I'm sad to say this knowing what I now know about Edward Cullen, but I was once prone to the Twilight movie franchise. Indeed, I too had the whole "Team Edward, Team Jacob" obsession and watched each movie perhaps a bazillion times. When Breaking Dawn part II came out, it was one of those things where you started the god-awful thing, might as well finish it.
The last time I saw a book butchered this badly was in Blood and Chocolate.
First off, Renesmee's ability to communicate via touch is hardly ever shown, Irina showing Aro what she witnessed is never shown, and the vast majority of the film is comprised of hand holding "...." moments. This kills time and leaves the viewer going okay can we please get on with it?
Secondly, Renesmee has even less dialogue in the film then she does in the book. Garret's speech to the Volturri is completely cut from the film, and the various clans' dialogue is miniscule.
The only decent scene in the movie, a scene of a great battle where Bella kicks serious ass, is completely useless. You watch this battle and think to yourself, hells yea I wish this was how the book ended and then.....yea that whole scene was just what would've happened if the Volturri decided to act.
There is I'm sure infinitely more wrong with this film, but the bottom line is it falls flat. There is no great ending, no climax, just idiotic dialogue and characters that just sort of hang around.
Monday, March 4, 2013
Prometheus-the prequel that never was. really.
Generally, I'm not one for alien movies. Sure, Close Encounters of the Third Kind had it's magic and I am dying to see how well The Host measures up, but generally the alien theme falls flat with me. On a whim, I rented Prometheus because it's supposed to be such an epic prequel to the epic franchise of the aliens movies.
Before I thoroughly disembowel this film as it should have been long before hitting the silver screen, let me make one thing clear:
This movie is NOT a prequel to the alien franchise. At all.
The movie basically centers around this team of astronauts, mostly human with one robot/android, who go to a far off planet because they believe they will find the origins of mankind. What they find instead answers nothing in regard to this, and basically tries to kill everyone.
You have a mystery goo that presents interesting results in taking over the body of one astronaut, thereby resulting in his imminent let the mo'fo burn death, a chest-buster that doesn't even kill the girl effectively but just kind of wiggles around on a hook for a little bit, some underlying racism (albino's are evil alien things that will kill you), and no closure whatsoever.
At the end of the film, the only decent part of the movie shows an alien from the alien movie franchise just kinda hangin out on the abandoned ship.
Why is this review so short? Simple. Nothing memorable whatsoever. Watch at your own risk, but it's two hours of your life you will never get back.
Before I thoroughly disembowel this film as it should have been long before hitting the silver screen, let me make one thing clear:
This movie is NOT a prequel to the alien franchise. At all.
The movie basically centers around this team of astronauts, mostly human with one robot/android, who go to a far off planet because they believe they will find the origins of mankind. What they find instead answers nothing in regard to this, and basically tries to kill everyone.
You have a mystery goo that presents interesting results in taking over the body of one astronaut, thereby resulting in his imminent let the mo'fo burn death, a chest-buster that doesn't even kill the girl effectively but just kind of wiggles around on a hook for a little bit, some underlying racism (albino's are evil alien things that will kill you), and no closure whatsoever.
At the end of the film, the only decent part of the movie shows an alien from the alien movie franchise just kinda hangin out on the abandoned ship.
Why is this review so short? Simple. Nothing memorable whatsoever. Watch at your own risk, but it's two hours of your life you will never get back.
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Paint it Blank
Chances are pretty good that in the course of your lifetime you have either read, seen, or otherwise become familiar with the work of Janet Fitch, author of White Oleander. Well here pretty recently I stumbled upon Fitch's newer book, Paint It Black and frankly I was deeply disappointed and wished I could essentially "unread" it.
Paint It Black tells the story of Josie Tyrell and her romance with Michael, son of famous piano player Meredith Loewy(?), bouncing around between the aftermath of his suicide and memory flashes of the strained relationship they had. Throughout the course of the book, Josie finds herself tied to Meredith in a sort of "I will manipulate you to get what I want and yet I genuinely care about you" relationship. There becomes a power struggle of sorts over who knew Michael more, and the secrets revealed are many and varied, which admittedly will keep the reader turning the page whether they want to or not.
Seems like a decent enough plot, and indeed this is what led me to read the book in the first place. The problem however is that a good 80 percent of the book is simply about the character asking why this happened.....and never is this question directly answered. The book simply states that it happened because his life was just to unbearable. To which I say, well there's a generic answer; such is the umbrella reason for the majority of suicides. The other 20 percent of the book is spent dancing around whether or not Meredith and Micheal's relationship was.....shall we say a bit more than motherly. And sadly, this is another part of the plot that is never answered in black and white (pun sincerely intended).
Perhaps the largest problem is that it is painfully obvious the author has gotten lazy in her writing. Meredith manipulation and Josie's emotions are almost carbon copies of Ingrid and Astrid from White Oleander, but without the flow and passion that made White Oleander such an instant work of genius. Michael himself not only has no voice in the book, but seems a dull placeholder at best. The writing is dry, over-exaggerated, and to be honest unrealistic. Josie, though not hard to identify with, to me seems to have no real substance, and this could be because the novel is told from a third person instead of first person point of view.
If you are a fan of Janet Fitch, I highly recommend bypassing this one. Fitch's talent far surpasses what we are shown here, and I would hate to see one novel go unread after the sheer disappointment of this one.
Paint It Black tells the story of Josie Tyrell and her romance with Michael, son of famous piano player Meredith Loewy(?), bouncing around between the aftermath of his suicide and memory flashes of the strained relationship they had. Throughout the course of the book, Josie finds herself tied to Meredith in a sort of "I will manipulate you to get what I want and yet I genuinely care about you" relationship. There becomes a power struggle of sorts over who knew Michael more, and the secrets revealed are many and varied, which admittedly will keep the reader turning the page whether they want to or not.
Seems like a decent enough plot, and indeed this is what led me to read the book in the first place. The problem however is that a good 80 percent of the book is simply about the character asking why this happened.....and never is this question directly answered. The book simply states that it happened because his life was just to unbearable. To which I say, well there's a generic answer; such is the umbrella reason for the majority of suicides. The other 20 percent of the book is spent dancing around whether or not Meredith and Micheal's relationship was.....shall we say a bit more than motherly. And sadly, this is another part of the plot that is never answered in black and white (pun sincerely intended).
Perhaps the largest problem is that it is painfully obvious the author has gotten lazy in her writing. Meredith manipulation and Josie's emotions are almost carbon copies of Ingrid and Astrid from White Oleander, but without the flow and passion that made White Oleander such an instant work of genius. Michael himself not only has no voice in the book, but seems a dull placeholder at best. The writing is dry, over-exaggerated, and to be honest unrealistic. Josie, though not hard to identify with, to me seems to have no real substance, and this could be because the novel is told from a third person instead of first person point of view.
If you are a fan of Janet Fitch, I highly recommend bypassing this one. Fitch's talent far surpasses what we are shown here, and I would hate to see one novel go unread after the sheer disappointment of this one.
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Superhero=Super Horrible
Okay so we've all seen one. A horrible sequel that makes us feel like our eyes should be bleeding for a wide variety of reasons. And what foul offal did I have the unfortunate displeasure of watching, you may ask?
Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance.
Now I absolutely loved the first Ghost Rider with it's amazing special effects, well-accomplished plot-line, and the rather surprising resurrection of Nicholas Cage's career. I'm sorry to say that this film not only had none of that, but it had nothing to offer whatsoever. Allow me to dissect this:
1. Plotline
So the main idea of this story is that the devil once again plays "Let's Make a Deal" and a random human girl by the name of Nadya gives birth to what is supposed to be his evil spawn (or the devil manifest in human form....this movie is a bit poor at explaining which one). First off, didn't the devil learn the first time that this is....shall we say a stupid idea? Second off, what exactly does this have to do with the plot-line of the first movie? Abso-stinking-loutely nothing.
2. The Introduction of New Characters
You would think that in making a sequel one would do a better job of explaining the who's-who of new demons, and humans, and people oh my, but this movie is chock full of people whom quite frankly are little more than placement holders. A five minute blurb introduces no less than five of the characters that seem to be central to this film, and the entire time it leaves you wondering, "Who the hell are you again?" At least other superhero movies give you a ten-minute back story full of emo-esque angst when introducing a newbie.
3. The atrocious acting skills of......well, everyone
The acting in here is quite similar to watching a group of five year olds playing pretend, but without the cuteness that makes you go awwwwwww. Nicholas Cage being the primary example of this goes from being the superhero who kicks arse yet has a soul of goodness to a deranged horrible imitation of the joker in a leather jacket with a skull for a head. Yes, I'm serious. Everyone else just kind of has cheesy one liners and moves around like a zombie, while Mr. Cage randomly breaks out into manic laughter.
Quite frankly, just about any movie pertaining to superhero's would be better than this, even Elektra. But then again, if you're looking to waste two semi-precious hours of your life or have a desire to laugh so hard your stomach hurts, then please, by all means watch away.
Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance.
Now I absolutely loved the first Ghost Rider with it's amazing special effects, well-accomplished plot-line, and the rather surprising resurrection of Nicholas Cage's career. I'm sorry to say that this film not only had none of that, but it had nothing to offer whatsoever. Allow me to dissect this:
1. Plotline
So the main idea of this story is that the devil once again plays "Let's Make a Deal" and a random human girl by the name of Nadya gives birth to what is supposed to be his evil spawn (or the devil manifest in human form....this movie is a bit poor at explaining which one). First off, didn't the devil learn the first time that this is....shall we say a stupid idea? Second off, what exactly does this have to do with the plot-line of the first movie? Abso-stinking-loutely nothing.
2. The Introduction of New Characters
You would think that in making a sequel one would do a better job of explaining the who's-who of new demons, and humans, and people oh my, but this movie is chock full of people whom quite frankly are little more than placement holders. A five minute blurb introduces no less than five of the characters that seem to be central to this film, and the entire time it leaves you wondering, "Who the hell are you again?" At least other superhero movies give you a ten-minute back story full of emo-esque angst when introducing a newbie.
3. The atrocious acting skills of......well, everyone
The acting in here is quite similar to watching a group of five year olds playing pretend, but without the cuteness that makes you go awwwwwww. Nicholas Cage being the primary example of this goes from being the superhero who kicks arse yet has a soul of goodness to a deranged horrible imitation of the joker in a leather jacket with a skull for a head. Yes, I'm serious. Everyone else just kind of has cheesy one liners and moves around like a zombie, while Mr. Cage randomly breaks out into manic laughter.
Quite frankly, just about any movie pertaining to superhero's would be better than this, even Elektra. But then again, if you're looking to waste two semi-precious hours of your life or have a desire to laugh so hard your stomach hurts, then please, by all means watch away.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Teenage Sociopath, Anyone?
So for my first ever review (cue cheers), I recently watched the movie, We Need To Talk About Kevin. The previews were what mainly intrigued me, and unlike most movies the previews did not sum up the movie for me in a five second window.
In the beginning of the movie we are introduced to the female lead, Eva Katchadourian who is continuously plagued by the locals of the town by means of verbal and physical abuse, including an incident where what looks like red paint is splashed all over her tiny run-down house. The movie then jumps around a little bit as if inside the characters memories, and then starts to tell the story of how she ended up where she is now.
How Kevin ties into the movie is he is Eva's son, and as the film progresses we are shown his childhood where he is....shall we say a bit of a problem child. Hardly saying a word at the age of around five or six, not potty trained, and with behavioral responses that are a bit spastic at best. Eva, being a concerned mother, takes him to the doctor assuming that there may be some sort of mental disability such as autism. Allow me to sum this up a bit: the doctor insists there is nothing wrong with him. As he grows up, Kevin does learn how to do all of these things, but his behavior becomes increasingly out of control, doing things seemingly just to aggravate Eva to the point of her thinking Kevin has a personal vendetta against her.
Fast forward to the teenage years. Kevin now has a little sister,Celia, and has matured (or rather, immatured) into your standard teenager with an attitude problem. Soon events start happening at the house that arouse Eva's suspicions about Kevin's enmity even more . Celia's pet guinea pig "mysteriously" goes missing, and it is later insinuated that the animal was shoved down the sink drain into one of those chopper thingies. Later, Celia looses eyesight in one eye due to drinking the drano that Eva used to unclog the sink....and insisted she put back in the child-locked cupboard right after using. Although Eva keeps insisting that maybe Kevin had something to do with this, her husband not only keeps making excuses for him but praises him as the "golden child".
Now mind you, this entire movie I'm wanting to jump through the screen and choke the living daylights out of this kid because just short of demonic possession this kid is a freakin' warped and shows pretty much all the signs of a sociopath. So just how do you raise a sociopath that you think is as good as gold if you are the dad? Why, give him a bow and set of arrows for his birthday of course!
I won't give away the ending, so this is the part where I tell you what I think of the movie. If you like psychological movies where it's such fun to try to analyze the character, it is a bit of a delight and very reminiscent for me of the book Wolf at the Table. As far as accomplishment of the story line however, it does fall a bit flat. It's one of those movies where you get to the end and go, "that's the end? well....okay I suppose that was decent...."
Bottom line here is that this film is very entertaining, but don't expect to glean from it some vital message. This film is best geared toward aspiring psychologists, film festival geeks, and perhaps the stephen king-ish fandom.
Link to trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGjjK5SMbJA
In the beginning of the movie we are introduced to the female lead, Eva Katchadourian who is continuously plagued by the locals of the town by means of verbal and physical abuse, including an incident where what looks like red paint is splashed all over her tiny run-down house. The movie then jumps around a little bit as if inside the characters memories, and then starts to tell the story of how she ended up where she is now.
How Kevin ties into the movie is he is Eva's son, and as the film progresses we are shown his childhood where he is....shall we say a bit of a problem child. Hardly saying a word at the age of around five or six, not potty trained, and with behavioral responses that are a bit spastic at best. Eva, being a concerned mother, takes him to the doctor assuming that there may be some sort of mental disability such as autism. Allow me to sum this up a bit: the doctor insists there is nothing wrong with him. As he grows up, Kevin does learn how to do all of these things, but his behavior becomes increasingly out of control, doing things seemingly just to aggravate Eva to the point of her thinking Kevin has a personal vendetta against her.
Fast forward to the teenage years. Kevin now has a little sister,Celia, and has matured (or rather, immatured) into your standard teenager with an attitude problem. Soon events start happening at the house that arouse Eva's suspicions about Kevin's enmity even more . Celia's pet guinea pig "mysteriously" goes missing, and it is later insinuated that the animal was shoved down the sink drain into one of those chopper thingies. Later, Celia looses eyesight in one eye due to drinking the drano that Eva used to unclog the sink....and insisted she put back in the child-locked cupboard right after using. Although Eva keeps insisting that maybe Kevin had something to do with this, her husband not only keeps making excuses for him but praises him as the "golden child".
Now mind you, this entire movie I'm wanting to jump through the screen and choke the living daylights out of this kid because just short of demonic possession this kid is a freakin' warped and shows pretty much all the signs of a sociopath. So just how do you raise a sociopath that you think is as good as gold if you are the dad? Why, give him a bow and set of arrows for his birthday of course!
I won't give away the ending, so this is the part where I tell you what I think of the movie. If you like psychological movies where it's such fun to try to analyze the character, it is a bit of a delight and very reminiscent for me of the book Wolf at the Table. As far as accomplishment of the story line however, it does fall a bit flat. It's one of those movies where you get to the end and go, "that's the end? well....okay I suppose that was decent...."
Bottom line here is that this film is very entertaining, but don't expect to glean from it some vital message. This film is best geared toward aspiring psychologists, film festival geeks, and perhaps the stephen king-ish fandom.
Link to trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGjjK5SMbJA
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)