Posted on July 12, 2007 in Books
1. In your opinion, what is the best translation of a book to a movie?
2. The worst?
3. Had you read the book before seeing the movie, and did that make a difference? (Personally, all other things being equal, I usually prefer whichever I was introduced to first.) – BTT
Well, a couple of my favourite movies are the 2003 Peter Pan and The Princess Bride. Both with books I adore and films that one can see over and over again. I think a lot of book to movie translations are decent. The Hours is another well done film adaptation.
I probably do know some bad adaptations because I watch a lot of movies and read a lot of books. I purposefully seek it out some times. Most of the time, the adaptations just turn out as simply as boring movies because the translation has been hard to capture.
In general, I tend to read the book before the movie. I try to any way. I read Trainspotting before seeing the movie, and it made the difference I think because it made more sens. I remember how other people watching it didn’t seem to understand it (it’s trippy), but having read the book, it was less disorientating. I usually prefer the book to the movie because there are some things films don’t capture me the same way. There are some adaptations that I love just as much as the book.
Speaking of which, I should post that list of adaptations I have seen so far.
Posted on June 28, 2007 in Movies
This 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.
Posted on June 19, 2007 in Movies
Brilliant. 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.
Posted on June 7, 2007 in Movies
Based 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.
Posted on June 6, 2007 in Movies
I 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.
Posted on June 3, 2007 in Movies
The 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.
Posted on May 8, 2007 in Books, Movies
I’ve had this book for awhile, but I was about averse to starting it thinking it was long. Partly because I read Emma last November, and it took me awhile since it was November and Emma is the longest of the Austen books. My copy of NA just looked long, and it did not take me long to read. I liked it even though Cathy was a bit silly in the middle with her over reactive imagination. She is naive, but not so irritating as other characters named Catherine (hello, Wuthering Heights). Mr Tilney amused me with the teasing. Now, NA is Austen’s satire and mocking of gothic novels which makes the novel a bit meta in the nice way. I don’t think NA is nearly as enjoyable or satisfying as Persuasion or Pride and Prejudice (my favourites), but it’s light, quick, and moved adequately enough.
This ITV Jane Austen season adaptation is my second from the season. I previously saw Persuasion which I enjoyed for all its cheesy ending. A lot of people find this to have been the best of the three adaptations, and I can see why because it was fun and witty. Andrew Davies adapted it, and he really is one of the best at adapting scripts having done the 1995 P&P, Wives and Daughters (two of my favourite period dramas) and the upcoming Sense and Sensibility. He seems to have a lot of fun with NA because it was very charming with added fantasy scenes. I also thought the casting was good on this; I enjoyed the ITV Persuasion for a similar reason. I really liked JJ Feild as Mr Tilney; he doesn’t look conventionally handsome in pictures, but he lends himself well to the character. I remember watching a young Felicity Jones in The Worst Witch and Weirdsister College. I found her amiable and sweet in this, and both had nice chemistry too. So, I’m two for two now for the JA season. I’ll have to watch Mansfield Park now to see if I like that too, but I haven’t and don’t plan on reading MP for awhile. Though, I’m already predisposed to Billie Piper. I’ll have an excuse to see JJ Feild again in The Ruby in the Smoke (by Philip Pullman), also starring Piper, which I plan to read and watch sometime in the near future.
Posted on April 15, 2007 in Movies
Michael (Ulrich Thomsen) has everything under control: a successful military career, a beautiful wife (Connie Nielsen) and two daughters. His younger brother Jannik (Nikolaj Lie Kaas) is a drifter living on the edge of the law. When Michael is sent to Afghanistan on a UN mission, the balance between the two brothers changes forever. Michael is presumed dead, and Sarah is comforted by Jannik who becomes more responsible and capable as a friend and uncle to the girls. Michael is captured, and returns home after a horrible experience, but his trauma can not be helped as things are irrevocably changed in the family.
How often do I see Danish films? I think this is my second after Babette’s Feast. I’ve wanted to watch this one for awhile having heard good things overall, the performances notably. It was quite emotional, and Michael’s experiences in Afghanistan were provocative. The movie is about PTSD, families, grief, and the tragedy of life. Michael’s experience may be an exception, but his coping and aftermath are not to a soldier. I knew watching the movie that were not be a clear-cut or happy ending, but I think it was satisfying with a little hope. A lot of the film is done with handheld camera making the scenes more visceral and documentary. The performances by all the cast are good here, and Connie Neilsen looks luminescent and almost angelic in the whole movie. I liked her character a lot, and it wasn’t contrite to see how both brothers would find her beautiful. Both Thomsen and Klaas were splendid, and the triangle was underplayed compared to what you would see in most films.
Posted on March 23, 2007 in Movies
Commentary on movies I’ve seen each month. Annual list.
The Departed (04-5 03 07): Good Scorsese. Now, I have to watch the original again. I really liked DiCaprio in this.
The Holiday (08 03 07): I only watched is for Kate Winslet.
Borat (10 03 07): Some of it was funny. It’s a bit sad, really.
Little Miss Sunshine (11 03 07): Nice, good, and funny.
Casino Royale (19 03 07): I grew up with James Bond. My Dad loves the franchise. I’ve seen most of the Bond movies except Oh Her Majesty’s Secret Service so don’t ask me about Lazenby, but I believe each Bond is unique and different. I don’t pick favourites among them any more. Given that, I really liked this movie. I found the last couple of Bond movies pedantic compared to this. I have not read any of the Bond books or any spy novels; not for dislike, but lack of chance. Having said that, this movie seemed to be more like an actual spy novel with a plot rather than a screenplay someone put forth so the franchise could keep going. I really did like Pierce Brosnan’s Bond, but I found that Daniel Craig was raw in his portrayal. His emotional side was a tad more soft and revealing, which makes me more excited that he’s going to Asriel. Eva Green, the main Bond girl of this film, is simply beautiful and I really look forward to her in The Golden Compass as well.
Fruits Basket (21-22 03 07): Every episode is so emotional. I watched this in Japanese with French subtitles which got me brushing up on the latter. I remember how obsessed everyone was with the anime when it first came out in Japan. Due to the fact that it ran concurrent with the manga, and probably thought there would be a second season, a couple of the episodes were filler-ish. I think it would have made a good second season even though some of the endings to the manga were rather lame. Still, it ended on a beautiful note with the 26 eps.
Posted on March 16, 2007 in Books, Food, Movies
The disappearing bees thing has been worrying me for a bit. I love honey, and I love bees. They are quite incredible creatures and honey is liquid gold. I found a podcast from earthfiles.com (episode 10) discussing it. Did you know that 1/3 of human food supply is directly affected by bees with another 30% indirectly. It would be enough for this to signal some environmental hazard and doom. Where have all the bees gone?
I must read that copy of Robbing the Bees: A Biography of Honey–The Sweet Liquid Gold that Seduced the World by Holley Bishop that I have in the house. I’ve had since before the bees did a Houdini and when I read The Secret Life of Bees by Sue Monk Kidd.
On a more positive note, I just got Casino Royale since my Dad is a Bond fan. I may not watch it this weekend, but it reminds me that Daniel Craig is playing Lord Asriel in His Dark Materials: The Golden Compass. I don’t go to movies in theatres often, but I am definitely going to see this on the opening weekend in November. The books are some of my favourites; I’ve been tracking the movies since well before they started production in 06 on Bridges to the Stars. Philip Pullman recently wrote a piece at the Sunday Times about the film. He seems very excited which makes me a fan doubly excited. He speaks of the fact that Nicole Kidman was his original pick for Mrs. Coulter, and it’s great that they got her because she is perfect casting. Overall, signs are pointing for a favourable adaptation.
Images from Yahoo! Movies:
