Movie reviews

[ayoub]

First, Goblet of Fire:

Once you accept that the movie isn't going to contain all of the book, you can accept that what they did put in was done well.
A thrilling film which showcased how well the kids are maturing into actors :D

Second, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.
Once you can ignore Johnny Depp trying to be Michael Jackson, the movie is visually stunning. Although hearing English accents referring to chocolate as "candy" does grate on the nerves quite a bit. The original is still a million times better...
Tim Burton made the movie a little darker than it should have been, and Danny Elfman's music reminded me a little too much of their collaboration in Batman to put things into the right mood for a kids movie.

Tonight, War of the Worlds :D

Comments

[poetbear.livejournal.com]

the thing about the 'original' is that it does not resemble the book, Ayoub. it seems to ignore the fact that Roald Dahl's
stories were a bit bent and that his point of view may was just slightly warped. i like both versions, for completely different reasons. ~paul

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Having never read the book, I didn't know that. Although Roald Dahl always had a darker slant to his work.

But Johnny Depp was trying to be Michael Jackson, and that was scary for all the wrong reasons...

[poetbear.livejournal.com]

that's a frightening idea, all right!~paul

[fayruz.livejournal.com]

War of the Worlds scared the living daylights out of me!

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Sounds like it'll be fun!

I read the book many many years ago, so I've got a little bit of a memory of what happens.

King Kong and Narnia look good though

[inmyocean.livejournal.com]

War of the Worlds starts off good and then ends so abruptly and not so well in my opinion. I wasn't impressed by it. But Tom did a fine job acting in it even though I don't particularly like him as an actor.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

I was impressed by him in Collateral, but he still hasn't beaten his performance in A Few Good Men for me...

[lilgeorgiawhore.livejournal.com]

There are a great many Harry Potter-philes who seem to find it very, very difficult to seperate the films from the movies. They always cry "foul!" at the littlest change. People like this annoying the shit out of me. They worship the first two films and hated the third. The third film is very different from the books in terms of plot and characters. But, it captures the mood and the tone of the book so eloquently, I can't help but love it more than the first two films. The HP world explored in PoA looked exactly like the world I'd always imagined in my head, and it wasn't until I saw PoA that I realized why I had never clicked with movies 1 and 2. The GoF film did the same, expanding on what Cuaron did in PoA and he did it beautifully. My theory on all of this is that JK Rowling has acted as a supervisor on all four movies. If she's okay with the changes, then all the fans can shut up and be okay with them, too :-)

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

I really liked the movie :)

You can't see the harry potter movies exactly as the books, same as the LOTR trilogy...

[lilgeorgiawhore.livejournal.com]

When I saw the 3rd movie with my sister, we were watching the end credits and this kid a few rows ahead of us was pointing out EVERY SINGLE change to his family (who clearly were only listening just to amuse the kid). He just kept going ON AND ON AND ON about all the little things that had been changed, or were different from the first two films (and don't even get me started on those people) ... anyway, at one point he says something like "What was with the choir? There was no choir at Hogwarts!" and my sister, from five rows back, shouts down "Just because JK didn't mention a choir in the book doesn't mean the choir doesn't exist!"
God, how I love my sister :-)

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

The shrunken heads weren't in the book either, but even JK was impressed by them...

[razzberee.livejournal.com]

Okay I don't see the whole JP acting like MJ at all. I thought the movie was awesome.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

It was the high pitched voice, the slightly greyish complexion, the eternally youthful look, and the sudden discomforts he had with family... It just made me think of MJ too much.

[kay.livejournal.com]

Omg .. that was precisely what I even said during the movie "why the hell does he have to play the movie like he's MJ' :)

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

That's the first thing I noticed about his acting...

It became more annoying as it progressed...

[kay.livejournal.com]

I was really annoyed with Depp ... he made it into such a strange and annoying character ... having read the book a gazillion times I simply couldn't relate to the Willy Wonka he played, felt more like he was doing the whole 'fear and loathing in Las Vegas' trick all over again.

But have to admit I was also very visually dissapointed. I expected more of it, no clue why they remade it.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

I thought the visuals and the effects were good, and the kid that played Charlie did very well...

[kay.livejournal.com]

I just think that when you remake such a movie anno 2005 you gotta do a kick ass job on it or don't do it all .. I guess I expected more than what was showed. I liked the waterfall, tho. The rest of the cast was brilliant, too! I still prefer the original movie .. to me, that came closest to what I had in mind when I read the book.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

The original was far superior, definitely. I still haven't read the book though