Da Couch Tomato

An attempt at a new layout, with horrible glitches, and very minimal knowledge of HTML.
Showing posts with label emma watson. Show all posts
heyguys.com

Da Couch Tomato Podcast, Episode 21, discussing Little Women, the unavoidable comparisons with the 1994 version, and how this film gives us something new as another remake of a certified classic.

Background music used is the Little Women score by Alexandre Desplat.

Hosts: Sting Lacson and Rachel

Rating: 8.7/10
3:42 PM
"You had me at 'library'."

•This isn't a shot-for-shot remake of the original 1991 animated film by Disney. This is more or less a very similar retelling, updated for a modern audience, particularly those who weren't born yet when the original was released.

•There are more songs here than the original one, but the great thing is, it's by the same composer and lyricist, Alan Menken and Tim Rice. And I believe that's the reason the new songs are a great fit to the old. Like, to someone who hasn't seen the original, all the songs in this 2017 version would have a unified feel to it, and they probably wouldn't be able to tell which songs are more than 20 years old.

•Emma Watson can sing, yes, but just barely. Like you can tell musical theatre isn't her background. In fact, she is, in my opinion, this film's weakest link. But I can't seem to think of anyone else who could've played Belle in this live-action version.

•Ewan McGregor was awesome as Lumiere. We've heard him sing before, in Moulin Rouge, so no surprise there. And to think he'd never seen the original before he signed up for this project. But with the way he sang "Be Our Guest", you can't tell. You'd probably even think he's seen the original a thousand times on VHS.

•I'm not a fan of the boots, Emma Watson. I understand it was your call to wear them. What were you thinking? No. Just no.

"You're not wearing those hideous boots, are you?"

•Luke Evans as Gaston and Josh Gad as LeFou were awesome. Unlike Emma Watson, these two are great singers. Josh Gad has already shown us his vocal prowess in Pixels, so it's nothing new, really. But Luke Evans came as quite a surprise. And to think I used to refer to him as a "poor man's Orlando Bloom".

•Apparently, LeFou is the first openly-gay Disney character. I just found that out recently, because it wasn't really obvious in the animated version. But I think Josh Gad is really gay. Or at least he could pass for gay. Actually, he's a family man with two daughters, so I don't think he's gay.

•I understand it was a stylistic choice to put Mrs. Potts's face on the side of the teapot instead of having the spout as her nose. But the animation looked kind of tacky, of you ask me. Emma Thompson in lieu of Angela Lansbury is okay, but I just don't like how the animation looks, sorry.

•I didn't know Ian McKellen was Cogsworth. I can picture him in a superhero film franchise. But I thought voice acting would be beneath his status as a skilled thespian. Apparently everyone has a price. I wonder how much he got paid for this gig.

•Dan Stevens was perfect as the Beast. First, because he sings quite well. Second, because he kind of looked like the prince in the animated version. With all the effort he exerted in his performance, it's a shame director Bill Condon didn't opt for practical make-up over CGI, but it was still a good job nonetheless.

Why does Cogsworth look like a Transformer?



Beauty and the Beast. USA. 2016.



Original rating: 8.0/10
"Be Our Guest": +0.1
"The Mob Song": +0.1
Emma Watson's singing: -0.1
Underutilising Kevin Kline: -0.1
Underutilising Stanley Tucci: -0.1
Audra McDonald's singing: +0.1
French translations at the end titles: +0.1
Final rating: 8.0/10
8:42 AM
YouTube

The art of adaptation has many forms (I am of course talking of adaptation in its literary sense). Adaptation is the process by which a work is transposed from one medium to another. For example, a novel can be adapted from a stage play, or a poem can be adapted into a short story. And movies can be adapted from almost any medium under the sun.

The film Noah from director Darren Aronofsky is one such example, coming out as the second of at least three films this year adapted from biblical sources. Understandably, viewers would tend to compare Noah with other biblical films such as The Passion of the Christ, The Last Temptation of Christ, and The Prince of Egypt.

There are some films which are considered modern-day adaptations of Biblical stories, like the obvious modern-day Christ narrative The Matrix, but in my opinion, these aren't so much adaptations as modern-day retellings. Yes, they may be similar, but they are distinct. Baz Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet is a modern-day adaptation, while Romeo Must Die is a modern-day retelling of William Shakespeare's classic play. So where does the difference lie?

"Adaptation? Retelling? I'm confused now."
5:55 PM
Columbia/Mandate/Point Grey

Sorry to disagree with some of you, but while the premise of This Is the End may seem good on paper and in box office returns, in reality, it really isn’t.

The poster says it all.
4:22 PM

I'd say this film is worthy of being counted among the classic coming-of-age stories. I had the same after-feels when I watched Almost Famous; I wish I watched this movie when I was in freshman college.

No, he's not getting his first oral here.
3:57 PM
She looks more like Marilyn in black in white.

Michelle Williams is on a roll, getting Oscar nominations for her performances (only last year she was nominated for Blue Valentine), but not yet really there to pick up the golden bald trophy man.

I would say her portrayal of the icon that was Marilyn Monroe (Williams) is the reason My Week With Marilyn was nominated for the Best Picture. (Like other bets, yes, it is also a film about making a film—well, sort of.) But that would be unfair to other worthy actors in the film: Kenneth Branagh, Dominic Cooper, Judi Dench, Julia Ormond, just to name a few.

Even Emma Watson was part of it albeit in a minor role.

It would also be unfair to Colin Clark (Eddie Redmayne), the film being in his point of view. It was his week with Ms. Monroe that this film is about, for crying out loud.

He looks familiar but I can't put my finger on it.

As a whole, though, My Week With Marilyn is a gem. It was a bit surreal. There is a feeling of lightness while watching it, as well as deep but subtle hints of how troubled the late actress was. It’s not a surprise that she allegedly took her own life. It gave me a ping-pong session of queries in my mind:

Was she just a sexy pin-up girl?

How good of an actress was she really? Or did her "connections" play a big part on her career? And maybe her demise as well?

But this film is not for the audience to grieve for her and/or for someone like me, as part of the generation who never really knew her onscreen, to search for the answers to the many what-ifs. It’s simply a story of an extraordinary week of a young naive boy with Ms. Monroe. But it's not as simple as it sounds. I imagine a glimpse of her is overwhelming as it is, what more a week.


My Week With Marilyn gets a seven-point-five out of ten for brilliant performances and a insightful peek into a lost icon's life.



 *screencaps by VLC
8:24 AM
It's time to stop delaying the inevitable. 

Seven, books, eight films, more than a decade of the magic that is the Harry Potter universe. Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Part 1 was the calm before the storm and the Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2  is the big, grand, epic finale. But allow me to rant a bit:

Spoilers abound. But really, who doesn't have even the slightest idea?

Professor McGonagall (Maggie Smith) gigling "I've always wanted to use that spell" is, I think, completely out of character. Granted the Hogwarts' Deputy Headministress has a bit of punk in her persona, she has more sense than that, especially knowing that all hell is about to break loose.

But it was a blast to see her and Mrs. Weasly kick ass.

The before-we-die kiss between Ginny (Bonnie Wright) and Harry (Daniel Radcliff) was forgettable. And so was Ginny, which is a bit sad. And speaking of kisses, the most awaited kiss between Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermoine (Emma Watson) would have been nice if the camera showed the lip-lock.

And not just "the most awaited" shot of Ron's red hair. Pffft.

Overall, it feels a bit rushed. Although I agree that the cameras should follow Harry and Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes), I felt a little robbed of the essential aspects of the Battle of Hogwarts. The whole grand battle is seen more in a macro scale: You see the massive number of Death Eaters and giants storm the castle, but we miss out on seeing Fred (Oliver or James Phelps?), Remus (David Thewlis) and Tonks (Natalie Lena) die. I thought the whole idea of splitting the book into two films was to be able to have time to show what counts, be it the magnificent special effects or the gravity of emotions that the story holds.

That's it, I swear, no more rants.

But all that said and let go, it may very well be a fitting end to the Happy Potterverse. I maybe just expected that it'll be too faithful to the book (Yes, I know films are different!). But it's not at all bad. Not bad at all.

My eyes were dry up until the scenes after this.  

The child actors have grown physically into and connected with their roles and it's evident that they gained experience acting side-by-side with most talented actors. Fiennes was really effectively evil. Bonham Carter playfully displayed her acting range. Ciaran Hinds as Aberforth Dumbledore and Kelly MacDonald as Helena Ravenclaw were unexpectedly awesomely cool. Special mention, though, to Alan Rickman as Professor Severus Snape, who as an actor and a complex character really stole the show for me.

"Eee-qual-ly..." guilty of making the audience sob in terror.   

It's bittersweet to bid farewell to Harry, Ron, Emma, Draco (Tom Felton) Neville (Matthew Lewis, who has a bit of a Clive Owen-feel now that he has shed the baby fat and has facial hair, plus a good sense of British humor), Ginny, and Luna (Evanna Lynch), and to Hogwarts and The Burrow. But as J.K. Rowling said, "Hogwarts will always be there to welcome us home."


Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 gets an eight out of ten because Snape made me cry and because it is the last of its kind and we will all miss it. And because the child actors in the series kinda grew up fairly decent.


*Photos from daemonsmovies.com



You may also want to check out the other reviews of Deathly Hallows: Part 2 by Mary Quite Contrary and Sting Lacson.
10:11 PM
Destroying Hocruxes can't be too boring, right?
I just finished the seven Happy Potter books just a few hours before stepping in the cinema to watch this. I'm not comparing book vs. film, but it's nice to note that this film (and maybe also Part 2 together) might be the one of the closest to the books.

In the seventh film of the Happy Potter series, we see Harry set to continue the task Professor Dumbledore left him. With best pals Hermoine and Ron, their journey outside Hogwarts leads them face-to-face with kinds of magic they, or even the members of the Order of the Phoenix, have never known before. But they have to find and destroy the Hocruxes in order to defeat Voldemort once and for all.

We have loads packed in our tiny rucksacks.
Kudos, of course, to the cast—and this means not just the three leads—because they have all done their part well. Great job especially though to Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint who had grown up with their characters. Rupert, who I think as Ron, is so hilarious in the absence of Fred and George Weasley's screen time. Emma has several very fashionable pieces of wardrobe, as Hermoine travels with a small bag with undetectable extension charms. Brilliantly done, mainly so because she has to look good being the only girl in the trio—she looked amazing! And Daniel has grown to be an actor I think we will see more of after the series ends.

I wonder if this top will look good on me? Hmmm.
But as a stand-alone movie, it dragged on for more than two hours without an obvious climax. And this is so because, of course, splitting the plot of the seventh book means splitting the story. And it's only natural to have the climax at the end of the film series which is Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2. I would have waited for the second part and watched them in a marathon for a better movie experience. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1, sad to say, elicits not much of a rave as a movie, except that it sets the stage for July next year. That, I expect, will complete the Happy Potter series on a high note. Because no matter how the books were adapted into movies, it's no denying that it's a great epic story. I honestly can't wait for Part 2!


Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 gets six out of ten, for staying true to the well-written narrative, being hyped all over, and extending the wait for the very last installment.


P.S. If one's going to argue that an elf's death is a climax-denouement, then I say otherwise. It could have been that for Part 1 if the preceding scenes were treated with heightened emotions, effects, action, music, and what have you. But it doesn't feel so. It was just as it was presented in the book, a sort of subclimax.


*photos from www.listal.com
4:53 PM
"No, Miss Granger, I have no potion to improve acting."

(Boo to Claire for not reviewing this despite watching it first.)

They say this is like The Dark Knight of the Harry Potter franchise. I say not really.

Okay, first thing's first. Let's get the adaptation issue out of the way.

This is already the sixth Potter adaptation. Everyone should know by now that the movie is not like the book. There are some exceptions, of course, but as a general rule, do not expect the movie version to be a hundred percent faithful to the adapted source.

So what can I say about Half-Blood Prince? It's darker. Edgier. Less action than Order of the Phoenix, but we have more flashbacks of Tom Riddle, which makes it a treat for fans of the book.

Emma Watson and Bonnie Wright are getting prettier and prettier. But sadly, Emma Watson's acting hasn't improved much. Just a little. She doesn't overact that much anymore. Daniel Radcliffe's acting has improved a lot. And Rupert Grint is always good.

On the adults' performances, Mrs. Tim Burton a.k.a. Helena Bonham Carter is in her element as usual, while Jim Broadbent is excellent as Professor Horace Slughorn. Alan Rickman is still the best. And Michael Gambon tends to look like Gandalf the Grey in a lot of shots. Must be the hair. And the beard. Or both.

This reminds me of something Homer Simpson once said: "No man should outlive his fictional wizard." Which is exactly what I felt when Dumbledore, you know, died.

Again, they say this is The Dark Knight of the Potter franchise. And I say The Dark Knight does not have any teeny-bopper romance going on every fifteen minutes or so.


*some info from IMDb
pic from movies.msn.com


Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. UK. 2009.


Rating: Seven and a half out of ten.
11:04 PM
"One more take, please? Didn't stick my tongue out too much."

By now, everyone should have realized that it is very rare for a movie adaptation to be exactly like the book. This film is no different. Movie adaptations should only be either one of two things: as good as the book, or better. I would like to congratulate David Yates for a visually somber look, complementing the darkness of the story itself. Order of the Phoenix, compared to the other movies, utilizes the most magic, with an excellent representation of the Ministry of Magic, as well as the Weasley’s Skiving Snackboxes and their awesome fireworks display. The juvenile actors have shown some improvement, especially Daniel Radcliffe, whose angst-filled Potter takes center stage. Rupert Grint as Ron Weasley is terrific as usual, while Emma Watson still has to work on her overacting. The adults, meanwhile, give the film its darkest edge, with Gary Oldman taking the lead (when will this man win an Oscar?) and Helena Bonham-Carter making her wizarding debut as the twisted Bellatrix Lestrange. Of course, there is no need to mention Ralph Fiennes, who gave a five-star performance as Lord Voldemort. Alan Rickman has never failed to deliver an extremely despicable Severus Snape, and we can expect his splendid performance for The Half-Blood Prince.

Note: Mrs. Arabella Figg was played by the actress who also played Cleopatra’s nanny in HBO’s Rome.

Three stars.
4:13 PM
Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )
Premium Blogspot Templates
Copyright © 2012 Da Couch Tomato