Weblog:
I’ve been behind on BSG for about three episodes, and I finally caught up today. OMG they totally tore it up on the season finale! I had just complained recently that they needed to pick up the pace, and boy they did that and then some! The reversing of having Baltar as Six’s delusion was brilliant, and having Boomer and Six changing the Cylon’s minds, the one year jump in time to after settling on New Caprica, plus the sudden Cylon invasion–bravo! My faith in the BSG writing staff has been fully restored.
…
I watched some pretty good films recently, plus a bunch of others not really worth mentioning. I’ll talk about the good ones, and mention a couple of the disappointing ones (only because I expected more).
Memoirs of A Geisha – Generally better than I had imagined, despite the niggle I have with the main female leads all played by current popular Chinese actresses instead of Japanese. For a film adapted from a novel written by a white guy, you should never expect authenticity, and if you disregarded that, the film really wasn’t that bad, especially if you aren’t put off by a healthy dose of melodrama (the style of the film lends itself well to melodramatics).
Jarhead – I really looked forward to Jarhead because I loved American Beauty (although Road to Perdition didn’t do much for me), and because I simply love good war films and expected at least an above average one from Mendes. Visually, Jarhead was just gorgeous–particularly the scenes in the desert with the burning oil fields. There were some very powerful scenes in the film, and while it’s nothing like a conventional war film, I feel that it will have a place among the greats as one of the best to have conveyed the sheer psychological toll military life has on a person–how military training transforms you into something you never thought you’d become, and could never go back once you’ve been in that mental state.
King Kong – It was pretty much what I expected–a thrill ride with some heart. It’s not the kind of film I would ever consider as one of my favorites–not because it did anything wrong, but simply because of incompatibility of the director’s style and my personal taste. Sometimes, taste is just a highly personal thing–either you’re on that wavelength or you aren’t. I’m sure some of my favorite films would make Peter Jackson shake his head and snort.
Good Night, and Good Luck – It was a good film, and I expect nothing less from George Clooney as a director. However, as much integrity as the film portrays and possess itself, it’s somewhat sterile and lacked passion. I’m not saying a film has to wear everything on its sleeve, but maybe being a little more emotionally indulgent would’ve taken away the coldness of the tone (unless you cross into the Spielberg zone of sentimentality–then it’s probably more harm than it’s worth).
Pride & Prejudice – I really didn’t mind that it wasn’t authentic, as we’ve seen too many Jane Austin adaptations by now anyway. I only cared if the film was a good one, and IMO, it was, despite some strange acting from Kiera Knightley. Strange, because the way she expressed certain facial emotions was quite different from how most people would, but different certainly does not mean bad–thus I use the word strange. It’s funny that everytime I pop in one of these English period dramas I always expect to be bored at some point, but every time I’ve been pleasantly surprised.
Dark Water – I’m going to be a typical male for a moment and throw my intellect out the window. *Ahem* Please Jen, put back all the pounds you’ve lost. You really were lovelier when you had some meat on them bones. The film itself? I thought it was directed quite well, with good use of cinematic techniques to tense up the audience. Hitchcock would be pleased.
Flightplan / Red Eye – Why am I lumping the two together? Well, I watched them a day apart, and both were so similar in premise that it was inevitable to compare the two. Red Eye is the more mainstream of the two–with all the expected Hollywood styling, humor, and cliches, although I wouldn’t say it’s bad at all–quite entertaining in fact, in a popcorn kind of way (although smarter than your typical popcorn flick). It was interesting to see that Wes Craven can do a mainstream film well, without having to rely on the shock factor of horror material. Flightplan was definitely better directed of the two, as it was more intelligent, more intense, and with less Hollywood glamour. I don’t know if that makes it a decidely better film–I guess it depends on your taste.
Brokeback Mountain – It’s as good a film as you can expect from Ang Lee–who’s certainly an intelligent and sensitive director. Technically, I think Lee’s gotten much better at handling static scenes–he used to be pretty bad with using bland camera angles during talking heads scenes, cutting back and forth between two people during a conversation in such a way that it drove me nuts. Excellent acting from both leads, and a surprising performance from Michelle Williams, who I only really knew from the TV show Dawson’s Creek.
Munich – It’s interesting that the less Spielberg-ish a film he makes, the more I respect and like him as a director. It shows that he’s capable of not leaving his foot prints in a film when it calls for that kind of treatment. He’s been doing more and more films like that the older he gets, and I for one feel it’s the sign of a director who’s getting better instead of becoming a hack or a self-indulgent egomaniac like some of his peers.
I said there were a bunch of other films not even worth mentioning, and unfortunately, Tim Burton’s Corpse Bride is one of them. It felt like Burton had an interesting idea, but couldn’t find ways to make that idea connect with the audience emotionally. I don’t know how many versions of the screenplay they went through, but what they ended up shooting probably was either a couple versions too few or too many (meaning they either didn’t rewrite enough, or rewrote too much)–all the essentially emotional elements were missing. Another disappointing one was the latest Harry Potter film. Not that any of the previous ones were cinematic masterpieces–to me, all films like it are disposable entertainment–popcorn flicks, if you will. However, even on that level, Goblet of Fire disappointed, with emotional threads unconnected, or severed in all the wrong places. I don’t read the books, so I don’t know how faithful the films are, but whoever was responsible (Rowling or Kloves), it was noticeably less involving than the previous films.
King Kong was good for me; I was really impressed with how well they constructed movement and facial expressions on Kong.
Memoirs of A Geisha, on the other hand, I have not watched the film yet, and I am pretty appealed to the book. I’m also not too happy with the lead roles, personally, but I’ve been hearing it’s still worth the watch. How was the acting to you Rob? I believe the DVD will be released this week in America (Tuesday I think?)
Valakrie – Yeah, the Weta team really set the bar for the next generation of CG effects. It’ll be hard to live up to that standard for all their peers.
The acting in Meoirs of A Geisha wasn’t what I had hoped for. To my eyes and ears, they mostly seemed to be playing caricatures instead of multidimensional characters with layered complexities. I don’t think the cast’s difficulty with the language was an issue, since there’s plenty of great acting you could do with facial expression and body language alone. During some moments, it was painfully obvious that the Chinese actresses were given crash lessons on how to act and sound Japanese. They really should’ve just gone with Japanese actors for the whole thing. I don’t believe for a second what Rob Marshall said in interviews about how the Chinese actresses were the best candidates because they fit the roles. I’m willing to bet that it was a simple case of ‘they are the most famous Asian actresss in the world right now, and they’ll be able to sell more tickets than if we used Japanese actresses because there really aren’t any internationally famous Japanese actresses at the moment–at least not at the level of recognition as Gong Li, Zhang Ziyi, Michelle Yeoh..etc.’ But the film is still worth a watch because it’s actually a pretty entertaining film, if you can forgive the obvious faults you should’ve been aware of beforehand.
I just wanted to comment on Goblet of Fire. You really should read the books, or at least listen to the excellent audio book versions read by Jim Dale. I didn’t think I would like a “kid’s” book, but it doesn’t read like that at all.
I’m afraid the rest of the movies are going to suffer the same fate as GoF, because Rowling’s books have grown to mammoth sizes. For example the first book was only 7 CDs, while GoF was 17. Since the movies stay the same length, a lot more has to be cut from the later movies. Some things the movie cut out didn’t affect the story at all (eg. the House Elf Liberation Front movement started by Hermione), while others really reduced the richness of the story (off the top of my head, the House Elf Winkie and the two Barty Crouchs, for one, and the greatly diminished role of Rita Skeeter).
It’s really too bad, because I like seeing the stories rendered in the rich visuals of a big budget movie, but the story suffers so much because of it.
Pearson – That’s always the dilemma with adapting books, particularly the really thick one. 😀 I’ve always had mixed feelings about films adapted from books, but each case is different because no two books or films are alike. There have been some great adaptations, and plenty of bad ones. I think the decision to adapt books are mostly driven by potential sales, not whether the book is suitable for adaptation. It’s common knowledge there are writers who essentially write for the sole purpose of getting that big fat check from a Hollywood adaptation–in fact some mainstream writers are shameless about it.
I rarely read sci-fi/fantasy (or any genre fiction in general) these days, as most of them are poorly written. I’m not talking about the command of the language, as all published books go through editors–what I’m talking about is the ability to create stories and characters that actually connect to readers on a deeper level than simply entertaining them. Not that there’s anything wrong with pure escapism, but at this point in my life, simply being entertained is often not enough anymore. Of course, this is a generalization about my reading habits, and it would be a bit pretentious to discuss the Potter books in that light. This isn’t to say children’s books can’t be more involving than disposable entertainment–I still remember the books I read as a child vividly, and whether they were “deep” or not, they remain an important part of my memory.
I’ve actually been listening to a lot of audio books lately (mostly on science, philosophy, or history) while I paint, so I’ll take your suggestion and give one of the Potter books a try. It might end up as an example of sometimes being entertained is enough. 🙂