Posts tagged review

This is a bit of a cheat since this book will probably never be adapted for the big screen. Nevertheless it is a book of stories about Sherlock Holmes and since we got to watch a new Holmes movie this past Christmas (thanks Guy Ritchie!), I think I’m allowed to indulge in some Sherlockian fun.

First I’ll admit that I don’t remember reading any of Doyle’s books. I came to love the character by watching Jeremy Brett play Holmes on television in the 1980s and 1990s. Brett is my standard by which all other Holmes impersonators are measured, so you can imagine how I feel about Downey Jr’s and Cumberbatch’s turn at the pipe (except Cumberbatch doesn’t even smoke a pipe!) Arrgh!

*deep breath* 

Read more …

“We love Scorsese, yes, yes we do!”

(Picture source: GK Films)

Of all the movie adaptations I’ve seen and reviewed on this blog, this is by far the best one yet. It is the best not because the source material was essentially a picture book, it’s more due to the fact that both screenwriter John Logan and director Martin Scorsese have managed to elevate a simple story into an enchanting tale that captures the magic of movies and why we all worship at its altar. Scorsese even manages to sneak in a little lesson on early cinema history.

Like ornaments on a Christmas tree, the book essentially serves as a spine Logan uses to hang the stories of new characters he’s created just for this two-hour adaptation. And they work out pretty well. The surprise is that these are not cold bodies created to fill the frame but fleshed-out characters who are looking for a way home, whatever home means for each of them.

I love this movie because it lovingly reminds us why we are moviegoers. To escape, yes, most certainly. Movies inspire us and heal us from the wounds of daily living. At one point in the movie, Méliès says movies are where dreams are made. Movie studios often forget we need to root for the characters onscreen because we want to be like them or see something of ourselves in these characters. I don’t know about you but I can’t relate to my heroes if killing and blowing things up are their only motivations. Instead, I’d like to think most of us are looking for the meaning behind the untidiness that life creates in its wake. Scorsese understands this and I think that’s why he’s such a successful and respected filmmaker. While many others try to cram as many things into a frame (yeah James Cameron, Michael Bay, I’m looking at you guys), Scorsese subtracts as much as he can, sometimes leaving us with only a big talking head (and Sacha Baron Cohen’s big nose). I’ve never seen 3D shot this way and I hope more directors will follow his lead. I also love how he uses a shallow depth of field to draw the audience into the 3D world he’s created, and the gold, browns, and blues hues that dominate every frame. Not only is this movie pretty to look at, the sound effects are wonderful it makes me think I’m in a clock.

There were definitely some restless people in the theatre with me. If you had read the book beforehand, you would just sit back and enjoy the meandering ways the story seems to take to reach the end. But pre-reading is not a prerequisite. I recognized some pictures from the book but even they get retouched by the Scorsese.

The best part though is seeing Méliès footage on the big screen. A huge wave of nostalgia swept over me as scenes from The Trip to the Moon and his other iconic films were shown, no doubt made even more powerful by the 3D effect. Scorsese also showed what it would have been like to shoot a Méliès scene, and for a cinephile like myself who love behind-the-scene stuff just as much as movies, it was pure heaven.

Rating: If all history classes were this enjoyable, I would never fall asleep in school ever again. You must watch this movie in 3D as it was created to be seen and enjoyed this way.

You either love or hate Neil LaBute. If you’ve seen enough of his movies like I have, you’ll realize his stories challenge the social norm, like Lakeview Terrace where a black police officer wages a racist vendetta against his interracial neighbours or LaBute’s more well-known film In the Company of Men where a misogynist executive toys with the emotions of a female subordinate. So of course LaBute’s the perfect man to take on the task of adapting Possession, A.S. Byatt’s novel that explores the sexual mores of the Victorian era though to make the film more marketable, LaBute has chosen (and rightly so) to give the mystery/treasure hunt aspect of the story a more prominent role in the adaptation. Academic scholars Roland and Maud trace a secret illicit relationship between two Victorian poets Randolph Ash and Christabel LaMotte through letters and their literary works, and in the process the scholars stumble upon a dark secret that had eventually destroyed that relationship. LaBute and his editor do a good job moving seamlessly between the two time periods. In one particular scene, his DVD commentary reveals a neat theatre trick that was used to shift between periods. 

Byatt’s evocative romantic poetry has been distilled into subtext: knowing glances and pregnant pauses fully realized thanks to a talented cast made up of hugely underrated British and American actors. Jennifer Ehle is best known to US audiences as Elizabeth Bennett in Colin Firth’s Pride and Prejudice series. She fills the screen with her large presence and were it not for the equally talented Jeremy Northam, she would have stolen every scene. The dialogue is punctuated with dry witty moments, especially the lines given to Toby Stephens, Tom Hollander, and Trevor Eve (the three T’s!). And then there’s Aaron Eckhart. It’s a role early in his career and it’s my favourite one of all. His Roland is endearing in its academic geekiness and a lot less stuffy than the character in the book. Gwyneth Paltrow’s performance reminds me of a more uptight Pepper Potts, the straight man to Roland’s brash “American” personality.

Rating: A hugely underrated movie with great performances, a great script, and wonderful direction. Though not entirely true to the original book, it is true to its essence and its passion.

I’ve never been a fan of chick-lit, but One Day by British author David Nicholls is what I imagine good chick-lit is like—- funny, poignant, romantic without being overly cheesy, good supporting characters that don’t fade into the background, all that with an ending that still manages to surprise.

Any story worth telling has a “hook” and One Day has a pretty good one: we visit our two characters’ lives on the same date every year for twenty years. Dexter, the boy who always wanted to be famous but only somehow manages to become a drunk infamous reality/variety show host. He’s friends slash lovers slash emotional parasite with Emma, a school mate whom he had a one-night stand on the eve of their university graduation. I initially thought the hook was gimmicky but the authenticity of the stories told over time managed to change my mind.

Read more …

Imagine a story about a man who used his good looks to sleep his way to the top. Now imagine this story written by a late 19th century writer. That in essence is Bel Ami (“Pretty Boy” in French), author Guy de Maupassant’s second novel. What a refreshing role reversal, I thought. 

It starts off very much like a fairy tale: once upon a time, a young man George Duroy wanders up and down the fashionable streets of post-revolution Paris, wishing desperately to be something more, more than a young war veteran borne from French peasant stock with barely enough money to buy his next meal. But the one thing George has going for him is luck. He bumps into a former comrade who takes him under his wing and gives him a job at a minor Paris newspaper. Very soon, George’s good looks gains him access into the world of the political elite, not to mention the hearts and bedrooms of several women, including the wife of the helpful former comrade. Stepping on the backs of several mistresses and his own wife, George’s star rises rapidly in Parisian society, exactly like a talentless reality star in today’s world, only famous for being at the right place at the right time.

The book provides an interesting social commentary at Parisian society at that time. Even after a bloody revolution ridding the country of royalty, Parisians still retain an elitist social structure based on wealth and power. The book describes some of these affluence in great detail, to the point of being farcical.

In some way we’re all rooting for George. Even though he was not born with all privileges of the wealthy, he still manages to fool his way to the top. It is inevitable that he becomes more ruthless and intentionally destroys many lives to fuel his social ascent. It is not that the women he takes advantage of are weak. With the exception of one, the women often get what they want out of their relationship with George. George is as much of an escape from their lives as they are to his.

Guy de Maupassant was well-known for his short stories and the prose is equally tight in this novel (though I have to admit the archaic language made some of the descriptions rather boring to read.) The story is remarkably contemporary which is probably why it’s being adapted into a film. It’ll be interesting to see if the adaptation focuses more on being a period piece or a dramatic piece.

Rating: Slow at first it’s a good read at the end. Persistence will pay off but only if you love reading classics.

The elephant in the room brought them together (This is my favourite shot in the entire movie.)

(Picture source: David James, Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation)

I left this movie thinking about eyes, actor Robert Pattinson’s big blues, the elephant’s enormous gentle brown liquid ones, and even Christoph Waltz’s creepy evil peepers. It’s not hard since Director Francis Lawrence seems obsessed with closeups. But if the eyes are the windows to our souls, the shades were kept mostly closed throughout this movie and no one seems to be home. Certainly not for the lack of trying though.

Robert Pattinson plays Jacob, a young man who has lost everything after the death of his parents. With nothing to lose, he jumps on a train and lands in the rough and tumble world of the circus folk ruled by a heartless dictator prone to violent mood swings. Of course behind every evil king is a queen of hearts and Reese Witherspoon plays the long suffering wife Marlena with so much grace and poise. Jacob falls in love with Marlena, and the love triangle that results ends with tragic consequences.

This is a movie that is reminiscent of films from eras past. With a lush orchestral score (none does it better than James Newton Howard), epic size sets and a large cast of extras, this genre of movies hardly gets green-lit today, especially by Hollywood studios and we are poorer for it. The golden age of filmmaking was built on movies like that and certainly director Francis Lawrence tries to capture some of that glamour and spirit in Water for Elephants. Jacqueline West’s costumes are polished. She has a great eye for detail and her clothes add another layer of visual interest in each frame.

Read more …

Judi Dench and Mia Wasikowska looking spiffy in bonnets.

(Picture source: Focus Features)

There are as many interpretations of Jane Eyre’s story as there are adaptations. Folks in the same theatre were clearly enjoying the film about a plucky teenager who lived centuries ago. Did they see it as a story about repressed Victorians? A plain Jane love story or a story about convictions and morality?

Welcome to Cary Fukunaga’s version 2011. In the opening, Fukunaga and screenwriter Moira Buffini plunk audiences right in the middle of the novel and begin to tell the story through flashbacks. How original, I thought. We get a clear view of who Jane is: a young unloved girl moving through life searching for acceptance and a larger existence. In what seems initially as a dull governess position, she meets her counterpart of sorts, Mr Rochester, who is looking for some way out of his own predicament. Love no longer has a place in Rochester’s jaded weary state of mind but Jane manages to fan a fire in his cold cruel heart. And then her world starts to open up in ways she cannot imagine or control, her self-respect and inner strength serving as her only guides.

Read more …

You’re never too old to enjoy a circus.
Ringling Brothers, Barnum & Bailey Circus elephants

(Photo source: Wisconsin Historical Society)

First and foremost this book is written by an animal lover for animal lovers. Yes, it’s also a romance set in the Great Depression. I think more importantly it’s a lesson about how we treat each other and our innocent 4-legged friends in the very worse of times.

Author Sara Gruen’s third novel reminded me of Big Fish, that Tim Burton movie where Ewan McGregor with a bad Southern accent played a man who coincidentally also worked at a circus. I wonder why popular culture frequently paints a romantic picture of Depression-era circuses when there’s clearly nothing romantic about poverty. Often, these circuses employ magical folk who manage to tempt unsuspecting commoners into spending their hard-earned cash on escapist entertainments. In Gruen’s version, the magic lies in that special bond between man and beast and how that relationship can have an effect on lives inside and outside the ring.

Read more …

There’s this part of me who wants to exult all the Gothic imagery in this book and turn this review into a copy of an essay I had written years ago for a high school literature class. So I’ll have to restrain myself.

It’s amazing how age can colour how you feel about a book. A simple tragic love story between a woman and a man that I enjoyed as a teenager turns into an uncomfortable morally complex story now through my adult lens. I think Jane Eyre was never quite as simple as I had thought. A young 18-year-old plain Jane takes up a position as a governess, a teacher to a child who is the product of an exotic European dalliance. Mr Rochester, her well-traveled boss, would fit right into any Jane Austen novel, a misunderstood rogue who is not thought of as handsome by all but still a diamond in the rough in Jane’s eyes. It doesn’t matter that the man is old enough to be her father and that he might be taking advantage of her youth and his position, the two fall in love almost immediately. On the day of their marriage, things fall apart as the truth comes out about Rochester’s sordid past and the morally uptight Jane has to make some difficult choices.

Read more …

Actor Timothy Olyphant, probably wondering why he’s in this movie.

(Photo credit: DreamWorks)

[My review of the book is posted here]

It might have been a less than enjoyable book but I Am Number Four the movie is a far better version of the story it’s based on, something that is rare these days when any adaptation going through the Hollywood wringer is likely to be louder, bloodier, and Imaxed out on special effects. But if your source material is bland oatmeal, spicing it up can only make it better.

Read more …