It starts out so promisingly. A sinister introduction to the final film of the franchise, showing the students marching through the grounds of the once great Hogwarts. Once a safe home from home for many, the Hogwarts in this instalment is a quick reminder of how far in his quest against Voldemort Harry has come. With the castle surrounded by Dementors, there seems to be little hope that the Dark Lord could be defeated.
And that's where the enjoyment finished for me. I wish I could watch the film without constantly thinking "this is wrong" or "this wasn't in the book", but I couldn't, and that may be what ruined it for me.
I won't list the faults; instead I will focus upon the positive aspects of David Yates' final foray into Hogwarts, Hogsmeade, Gringotts et al.
The performance of Maggie Smith as Professor McGonagall, plays the leader of the Hogwarts staff rebellion against Voldemort with gleeful abandon, declaring "I've always wanted to use that spell" after bringing the statues surrounding Hogwarts to life.
Helena Bonham Carter, as usual, plays an incredibly evil Bellatrix Lestrange, and also quite a convincing Hermione under the influence of Polyjuice Potion.
Emma Watson also shows her skills as a fine young actress, and as usual her prowess as an actress far surpasses fellow Horcrux hunters Daniel Radcliffe and Rupert Grint. That being said, although not the best actors in the world, Radcliffe and Grint have come on leaps and bounds since their woefully wooden performances from the initial outing to Hogwarts in the “Philosophers Stone”.
The film does benefit from being back inside the familiar grounds of Hogwarts, with a sense of purpose and meaning. The film feels like it knows where it is going, as opposed to the almost meandering first instalment, which suffered through seeming to lack urgency.
I will mention some of the changes the film made from the book, as I feel it necessary to bring these to light, particularly the omissions the film makers made.
Harry announcing himself to everybody, including Snape, in the Great Hall did not occur in the book, and I’m not entirely sure as to why they have changed how he exposed his return to Hogwarts to McGonagall. The only reason I can think is that the film makers did not want to show Harry using an unforgivable curse such as the cruciatus curse, although they did show him using the imperius curse in Gringotts, and therefore I decided that this cannot be the reason.
Also, if they were trying to tug on audience heartstrings towards the end of the film by including Harry apologising to Lupin for his death following the recent arrival of his son, surely the sensible thing to do would be to have included the part of the book where Lupin arrives at Shell Cottage at the beginning and announces the birth of a baby son, and asks Harry to be Godfather.
The ending of the film let me down as well, due to the change in how Harry reveals that he is not dead. Why it was necessary for Harry to jump from Hagrid’s arms and then run through the castle instead of protecting his friends and loved ones from the Death Eaters, I will never know. All it makes me think is that the film makers wanted Harry to seem like he was scared and running away from Voldemort, as opposed to the courageous Harry in the book.
I will accept that there are parts of the book that would not have translated into film as well, for example the fight scene between Mrs Weasley and Bellatrix Lestrange. As the majority of the action in the book is thought, and therefore not a time consuming part of the film.
I was disappointed in the film as I have read the book, and although all the films have strayed from J K Rowling’s original narrative, this is the film that I was most disappointed in. It is a case of if you haven’t read the book then you can’t miss what you never knew, but if you were an avid reader of the books then you may find yourself in the same boat as me.
Friday, 22 July 2011
Wednesday, 20 July 2011
My Guy Ritchie Film
This is the short film I made in the style of Guy Ritchie, as part of my University course.
The Pub Game Part 2
This is the second part of the thirty minute television programme, filmed at Maidstone Studios in front of a live audience, that I was involved in as part of my University course.
The Pub Game Part 1
This is the first part of the half hour television programme that I was involved as part of my University course.
Offline and Unwired Documentary
This is the 10 minute documentary that I made as part of my University Course.
The Social Network Review
I doubt that the Social Network will be a longstanding classic, but for the time being it is a film that defines a generation of facebook addicts.
Some of my friends have been to see this film, and returned seemingly dissappointed, by what i don't know! I can't believe they were expecting an action film, so i'm not entirely sure what they wanted from this film. All i know is that i enjoyed it, simply becuase it is extremely well written, brilliantly casted, and above all engaging!
David Fincher was under instruction to bring the film in at or around the 2 hour mark, but Sorkins script was 166 pages. This caused Fincher to instruct his actors to speak the dialogue faster, as evidenced by the first scene. However, you don't get the feeling that the film was rushed at all, it just works!
Jesse Eisenberg plays Mark Zuckerberg - the creator of Facebook- excellently. He moves away from his previous goofy performences, to give a cold, calculated performance of a genius who does anything he has to in order to get what he wants, regardless of who he hurts along the way. In contrast to this, Andrew Garfield as Eduardo Saverin is a more appealing character for the audience, and this makes Zuckerbergs betrayal even harsher. We will be seeing more of these two actors in the future, there is no doubt in my mind about that.
This film should not be known as "The Facebook Movie", as that does it a great disservice. Yes, it is about Facebook, but not solely about that. There are characters you get to know, like, dislike and laugh with, there is a great betrayal, tension and intrigue!
I reccomend this film to film and facebook lovers alike.
Some of my friends have been to see this film, and returned seemingly dissappointed, by what i don't know! I can't believe they were expecting an action film, so i'm not entirely sure what they wanted from this film. All i know is that i enjoyed it, simply becuase it is extremely well written, brilliantly casted, and above all engaging!
David Fincher was under instruction to bring the film in at or around the 2 hour mark, but Sorkins script was 166 pages. This caused Fincher to instruct his actors to speak the dialogue faster, as evidenced by the first scene. However, you don't get the feeling that the film was rushed at all, it just works!
Jesse Eisenberg plays Mark Zuckerberg - the creator of Facebook- excellently. He moves away from his previous goofy performences, to give a cold, calculated performance of a genius who does anything he has to in order to get what he wants, regardless of who he hurts along the way. In contrast to this, Andrew Garfield as Eduardo Saverin is a more appealing character for the audience, and this makes Zuckerbergs betrayal even harsher. We will be seeing more of these two actors in the future, there is no doubt in my mind about that.
This film should not be known as "The Facebook Movie", as that does it a great disservice. Yes, it is about Facebook, but not solely about that. There are characters you get to know, like, dislike and laugh with, there is a great betrayal, tension and intrigue!
I reccomend this film to film and facebook lovers alike.
127 Hours Review
"There is no force on earth more powerful than the will to live"
That is the last line from the trailer for this biopic about Aron Ralston, and how true that proves to be in this case.
In my opinion James Franco deserves an unbelievable amount of credit for his role as Ralston. Being able to hold the screen on your own for the best part of an hour is not easy, but he conveys the struggle and downward spiral into almost insanity excellently.
The real Aron Ralston has only showed his video diaries from his days trapped in the Blue John canyon to close friends and family, but James Franco and Danny Boyle were allowed to see them for the purposes of making the movie as real as possible. Ralston himself says that the film is as close to a documentary as possible while still being a drama.
At just over an hour and a half long, i didnt think it felt particularly long or drawn out, as the time passed quickly. However, if it had been longer i think it may have lost people's interest as there is only so many ways to show a man losing his mind while being stuck in the same location.
Possibly one of my favourite scenes from a film for a very long time comes when Franco is making a video recording while pretending his is on a radio show. The clever use of camera work and voice acting making it clear when it is Aron the mountain climber talking, or when it is the host of the show. He is self depricating and humble, apologising to his mother for not answering the phone to her and admitting he would not be in that situation if he had told someone where he was, calling himself a "hard hero". This scene serves to show how low his mentality has sunk, and also that he is changing because of the situation he finds himself in.
My major issue with the film is the overuse of split screen. I didn't think it necessary, effective or even good to watch! With this in mind, 127 hours is still an emotional drama which is well worth the watch.
That is the last line from the trailer for this biopic about Aron Ralston, and how true that proves to be in this case.
In my opinion James Franco deserves an unbelievable amount of credit for his role as Ralston. Being able to hold the screen on your own for the best part of an hour is not easy, but he conveys the struggle and downward spiral into almost insanity excellently.
The real Aron Ralston has only showed his video diaries from his days trapped in the Blue John canyon to close friends and family, but James Franco and Danny Boyle were allowed to see them for the purposes of making the movie as real as possible. Ralston himself says that the film is as close to a documentary as possible while still being a drama.
At just over an hour and a half long, i didnt think it felt particularly long or drawn out, as the time passed quickly. However, if it had been longer i think it may have lost people's interest as there is only so many ways to show a man losing his mind while being stuck in the same location.
Possibly one of my favourite scenes from a film for a very long time comes when Franco is making a video recording while pretending his is on a radio show. The clever use of camera work and voice acting making it clear when it is Aron the mountain climber talking, or when it is the host of the show. He is self depricating and humble, apologising to his mother for not answering the phone to her and admitting he would not be in that situation if he had told someone where he was, calling himself a "hard hero". This scene serves to show how low his mentality has sunk, and also that he is changing because of the situation he finds himself in.
My major issue with the film is the overuse of split screen. I didn't think it necessary, effective or even good to watch! With this in mind, 127 hours is still an emotional drama which is well worth the watch.
The Next Three Days Review
I watched this last week, so thought it was about time that i sat down and wrote about it.
The Next Three Days is the about the story of a man (Russel Crowe) whos wife (Elizabeth Banks) has been arrested on suspicion of murdering her boss following an argument at work. Crowe's character then sets about proving her innocence, but as this fails due to the overwhelming evidence against her, he sets out to break her out of prison. Seeking the advice of a criminal (Liam Neeson) who has escaped prison 7 times, he learns how quickly the police can shut off roads, intersections, train stations and airports.
Elizabeth Banks shows her potential for a leading lady with a convincing performance of a woman who has lost everything. We see her go from being a loving mother and wife, who takes a photo of her family every morning before work, to being a shadow of her former self as she is locked in prison, with a son who doesn't talk to her, and a husband who blames himself for their son being bulleyed at school.
Crowe is equally successful in his role as the husband who is desperate to free his wife from prison, so much so that he risks his own freedom to do so. Throwing caution out of the window he too loses his way from being a good father, to just being someone with one goal, regardless of the consequences.
Liam Neeson, although only a short cameo, plays the part of an escaped criminal excellently. His dark performance serves to enhance the desperate nature of Crowe's endeavour.
My major complaint with this film is that it felt long at just over 2 hours long, with parts of the story feeling dragged out and unnecessary. Also i had a numb ass by the end, but i'll put that more down to the rubbish chairs of Odeon rather than the film!
Overall it was a good film, if a little long
The Next Three Days is the about the story of a man (Russel Crowe) whos wife (Elizabeth Banks) has been arrested on suspicion of murdering her boss following an argument at work. Crowe's character then sets about proving her innocence, but as this fails due to the overwhelming evidence against her, he sets out to break her out of prison. Seeking the advice of a criminal (Liam Neeson) who has escaped prison 7 times, he learns how quickly the police can shut off roads, intersections, train stations and airports.
Elizabeth Banks shows her potential for a leading lady with a convincing performance of a woman who has lost everything. We see her go from being a loving mother and wife, who takes a photo of her family every morning before work, to being a shadow of her former self as she is locked in prison, with a son who doesn't talk to her, and a husband who blames himself for their son being bulleyed at school.
Crowe is equally successful in his role as the husband who is desperate to free his wife from prison, so much so that he risks his own freedom to do so. Throwing caution out of the window he too loses his way from being a good father, to just being someone with one goal, regardless of the consequences.
Liam Neeson, although only a short cameo, plays the part of an escaped criminal excellently. His dark performance serves to enhance the desperate nature of Crowe's endeavour.
My major complaint with this film is that it felt long at just over 2 hours long, with parts of the story feeling dragged out and unnecessary. Also i had a numb ass by the end, but i'll put that more down to the rubbish chairs of Odeon rather than the film!
Overall it was a good film, if a little long
Just Go With It Review
Adam Sandler seems to be getting back to his old best with his new romcom, combining slapstick with childish humour, and not forgetting of course the extremely attractive leading ladies in Jennifer Aniston and Brooklyn Decker. Sandler seems to have realised that he is at his best when acting like a child, as with Billy Madison.
Again teaming up with Dennis Dugan, the pair create another feel good movie, which anyone can enjoy, as long as they don’t mind watching a grown man doing silly voices and a barking hand, among other things. That being said, a film which includes a sheep receiving SheePR and the Heimlich manoeuvre can’t be all bad.
It’s nothing new in terms of formula from Sandler, following the premise of the majority of his other films. All in all, if you don’t like his films, you more than likely won’t like this. However, it does include Aniston in a bikini, so if you’re a fan of bikinis you might like to see it!
Again teaming up with Dennis Dugan, the pair create another feel good movie, which anyone can enjoy, as long as they don’t mind watching a grown man doing silly voices and a barking hand, among other things. That being said, a film which includes a sheep receiving SheePR and the Heimlich manoeuvre can’t be all bad.
It’s nothing new in terms of formula from Sandler, following the premise of the majority of his other films. All in all, if you don’t like his films, you more than likely won’t like this. However, it does include Aniston in a bikini, so if you’re a fan of bikinis you might like to see it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)