm was so good. I really wanted to see that wave effect that can accompany green sleeves.
* I was quite impressed with the likeness of the young Peter to the older Peter.
* I know he can't really help it but I loved the fact that the director's last name was Webb...
Cons -
* While I applauded the green-screen effects on the arm of Dr. Connors, I cannot applaud Rhys Ifans' amputee portrayal. I think the reason why we saw no wave was because he kept that arm glued to his side the whole movie. There should be SOME movement...it wasn't paralyzed.
* Speaking of that arm, I'm going to have to mention costuming here for a second. When you're fitting a real arm that's supposed to not exist in a coat with a full sleeve, do your best to use a lighter material or something and try hard to make the sleeve not look like it belonged in Abe Lincoln's closet.
* I know that since I don't read comic books or know the "real" story, I probably shouldn't complain but...could they not have this movie set in college rather than high-school? I'm just not buying Emma Stone in high school anymore...or that a 17 year old girl would know how to make an antivirus serum...or be that well trusted at a major scientific corporation.
* Oh sound department...what has happened to you? If anybody wants to see an example of poor sound looping, this is the movie to see. Un-synched lips to sound are NOT the worst part of this situation; there was an entire word changed in post. I'm not sure what the actor really said but it definitely was not the line. Did they run out of time to get another take? Was that the best he could do? Unacceptable on TV and definitely not okay in a blockbuster film such as this.
* There were a few times in this movie where I felt like I was back at Universal Studios, ridin' along in the Spider-Man ride. That's not a compliment.
* Did Peter wear his suit under his clothes ALL the time? I ask this question because, if not, dude needs to enter into some quick-change contests.
* Speaking of the suit...how the heck does the mask come off so easy yet look seamless when on? Is there some sort of magic glue not yet mass-produced that gives these results??
* Also, I get that spiders have sticky fingers (so to speak)...but if spiders were wearing tennis shoes...would that stickiness permeate the rubber soles? I don't think so.
* I liked the fact that in this movie, there was an actual contraption that shot the webbing out, however...I didn't like that he apparently always had them on (but they went invisible during certain scenes).
* If you're going to make a movie set in New York City, and you're also making a movie about a giant lizard that is apparently a pied piper...please do your research and spend more money on the CGI creation of the lizards called in.
* Speaking of Mr. Lizard...I don't even know. On the one hand, I was impressed by the make up crew on the real stuff but not so impressed with the CGI crew on the rest of it.
* How does Spider-Man see out of those lenses at night?
Now Mother..
This movie is rated PG-13 for a lot of violence and general scary stuff. Be prepared to discuss genetic engineering, biological warfare, and vigilantes versus police. There are a handful of lower-level curse words but no sex scenes.
Overall, this was definitely a better movie than any of the other Spider-Mans (Men?) I've seen in the past. There were several really cool scenes and I enjoyed the experience, in general. Did it "wow" me? No. But rarely do I "wow"...so that's not really saying a lot. I think it's a good movie for what it is. If you don't mind loads of CGI and love a good plot hole, this movie is perfect for you! 3/5 stars.
The Amazing Spider-Man
Directed By - Marc Webb
Written By - James Vanderbilt, Alvin Sargent, & Steve Cloves; based on the comic books by Stan Lee & Steve Ditko
Top Billed Cast - Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, and Rhys Ifans
So, Spider-Man. I really hope this is the last set of movies on this subject for at least twenty years. I'm not sure if I can handle any more than that. We all know the story, right? Kid gets bit by a mutant spider and becomes a mutant himself. He gets caught up in all sorts of trouble and the police hate him so he's pretty much a self-made outcast. BUT, he's in love and he's gotta do his best to figure out how to balance his job and his personal life with the fewest number of casualties. You win some, you lose some.
Pros -
* Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield have great chemistry...then again, I think Emma Stone could probably have great chemistry with a rock or even Keanu Reeves.
* The shots that were real were great. I especially loved the cinematography leading up to the funeral; raindrops floating down taut umbrellas made for a fantastic visual.
* I often don't care for scores that incorporate lyrical songs but the scarce use and good choices for this film worked well with the sequences.
* For as little as he said, Garfield did a good job maintaining his accent. We all knew he could, but it still should be noted as possible (I'm lookin' at you Ewan McGregor...)
* Seeing as how this was a remake of sorts, I was worried about the pace and I'm happy to report that I shouldn't have been. There were a couple of laggy-bits but, for the most part, everything moved along nicely.
* I much prefer this movie's Aunt Mae and Uncle Ben over the previous film's. Hats off to casting.
* I was somewhat disappointed that the CGI for Dr. Connors' arm was so good. I really wanted to see that wave effect that can accompany green sleeves.
* I was quite impressed with the likeness of the young Peter to the older Peter.
* I know he can't really help it but I loved the fact that the director's last name was Webb...
Cons -
* While I applauded the green-screen effects on the arm of Dr. Connors, I cannot applaud Rhys Ifans' amputee portrayal. I think the reason why we saw no wave was because he kept that arm glued to his side the whole movie. There should be SOME movement...it wasn't paralyzed.
* Speaking of that arm, I'm going to have to mention costuming here for a second. When you're fitting a real arm that's supposed to not exist in a coat with a full sleeve, do your best to use a lighter material or something and try hard to make the sleeve not look like it belonged in Abe Lincoln's closet.
* I know that since I don't read comic books or know the "real" story, I probably shouldn't complain but...could they not have this movie set in college rather than high-school? I'm just not buying Emma Stone in high school anymore...or that a 17 year old girl would know how to make an antivirus serum...or be that well trusted at a major scientific corporation.
* Oh sound department...what has happened to you? If anybody wants to see an example of poor sound looping, this is the movie to see. Un-synched lips to sound are NOT the worst part of this situation; there was an entire word changed in post. I'm not sure what the actor really said but it definitely was not the line. Did they run out of time to get another take? Was that the best he could do? Unacceptable on TV and definitely not okay in a blockbuster film such as this.
* There were a few times in this movie where I felt like I was back at Universal Studios, ridin' along in the Spider-Man ride. That's not a compliment.
* Did Peter wear his suit under his clothes ALL the time? I ask this question because, if not, dude needs to enter into some quick-change contests.
* Speaking of the suit...how the heck does the mask come off so easy yet look seamless when on? Is there some sort of magic glue not yet mass-produced that gives these results??
* Also, I get that spiders have sticky fingers (so to speak)...but if spiders were wearing tennis shoes...would that stickiness permeate the rubber soles? I don't think so.
* I liked the fact that in this movie, there was an actual contraption that shot the webbing out, however...I didn't like that he apparently always had them on (but they went invisible during certain scenes).
* If you're going to make a movie set in New York City, and you're also making a movie about a giant lizard that is apparently a pied piper...please do your research and spend more money on the CGI creation of the lizards called in.
* Speaking of Mr. Lizard...I don't even know. On the one hand, I was impressed by the make up crew on the real stuff but not so impressed with the CGI crew on the rest of it.
* How does Spider-Man see out of those lenses at night?
Now Mother..
This movie is rated PG-13 for a lot of violence and general scary stuff. Be prepared to discuss genetic engineering, biological warfare, and vigilantes versus police. There are a handful of lower-level curse words but no sex scenes.
Overall, this was definitely a better movie than any of the other Spider-Mans (Men?) I've seen in the past. There were several really cool scenes and I enjoyed the experience, in general. Did it "wow" me? No. But rarely do I "wow"...so that's not really saying a lot. I think it's a good movie for what it is. If you don't mind loads of CGI and love a good plot hole, this movie is perfect for you! 3/5 stars.
Saturday, June 9, 2012
Snow White and the Huntsman: Long title, longer movie.
As a hardcore despiser of anything Twilight...you might be surprised to know that I don't hate Kristen Stewart. I decided to go see this movie because Snow White was pretty much my favorite princess growing up (well, after I wore out my Little Mermaid VHS, it was a close second). I had the costume, I had the stuffed Dopey, I sang the songs; it was a good time. So, with that imprinted love of Snow White, I will pretty much watch anything related to that storyline. I like it. Join me in this journey into the land of make believe and giant white...deer?
Snow White and the Huntsman
Directed By - Rupert Sanders
Written By - Evan Daugherty, John Lee Hancock, & Hossein Amini
Top Billed Cast - Kristin Stewart, Chris Hemsworth, & Charlize Theron
In case you don't know the story of Snow White: no worries, this movie tells the whole thing. What new things they choose to bring to the table, however, are what's mostly going to fill this review. There are just some things you don't mess with. Fairies are one of them.
Pros -
* I love a good crane shot. This movie did really good work with their cranes, I was genuinely impressed. Helicopter shots, cranes, wides, steady-cams....whatever they were using was working for them.
* Along those same lines, props to the set designers (mostly); I thought the colors were brilliant and the contrasts well done.
* While I wasn't a huge fan of her entire performance, I would like to take a moment to (virtually) pat Charlize Theron on the back for being willing to be covered in indeterminate-goo for most of the film. Black goo, white goo, dark red goo...she was in it.
* I was actually not that bothered by the fight sequences in this movie. I rarely like battle scenes because it's so hard to tell who is who and which person I'm supposed to be rooting for (not because I can't tell good from evil but because the costuming is too similar or the shots too quick to actually see who's winning), but this movie did a really good job for the most part with keeping their "bad" people in very different clothing than the "good". The ponytails were a nice touch.
* CGI...I'll probably devote at least two asterisks to this same topic down in the Cons section but there were moments that I gave invisible high-fives to the CGI people. The hairy apple was one of them. I'm not easily grossed out but just thinking about eating a hairy apple? blech.
* Choosing to not have a heavy score in a movie like this is a risky move but it worked in their favor, I think. There were lots of moments of almost complete silence (some wheezing aside) and I felt that better communicated the feelings of the scenes than a dramatic musical background would have.
* Comic relief is alive and well...if you make it far enough to see it. This movie is long, and slow, but if you stick with it you will be treated to some excellent poop jokes. Just thought I'd let you know.
* This last asterisk in this section I'm giving to my good pal, KStew. In a movie where she only said like 30 lines, I felt she did a much better job emoting than in almost any other film I've seen her in. She was consistant and actually smiled a couple of times; it was odd.
CONS -
* This is such a slow and long movie. I made the mistake of downing a bottled water prior to entering the theater so my opinion of the pacing might be a bit askew but I really don't think so. If you know the story of Snow White, which...who doesn't at this point?, then you're probably going to get a bit bored at times.
* There were a lot of moments in this movie that felt like moments in other movies. I know, it's 2012 and there it's getting super hard to be original but, honestly, it's not that hard. Ask me some time about my "dotting certification", originality is not dead. There are ways to have a scary forest without it having such a resemblance to a very famous scary forest in The Princess Bride; I was looking for ROUSes everywhere. There was also a Great Expectations moment as well as Ever After (wrong princess but apparently they didn't care), Narnia, Fern Gully...honestly, the list goes on and on.
* Did the producers blow all their money on paying the actors and not have any left to spend on dialect coaches? Really? I mean, ya hire not one...not two...but THREE non-British actors to play the lead characters in a film supposedly set in England but you don't try for some consistency in dialect? Charlize Theron sounded like she had a speech impediment half the movie and the other half she was slipping in and out of that "accent", then you have KStew who did an okay job (mostly) at keeping her consistency, and then you have Hemsworth and he's Scottish? Did I miss something? There was only one character in the whole movie that was Scottish. I just don't get it. If he's gotta have a different accent than everyone else for some unexplained plot-point then why couldn't he just be Australian? Continuity aside, I mean, really...there are fairies so it can't be because Australia wasn't yet founded.
* On the whole Hemsworth being Scottish for unknown reasons point: why did he narrate the beginning of the movie? If he didn't know who Snow was...why was he telling her story? I'm just confused. If this movie was ever meant to be a stand-alone piece, they really failed at communicating things.
* Can I talk about those fairies for a second? Good. Fairies, in my opinion, should not look like Gollum. They are supposed to be the epitome of all things magically good in movies. At least Harry Potter called their ugly ones "pixies" so it made it better. These were just...naked and wingless and riding around in the "pouches" of Magpies? I just don't even know.
* Since I already mentioned skimping on the budget in certain areas, let's talk about the CGI again. From the naked-Gollum fairies to the rabbits to the big white...deer? I just wasn't impressed. At this point in movie history, I just don't buy the excuse that they can't do better. Jim Henson's puppets were more believable as actual creatures than those things. Not only is CGI more challenging to work with for the actors, but reaching that level of "realness" seems to be way too difficult for most productions. I believed the reindeer in The Santa Claus more than I believed these animals ever walked on the earth. I just find it insulting and pointless. I get that it's make-believe anyway but if Animal Planet can do a better job creating a CGI shark and T-rex on one of their programs, this multimillion dollar production should be embarrassed.
* Apparently, if you're locked in a tower for 7+ years you don't spend any of that time looking for things that might help you escape; you make dolls and pray over nonexistent food. You also don't practice making fire.
* There was one moment, that I won't spoil completely, that felt very much like one of those "hidden" moments in Disney movies where you know the animator got fired later when it was discovered that he/she put *that* in the film. You know what I mean. Have fun looking for it but the entire theater in the showing I watched gasped/laughed out loud when it happened. Fun times.
* In other CGI-related news: apparently Hemsworth was the only actor worthy of getting breath added in-in post production.
* One thing I really really really hate in movies & TV shows is the fake drinking. Not just alcoholic beverages, but when they're carrying around obviously empty coffee cups and trying to make me believe that there is liquid inside them. Can they not put water in them? Or, heck, some sort of weight so that they don't look like they're going to fly away the second they are set down? Anyway, I get that the actors can't be expected to consume liquids in every take of every scene where it is "needed" for their character to drink...but...if said character is only "drinking" a single gulp in said scene before tossing the vessel aside, couldn't he at least PRETEND to swallow something instead of just lifting the thing to his lips? Fake drinking is like acting 101. You learn that right after you learn how to faint.
* This is a legitimate question: why is it that people are rarely dry in period films? Did all the roofs leak? Did they never have dry days on which to hang their clothes? Did the wind never dry their never-brushed-unless-they-were-royalty locks?
* Remember that one time you made out with your wicked Step-Mother? Apparently Snow White didn't either. I dunno about you, but if I kissed a guy that turned out to be my Step-Mom and then I died and came back to life, I might throw up. Ok, it'd probably be low down on the "to-do" list but it would still be there!
* I saw KStew's "invisible" reins. The whole movie is now ruined. Not really, but it was one of my favourite moments.
* For a movie of this length, one hundred and twenty-seven minutes to be exact, there was quite a bit that went unexplained. Like the fact that one of the dwarves was blind. Sure, we all knew it...but still.
* Speaking of unexplained things...did ALL of the girls "drained" by the Queen get re-beautified? If that's the case...did the Huntsman's wife? Do I smell sequel topics?
Now Mother..
This movie is rated PG-13 for action violence, mostly in battle sequences. There is some awkward sister-brother-love that might need some explaining as well as talk about magic and hallucinations. Aside from the violence, though, this movie is fairly "clean" by traditional standards.
Overall, I didn't hate this movie. I laughed...a LOT. KStew did a pretty good job considering the fact that she said even less in this movie than she does normally. I mean, I guess I give some props to the casting director for hiring an actress known WORLDWIDE for not being able to properly emote to play a character with so little to say. But, then again, there is the whole "the role was offered to NINE other actresses before her" thing. That might clear some things up. I'm definitely interested to see if they do end up making two more of these things. I'd rather it not turn into another film series involving KStew giving birth. Nobody wants to see that. Again. 2.5/5 stars
Snow White and the Huntsman
Directed By - Rupert Sanders
Written By - Evan Daugherty, John Lee Hancock, & Hossein Amini
Top Billed Cast - Kristin Stewart, Chris Hemsworth, & Charlize Theron
In case you don't know the story of Snow White: no worries, this movie tells the whole thing. What new things they choose to bring to the table, however, are what's mostly going to fill this review. There are just some things you don't mess with. Fairies are one of them.
Pros -
* I love a good crane shot. This movie did really good work with their cranes, I was genuinely impressed. Helicopter shots, cranes, wides, steady-cams....whatever they were using was working for them.
* Along those same lines, props to the set designers (mostly); I thought the colors were brilliant and the contrasts well done.
* While I wasn't a huge fan of her entire performance, I would like to take a moment to (virtually) pat Charlize Theron on the back for being willing to be covered in indeterminate-goo for most of the film. Black goo, white goo, dark red goo...she was in it.
* I was actually not that bothered by the fight sequences in this movie. I rarely like battle scenes because it's so hard to tell who is who and which person I'm supposed to be rooting for (not because I can't tell good from evil but because the costuming is too similar or the shots too quick to actually see who's winning), but this movie did a really good job for the most part with keeping their "bad" people in very different clothing than the "good". The ponytails were a nice touch.
* CGI...I'll probably devote at least two asterisks to this same topic down in the Cons section but there were moments that I gave invisible high-fives to the CGI people. The hairy apple was one of them. I'm not easily grossed out but just thinking about eating a hairy apple? blech.
* Choosing to not have a heavy score in a movie like this is a risky move but it worked in their favor, I think. There were lots of moments of almost complete silence (some wheezing aside) and I felt that better communicated the feelings of the scenes than a dramatic musical background would have.
* Comic relief is alive and well...if you make it far enough to see it. This movie is long, and slow, but if you stick with it you will be treated to some excellent poop jokes. Just thought I'd let you know.
* This last asterisk in this section I'm giving to my good pal, KStew. In a movie where she only said like 30 lines, I felt she did a much better job emoting than in almost any other film I've seen her in. She was consistant and actually smiled a couple of times; it was odd.
CONS -
* This is such a slow and long movie. I made the mistake of downing a bottled water prior to entering the theater so my opinion of the pacing might be a bit askew but I really don't think so. If you know the story of Snow White, which...who doesn't at this point?, then you're probably going to get a bit bored at times.
* There were a lot of moments in this movie that felt like moments in other movies. I know, it's 2012 and there it's getting super hard to be original but, honestly, it's not that hard. Ask me some time about my "dotting certification", originality is not dead. There are ways to have a scary forest without it having such a resemblance to a very famous scary forest in The Princess Bride; I was looking for ROUSes everywhere. There was also a Great Expectations moment as well as Ever After (wrong princess but apparently they didn't care), Narnia, Fern Gully...honestly, the list goes on and on.
* Did the producers blow all their money on paying the actors and not have any left to spend on dialect coaches? Really? I mean, ya hire not one...not two...but THREE non-British actors to play the lead characters in a film supposedly set in England but you don't try for some consistency in dialect? Charlize Theron sounded like she had a speech impediment half the movie and the other half she was slipping in and out of that "accent", then you have KStew who did an okay job (mostly) at keeping her consistency, and then you have Hemsworth and he's Scottish? Did I miss something? There was only one character in the whole movie that was Scottish. I just don't get it. If he's gotta have a different accent than everyone else for some unexplained plot-point then why couldn't he just be Australian? Continuity aside, I mean, really...there are fairies so it can't be because Australia wasn't yet founded.
* On the whole Hemsworth being Scottish for unknown reasons point: why did he narrate the beginning of the movie? If he didn't know who Snow was...why was he telling her story? I'm just confused. If this movie was ever meant to be a stand-alone piece, they really failed at communicating things.
* Can I talk about those fairies for a second? Good. Fairies, in my opinion, should not look like Gollum. They are supposed to be the epitome of all things magically good in movies. At least Harry Potter called their ugly ones "pixies" so it made it better. These were just...naked and wingless and riding around in the "pouches" of Magpies? I just don't even know.
* Since I already mentioned skimping on the budget in certain areas, let's talk about the CGI again. From the naked-Gollum fairies to the rabbits to the big white...deer? I just wasn't impressed. At this point in movie history, I just don't buy the excuse that they can't do better. Jim Henson's puppets were more believable as actual creatures than those things. Not only is CGI more challenging to work with for the actors, but reaching that level of "realness" seems to be way too difficult for most productions. I believed the reindeer in The Santa Claus more than I believed these animals ever walked on the earth. I just find it insulting and pointless. I get that it's make-believe anyway but if Animal Planet can do a better job creating a CGI shark and T-rex on one of their programs, this multimillion dollar production should be embarrassed.
* Apparently, if you're locked in a tower for 7+ years you don't spend any of that time looking for things that might help you escape; you make dolls and pray over nonexistent food. You also don't practice making fire.
* There was one moment, that I won't spoil completely, that felt very much like one of those "hidden" moments in Disney movies where you know the animator got fired later when it was discovered that he/she put *that* in the film. You know what I mean. Have fun looking for it but the entire theater in the showing I watched gasped/laughed out loud when it happened. Fun times.
* In other CGI-related news: apparently Hemsworth was the only actor worthy of getting breath added in-in post production.
* One thing I really really really hate in movies & TV shows is the fake drinking. Not just alcoholic beverages, but when they're carrying around obviously empty coffee cups and trying to make me believe that there is liquid inside them. Can they not put water in them? Or, heck, some sort of weight so that they don't look like they're going to fly away the second they are set down? Anyway, I get that the actors can't be expected to consume liquids in every take of every scene where it is "needed" for their character to drink...but...if said character is only "drinking" a single gulp in said scene before tossing the vessel aside, couldn't he at least PRETEND to swallow something instead of just lifting the thing to his lips? Fake drinking is like acting 101. You learn that right after you learn how to faint.
* This is a legitimate question: why is it that people are rarely dry in period films? Did all the roofs leak? Did they never have dry days on which to hang their clothes? Did the wind never dry their never-brushed-unless-they-were-royalty locks?
* Remember that one time you made out with your wicked Step-Mother? Apparently Snow White didn't either. I dunno about you, but if I kissed a guy that turned out to be my Step-Mom and then I died and came back to life, I might throw up. Ok, it'd probably be low down on the "to-do" list but it would still be there!
* I saw KStew's "invisible" reins. The whole movie is now ruined. Not really, but it was one of my favourite moments.
* For a movie of this length, one hundred and twenty-seven minutes to be exact, there was quite a bit that went unexplained. Like the fact that one of the dwarves was blind. Sure, we all knew it...but still.
* Speaking of unexplained things...did ALL of the girls "drained" by the Queen get re-beautified? If that's the case...did the Huntsman's wife? Do I smell sequel topics?
Now Mother..
This movie is rated PG-13 for action violence, mostly in battle sequences. There is some awkward sister-brother-love that might need some explaining as well as talk about magic and hallucinations. Aside from the violence, though, this movie is fairly "clean" by traditional standards.
Overall, I didn't hate this movie. I laughed...a LOT. KStew did a pretty good job considering the fact that she said even less in this movie than she does normally. I mean, I guess I give some props to the casting director for hiring an actress known WORLDWIDE for not being able to properly emote to play a character with so little to say. But, then again, there is the whole "the role was offered to NINE other actresses before her" thing. That might clear some things up. I'm definitely interested to see if they do end up making two more of these things. I'd rather it not turn into another film series involving KStew giving birth. Nobody wants to see that. Again. 2.5/5 stars
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)