Category: Movies

Ocean's 13When I watched Ocean’s 12 a few months ago, I found it fine, not great. Only later did I realize how stupid the plot was, but it didn’t really occur to me right away because one doesn’t really watch these films for plot. Though I must say this one was more thought out than its predecessor, but I found the latter more pretty only because they were in Europe. This one goes back to being solely Las Vegas with a casino oriented plot, just like the first one. Al Pacino and Ellen Barkin come for this ride, not to mention little bits from Julian Sands and Eddie Izzard (reprising). So I wouldn’t say I was a big fan of Clooney, Pitt, etc., but I don’t dislike the guys, and they honestly look like they enjoyed making this movie. I like a good blockbuster where it’s light, fun, and the cast looks like they don’t mind being there either. The cast also have chemistry which tells me they like being around each other too. It’s not the best comedy, nor the most profound, but Steven Soderbergh has his nice visual cues and editing in the movie. All in all, not a total waste of a couple of hours, and if you like these guys and accept this for what it is, it’s not bad way to spend your time.

Things are slowly going to get busier from here on out so I have less time to do the things I like which include blogging so I’ve decided to rec books and movies I’ve seen previously, but not formally reviewed on this blog. I’m not going to write full reviews because t’s usually been some time since I’ve read them. I am also going to aim to reccommend books and films that are relatively under rated.

I did review both of these on allconsuming.net, so I’ve included them which I wrote over a year ago.

The Leopard by Giuseppe di Lampedusa and film directed by Luchino Visconti

The Leopard - film“I learned about the movie and book from Roger Ebert’s Great Movies II. I read the novel first, and I enjoyed that. This adaptation does the book justice. Both of them have the same maudlin and sad nostalgia that everyone may not appreciate, but they are lovely. The movie is a beautiful period piece. Burt Lancaster said this was his best work, and he captures the character very well. If you like sentimental, beautiful, historical, foreign movies, I’d recommend this.”

A Complete Maus: A Survivor’s Tale by Art Spiegelman

“I tried to find this before I went to Poland, but I’m glad I read this after I came back. Having seen Auschwitz and other camps, and met Holocaust survivors, I’m able to visualize this book more. It’s very powerful in its understated imagery. I love the personal and meta commentary. It’s deeply reflective and introspective.

Books to Movies Challenge

Once upon a time, I use to read a lot more books a year than I do now, and honestly do not think that I can complete all my reading challenges for 2007 because my life will start getting hectic again beginning next month. Though, what Nymeth says is right, it’s not the end of the world if I don’t complete them. So here are choices for the Book to Movie challenges which I couldn’t resist because this is the sort of thing that I do often enough that I even keep track of it seen in the previous post.

The challenge is to select three books that were made into movies. It runs from September 1 to December 1. I plan on doing book and movie comparisons for at least two of the below.

1. Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier. I’ve already seen the film, but I’ve been meaning to read this for awhile. Also being read for the Something About Me Challenge. – Completed

2. Little Children by Tom Perrotta. – Completed

3. Running with Scissors: A Memoir by Augusten Burroughs. – Completed

Alternates:
Not because I’ll have free time, but in the case I don’t manage a copy of one of the above, and I like alternates.

Minority Report by Philip K. Dick.
Mary Poppins by P. L. Travers.
Anne of Green Gables by L. M. Montogomery.
Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas.
Friday Night Lights by Buzz Bissinger. Most unlikely, but I love the TV show and have yet to read the book or see the film.

In 2004, I began to compile a list of movies I’ve seen based on books I’ve read. I have updated it ever since, and it’s just the ones I can remember because I read many books and watch many films. They are listed by the time I either finished the book or the movie (and I list accordingly which was first). Only things that I have read and seen are on this list. This list is updated periodically a couple times every year when necessary.

Continue reading →

This book reminded me a bit of To Kill a Mockingbird in its setting and main characters. Both books takes place in the south. While the core themes of it differ, both are essentially stories about growing up. Katherine Paterson seems to capture childhood so well. When Jess and Leslie create and explore Terabithia, I remember my own childhood of imagining other worlds, fantastic creatures and adventures. They even refer to Narnia. I remember reading that series, and trying desperately to find a wardrobe. I’m sure I hid in a wardrobe once, but alas, not gateways. The only thing that bothered me about this book is that I predicted the ending early on, and initially found it a bit contrite. I do not blame the book because if I had read it when I was 10, I probably would not have found it contrived since now I’m marred by years of books, movies and television. It’s hard for me to review very well written books, especially children’s ones such as this because it just comes down to the writer’s ability to write prose and experiences that capture readers. Paterson allowed me to be nostalgic, and I only wish I had read this when I was younger because I know I would have loved it and understood it even more than I do now.

The movie was adapted by Disney this year. Overall, I think they did a decent job. It could have been a lot worse, and while they changed some things such as the time setting of the book (present day instead of the 1970s in the book) and other little details, I found they kept the important things and tried to accentuate certain details the book was subtle yet important on (Jess’s father and their relationship). I do not think the movie is a replacement is for the very well written book about growing up and the values of imagination and friendship. I liked the movie well enough, and considering what I’ve heard of other films in this demographic, it probably is good as a stand alone film and more worth kids’ (and adults too) time.

84, Charing Cross Road by Helene Hanff84, Charing Cross Road (1970) is the documented real life twenty year correspondence between New York write Helene Hanff and London bookseller Frank Doel. It’s been some time since I’ve read the book, but I watched the film today so it brings me memories about the lovely epistolary memoirs. I think anyone who truly loves books should read it because Ms Hanff expresses so many views of why we love prose, poetry (like her, I’m a Donne and Blake girl), and beautifully bound books. The letters are a testament to the relationships that are born and thrive under mutual, ardent bibliophilia. It’s quite a short book, and quite satisfying in my opinion since I love letters almost as much as I love books.

The movie was made  in 1986 and stars Anne Bancroft as Helene, Anthony Hopkins as Frank, and features Judi Dench as Nora Doel. Bancroft did well here, and it was refreshing seeing Hopkins and Dench so young. I think it’s a fine adaptation that not long expresses the relationships from the book and more, but it features all the good things that come out of a period piece drama. There are so many nice moments of detail about the time including the rationing in post-war Britain and the student protests of the 1960s. A nice companion to the book with lovely historical visual detail.

Knitting: I got my Ravelry invite finally this past weekend which means I’ve been spending my merry time over there. If you’re on it, add me as I am “athenablue”. For knitting, I am still dismayed by the Swallowtail Shawl, but I cast on Shedir this week using Rowan Felted Tweed. I love the yarn. The yarn is quite dark, so I hope the cables show up well. I’m debating about cabling without a cable needle. I’ve lot both of my cable needles at the moment.

Books: Well, I’ve read Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows this past weekend. I doubt I will make a blog post for long time. I started Beowulf last week, but have yet to delve more deeply. I also acquired the HP&DH audiobook as you see on the bottom. Chapter 33 is the only one I’ve reread so far.

Movies: Last thursday, I rewatched Roman Holiday with a couple of others who had not seen it. I don’t tend to rewatch movies often, but it was nice to do so. I laughed and found it wonderfully dated. I also watched Kitty Foyle during the weekend, the first new old movie I haven’t seen in a long time. Ginger Rogers was very good in it. She can dance and act it seems.

Fitness: So behind. Did yoga on saturday, intend to run again next month. Will start do pilates again.

—————-
Now playing: Stephen Fry – Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows — Disc 18 – Chapter 33
via FoxyTunes

Jane Eyre Masterpiece TheatreThis is at least the fifth adaptation of Jane Eyre that I have seen. In 2005, I saw almost every major JE adaptation including the BBC version with Samantha Morton and Ciarin Hinds, the 1940s Orson Welles version, the 1983 TV version with Timothy Dalton, and the Franco Zeffirelli version with William Hurt. The only other notable JE adaptations I have not seen are the 1973 TV version and the 1970 film version. Clearly, I love the book. Before watching this Masterpiece Theatre version, one of my favourite versions was the 1983 Timothy Dalton TV version. Yes, he is too conventionally handsome to be Mr Rochester, and the production values were practically nil, but my goodness was he good in it. He made it for me. I’m delighted to say that I love this Masterpiece version even more because it had good acting, better production values, and I found the adapted screenplay had just the right length. They cut just enough, and added the details to Jane and Mr Rochester’s relationship that I often felt lacking in other adaptations. I only remembered after that Toby Stephens was the Bond villain in Die Another Day, and he was Duke Orisno in Twelfth Night. I also completely forgot that his mother is Dame Maggie Smith. There are only fifty actors in Britain, and they tend to be related and star in Doctor Who or Harry Potter movies. I found it hard to remember TS’s roles because he was very much the part. He and Ruth Wilson had great chemistry, and it was romantic enough that I didn’t roll my eyes (though, I don’t think I would for this story). Wilson could be too pretty to be called plain, and she bears a striking resemblance to a friend of mine especially with her hair down. All in all, a very good adaptation, but I’ve come to expect good things from Masterpiece Theatre.

Hot FuzzBrilliant. Having liked Shaun of the Dead, I was looking forward to this and had notions that it would be good. Stylistically, I love the writing, humor, and the mix of comedy and drama that Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright showcase in these two movies. Respectively, I find Pegg smart, funny, and everyman attractive on screen presence. I like Wright’s choices in rapid fire editing and almost surreal storytelling. The film is homage with spoofish qualities to action and cop movies. I’ve watched and enjoyed a number of action blockbuster movies myself. Parts of the movie, especially the editing and reminded me of CSI. The cast was fabulous. Having mentioned Pegg, his chemistry with Nick Frost is as good as ever. I always like Bill Nighy, Jim Broadbent, and I adore Timothy Dalton. It’s really great to see him in mainstream films again, especially in a funny action movie. As with all action/cop movies, they are guy and buddy movies, but this film is damn funny that just as with SotD, girls will enjoy it if they get the sense of humor. I am one of these girls, and I also like a gun filled action movie once in awhile. Definitely going to the feel-good rewatch collection.

Perfume: The Story of a MurdererBased on the book of the same name by German writer Patrick Süskind, several directors including Stanely Kubrick and Martin Scorcesse pronounced the film unadaptable. I haven’t read the book, and as I often do when I happen to watch the movie before the book, I wish I did. Not that it would make things less odd, but it would leave me feeling less disjointed afterwards. I know that if I had not read Trainspotting, the movie would have been more confusing. This story takes place in 18th century France, and it’s shot very well. I think the directing, design, and cinematography are the best things about the film along with the casting. I wanted to see the movie based on the ensemble cast including Dustin Hoffman and Alan Rickman, two of my favourites. Rachel Hurd-Wood who played Wendy in 2003’s Peter Pan was also in it with well done dye job on her red hair which I don’t think is her natural hair colour. The protagonist is played by British actor Ben Whishaw whose cheekbones could glass for all I know. The story is unique though, and the protagonist is an antihero rather than a clear cut out character to sympathise with. The book is apparently classified as Magical Realism which explains a lot. The ending is weird and offbeat, and the whole film is different than most stories or films. I think the film can be accused of being pedantic and absurd by others. I don’t know if I would recommend the film, but I don’t hate it. Then again, I rarely truly dislike a book or a film. I think there are positive aspects to almost everything. In this film’s case, the visuals, the casting, and the style of shooting. I may seek out the book, but not soon.

On a related note, I have kept a list of every book to movie adaptation I have read and then seen or vice versa. I’ll post the list in the near future. Now, I need to get started on Watership Down.

28 Days LaterI never watch horror movies. When I got this movie last month, it was on a whim because it was around the time of the release of the sequel, I had heard good things about it, and Christopher Eccleston is in it. Since I don’t generally care for horror or scary movies, I can’t say if it was a good movie of its genre, but certainly an entertaining film overall. The beginning was pretty slow, but I noticed the nice soundtrack which only got better as did the plot, characters, settings, and scariness of the film. Yes, it reminded me of Shaun of the Dead a lot, but not in the psychologically scary parts surrounding Christopher Eccleston’s character. It was the fear of what happens to people in post-apocalyptic and dystopian worlds, not of the zombies. As usual, I’m pleased with CE’s work here even if the character was sometimes both dimensional (his psychology) and flat (bit stereotypical). The equally attractive Cillian Murphy really carries the film because slowly, his and the other characters are revealed to us and shown to be resilient capable survivors. There’s actual character growth. The screenplay is quite good then. Even though I haven’t seen any horror movies, I have a feeling the writing is better than most of the genre. I like that it was an original screenplay rather than adapted from novel, short story, graphic novel or comic book which often happens in science fiction. Director Danny Boyle said the writer Alex Garland cited The Day of the Triffids by John Wyndam as an inspiration for the book which I mentioned the other day. I liked the ending which I read was the original one. The sequel does not have any of the original cast, and there is apparently to be a third. I’m not quite sure I will seek out the sequels in the near future even if I did like this one. All because I liked this movie doesn’t mean I’ll make a habit of watching more horror films.

On a lighter note, here is a hilarious interview Time interview with George Clooney, Matt Damon, Ellen Barkin and Brad Pitt. I really want to hang out with these people.

The QueenThe screenwriter Peter Morgan said he wrote about a “cold, emotionally detached, haughty…prickly… out-of-touch bigot,” but due to people’s adoration of the Queen, they feel he wrote her with compassion. It’s a good screenplay, and an interesting movie to make since it does portray real people still alive. What really makes the movie is the acting; though, I wouldn’t expect anything less when I watch British films or television. I think Helen Mirren is not only talented, but very beautiful. Maybe it is because I do like the Queen, but I think what makes this movie good, and the Queen sympathetic is the portrayal by the magnificent Mirren, supported by Michael Sheen (Tony Blair), James Cromwell (Prince Philip), and others. Watching the film now coincides with Blair’s end as PM, so it was odd remembering that time. I can’t believe it’s been ten years of anything; I remember 1997 so well. I really never understood the backlash. I liked Diana as much as the next person, but the sentiments against the Queen and family seemed unnecessarily cruel. Maybe I was too young then to really appreciate the situation and Diana’s impact because my Dad always adored her and didn’t care for the family. He still thinks Charles is an idiot; I think the film was slightly more toward that view too actually. I don’t consider myself a Monarchist, but I have always liked the Queen. I’ve always found her an enigmatic but strong character. I think only the steeliness and elegance of Mirren could pull it off. Mirren said in her Oscar speech the movie was for the Queen for her “courage and consistency” over the years who while cold, difficult, prickly or not, Mirren flew and carried this film. Goodness, I hope I look half as good and as graceful as Helen Mirren when I am older. On a final note, I dislike hunting for sport, but I really hope the Stag was real in the first scene and not CGI, but definitely fake in the last one. Seriously, I really want to go to Scotland now.