Of all the 377 films playing at the 28th Annual Vancouver International Film Festival, there was really only one film that I wanted to see. That film was An Education.
It had great buzz coming from Sundance and even greater buzz from the Toronto International Film Festival. All of this was surrounding one person: Carey Mulligan who plays the central character Jenny.
This is Mulligan's breakthrough role and her first lead. Now, I've been very familiar with this young actress ever since I saw her play Ada Clare in 2005's BBC adaptation of Charles Dickens' Bleak House. I believe she made her feature debut as Kitty Bennett in 2005's big screen Pride and Prejudice.
But in An Education, Mulligan gives a standout performance as Jenny, a 16-year-old school girl in 1961 and destined for English studies at Oxford until one-day she is offered a ride home during a torrential downpour from an older man, David (Peter Sarsgaard).
Jenny's life is thrown into turmoil as she starts seeing David who gives her an education in life by talking her to jazz clubs and auctions, weekends to Oxford and Paris. She is also exposed to David's circle of friends, Danny (Dominic Cooper) and Helen (Rosamund Pike, playing the perfect dumb blond).
So soon Jenny realizes her school education may not be all cracked up and the life her parents, in particular her over-protective father (played to perfection by the always reliable Alfred Molina), wanted for her seems to be thrown in turmoil as she delves further in her relationship with David.
Sarsgaard is perfectly charming as David and you can see how Jenny falls for his charm and lifestyle. Another reason for me to love this film is that they keep on referencing Jane Eyre, which is one of the novel's that Jenny is studying in Miss Stubbs' (Olivia Williams) English class and her classmates keep on calling David, Jenny's Mr. Rochester.
While David seemed to be the perfect suitor, I kept on waiting for the other shoe to drop and have Jenny's world come crashing around her.
When that time comes, you do feel for her and one of my favorite lines of the film is when Miss Stubbs notes that Jenny sounds old and wise from all that she's been through, Jenny says back that "I feel old, but not wise." Mulligan's delivery of that line was note perfect.
When I got the Canadian film Cooking with Stella on my list of films to champion as part of my volunteer duties for VIFF09, I took a look at the description of the film and it definitely piqued my interest. It has a great Canadian pedigree behind Deepa Mehta wrote and produced it(with her brother Dilip directing). I loved Deepa's Bollywood Hollywood and her muse Lisa Ray is one of the stars of Cooking with Stella along with funnyman Don McKellar, who plays her husband.
According the VIFF guide, Cooking with Stella is the fiction feature debut of photographer Dilip Mehta, co-written with his sister Deepa, Cooking with Stella is a perfectly judged charmer that wears its politics so lightly you'll never mistake it for a Message Movie. It's the story of Michael (Don McKellar) and Maya (Lisa Ray), a pair of new parents from Ottawa who arrive in New Delhi where Maya has landed a diplomatic post. Comfortable and insulated in their High Commission compound, they get their big taste of India from their cook, Stella. She's a brilliant chef, loyal employee, devout Catholic and a bit of a thief. Stella pads her expenses, pilfers goods from her employers and works overcharging scams with local vendors. Michael and Maya are her latest jackpot, and the great fun of the movie is in seeing her negotiate their importance to her--first as easy marks, then as friends and finally as something like family.
For me, the unfortunate part of this film is that I just didn't like Stella. And I am not sure if we are supposed. Sure, she has some comedic moments but to be honest her thievery was a major turn off for me. As well, it really irked me how she eventually corrupted Maya and Michael's nanny Tannu. The film makers make a point of the poverty that Stella and Tannu live in that perhaps is the reason why they do what they do. For some reason, I though the kindness of her new bosses might stop her life of crime but alas no.
The food in the film did look good and that is probably the best thing in it and you can go the official Cooking with Stella website for the recipes.
At only 75 minutes long, Mid-August Lunch is a short but savory Italian treat.
Here is the VIFF 09 description of the film:
In Gianni Di Gregorio's delightful debut, an obliging middle-aged son finds himself catering to a spry but temperamental geriatric foursome--including his own mother. On the August holiday of Ferragosto, that celebrates the ascension of the Virgin Mary into heaven, pretty much the entire city of Rome empties out. Unfortunately for Gianni (played by the director himself), nursing a mountain of debt as well as his elderly mother Valeria, there is no easy escape. When the building manager realizes that he too can pawn off his own mother on Gianni (in exchange for forgiving a certain number of debts), the gray-haired quotient begins to escalate.
This is where the comedy comes in. In total (including his own mother) the senior set totals four and it does turn into an Italian version of the Golden Girls and that is not a bad thing. Each of the women offer different eccentricities that you could equate to the four women from the classic TV show. There is Marina who totally could be the Blanche of the group. There is Gianni's mother that could be the Dorothy of the group while Grazie who incessantly talks is Rose while Aunt Maria, who is a great cook, is Sophia down to the glasses.
There is also something very touching of how Gianni (who looks like Jerry Orbach) takes care of all these women, especially the three that are forced upon. He makes sure they have a place to sleep, make sure they eat well, take their medication and also make sure they are comfortable such as offering them a TV to watch. He does all this while taking more than the occassional sip of white wine.
The food in the movie should also get star billing. Their meals looked absolutely delicious and when the cast were talking about it in the film, it was even more delicious.
Even though Mid-August Lunch has finished its run at VIFF 09, I recommend checking it out if you ever get a chance.
Tonight I saw two films that I am championing as part of my volunteer efforts at VIFF this year.
I will review The Eclipse first even though I saw it second.
According to the description in the VIFF guide, The Eclipse is set in scenic Cobh, County Cork and director Conor McPherson's tantalizing amalgam of love story and supernatural thriller stars Aidan Quinn and Ciarán Hinds. Hinds is a widower who falls for visiting ghost-story writer Lena (High Fidelity's Iben Hjejle) while enduring some shocking apparitions.
I have to say that there were moments that when these apparitions appeared that I did jump out of my seat and did feel a chill course through my body but the weird thing was that every time people jumped in the audience it was followed by laughter. In fact there were several moments where the audience laughed and I am really not sure they should be.
For example, after Hinds' Michael Farr sees one these apparitions, he is comforted by his daughter but all of a sudden it is he who is comforting here even though she didn't see any ghosts yet the audience found this funny.
But what I found cloying was Fionnuala Ni Chiosain's score. You knew something scary was going to happen because of her creepy piano tinkling score that I was expecting to jump out of my seat at any moment.
I also didn't understand Conor McPherson's decision to shoot some of the movie in shadows. There was one particular scene were Michael and Lena were walking in a hospital corridor all in shadow and Michael leaves the scene and the camera lingers on Lena in complete darkness. It made no sense.
And Aidan Quinn was such a waste as a writer coming to town for an annual writer's festival that Michael works for in addition to be a woodshop teacher and a writer. Quinn was such a self-absorbed drunken blowhard that there was nothing likeable about him and he really served no purpose to the overall story.
On the ohter hand, Hjejle was winning as Lena and she displayed good chemistry with Hinds.
Hinds was good in is role as a still grieving widower.
There was something I wished the director and writer explained was why did Michael see the apparition that he did. I would like to know that answer or maybe I was just too tired to grasp it.
The Eclipse is playing two more times at VIFF09: Sun Oct 11, 9pm at the Ridge and Thu Oct 15, 4pm also at the Ridge.
Speaking of being tired. Pelleas and Melisande: The Song of the Blind was the film that I saw before the Eclipse. It was a two-hour long documentary that follows the first Russian production of the notoriously demanding Claude Debussey's 1902 opera Pelleas and Melisande.
The documentary was in French and showcased the rehearsals of the production spliced in with interviews of the director, conductor and some of the perfomers.
I will admit it. I fell asleep during the film. It actually was boring. Sorry but there was no way to sugar coat that.
I found the story of the opera to be fascinating: Golaud discovers Mélisande by a stream in the woods. She has lost her crown in the water, but does not wish to retrieve it. They marry and she instantly wins the favor of Arkël, who is ill. She falls in love with Pelléas. They meet by the fountain, where Mélisande loses her wedding ring. Golaud grows suspicious of the lovers, has Yniold spy on them, and discovers them caressing, whereupon he kills Pelléas and wounds Mélisande. She later dies after giving birth to an abnormally small girl.
And at times I wished that the film was just the opera and not behind the scenes.
There were somethings that I wished were better explained. First off, the director of the opera kept on mentioning the name Maeterlinck and I had no idea who he is or was until I read on Wikipedia that he is the author of the play of which Debussey based his opera.
Also, he follwed one of the actors who plays Arkel but never once showed us his name (we had to find out in the end credits) and only followed ever briefly. The same goes for all the people they interviewed. Not a single credit given to anyone.
The film also followed one of the violin players in the orchestra and what I found strange was the woman was speaking (I never learned who she was or how long she's been playing in the orchesra) as a voice over but the camera was on her and she isn't speaking. I found that weird. As well, she brought out the point that Debussey has never been performed in Russia. Now is it just his opera that has never been performed or all his works. Either way, I wouldn't mind finding out why it hasn't been performed in Russia and why is it such a big deal. That is never explained.
It also wouldn't have been nice to get the audience reaction. We got one audience scene but it was in the middle of the film and it went back to rehearsal footage that I got really confused.
Anyways, Pelleas and Melisande has finished its run at VIFF09.
The lasting image in history that most people associate with Queen Victoria, Britain's longest reigning monarch to date, is of a plump, dour, old woman always in black, forever in mourning for her beloved husband, Prince Albert.
However, in The Young Victoria, playing at the 28th Annual Vancouver International Film Festival (http://www.viff.org/tixSYS/2009/filmguide/films/2982), director Jean-Marc Valle (C.RA.Z.Y) and Oscar-winning screenwriter Julian Fellowes (Gosford Park) presents us with a Victoria (Emliy Blunt) that is vivacious, spunky, strong-willed yet naive.
The film explores her early reign, starting with the year before her she ascends the throne and her struggle with her mother's (Miranda Richardson) advisor, John Conroy (the very villainous Mark Strong) over the issue of Regency. Regency you see is in place when a monarch is unable to rule themselves because of illness or disability or because they are too young. You see, Victoria is 17 and it looks like King William IV (Jim Broadbent bringing nice drunken comic relief) is on death's door and with a Regency in place, it means that Victoria's mother will rule England (but it is really Conroy that will rule). This is where the strong-willed Victoria comes in as she refuses to sign anything that would take away her rights and be controlled
When Victoria turns 18, Regency is no longer needed and soon enough King William IV passes away and she ascends the throne. However, because she is so young and inexperienced, Victoria relies heavily on Lord Melbourne, the British Prime Minister, for advice on everything on who to hire for her household, events to attend and what issues she should be involved in or not.
Sprinked throughout all of this political intrigue is a love story between Victoria and her cousin Albert (Rupert Friend). While initially, they were an arranged match for political reasons (Albert was the nephew of the ambitous Leopold, King of the Belgians), it ended up being a love match.
It really is the love story of Victoria and Albert that gives the film its heart. Blunt and Friend have such great chemistry that is playful, sweet and loving. This chemistry is very evident during Albert's third and final visit to Victoria in England. When Albert enters the room, the camera focuses on Blunt's face and you can just see in her eyes that she deeply loves this man that has just walked into the room.
While this is very much a romantized view of their romance, I think I much prefer it than what the history books tell us.
As well, some of the facts presented were not historically accurate either such as Prince Albert taking a bullet during one of the failed assination attempts on Victoria's life but I can understand that Fellowes wanted to add some drama to the film.
Blunt should also be commended here as Victoria. Early on, just as Queen Victoria is coronated she still shows us that while she is Queen and the weight of a whole nation on her shoulders, Blunt still shows us that she is a teenager that wants to have fun and be mischevious.
The Young Victoria plays October 7, 2009 at 11am at the Visa Screening Room at the Granville 7 Cinemas.
Now, in Part two, its the docs turn. Five non-fiction films that range in topics from Porgy and Bess to cooking to looking at various aspects of aging.
The first documentary I want to recommned is Porgy and Me: In the World of Porgy and Bess. In the (white) world of opera, Gershwin's alternately celebrated and controversial opera Porgy and Bess is one of the very few works that takes people of colour as its subject. Susanna Boehm's stirring documentary follows the cast of the New York Harlem Theatre Company on their European tour of Gershwin's work.
The second film I like to recommend is Cooking History, a film that inventively uses the field kitchen as a prism through which to view 20th century European history.
Pelleas & Mellisinde (http://www.viff.org/tixSYS/2009/filmguide/films/2986) comes in at number four as a doc to watch. Since 1902, Claude Debussy's setting of Maurice Maeterlinck's symbolist drama Pelléas and Mélisande has divided critics and audiences, but if its enigmatic drama and the hypnotic sound of its world have never really entered the mainstream, its influence on later music has been incalculable and its fans quasi-religious in their devotion. This film depicts the first Russian production of this notoriously demanding opera and also blends in rehearsal footage and interviews.
The final doc that must be watched at VIFF 09 is Argippo Resurrected (http://www.viff.org/tixSYS/2009/filmguide/films/4705). Antonio Vivaldi's lost opera Argippo was originally composed for a Prague debut in 1730. Lost for centuries, the opera's score was discovered by young Czech conductor Ondrej Macek.
The 2009 Vancouver International Film starts October 1 and runs until October 16. Hope you go and enjoy all 10 films that I have recommended.
So there is one more film that I need to give a tremendous shout out to that is playing at VIFF09 and that is The Young Victoria.
This film closed TIFF 09 and now it is coming to Vancouver. The film tells the story of the early reign of Queen Victoria (Emily Blunt), showing how she ascended the thrown and her shaky start trying to rule a nation. It also depicts her romance with Prince Albert (Rupert Friend). My friend Sheri Block who covered the film at TIFF 09 for CTV.ca named The Young Victoria as her second most favourite TIFF experience.
The 28th Vancouver International Film Festival is just around the corner (it starts October 1 and ends October 16). While VIFF doesn't quite get all the pomp and circumstances (meaning Hollywood celebs) as TIFF or the Toronto International Film Festival does but VIFF does offer many of the same high quality films that TIFF often presents such as this year both film festivals are showing The Young Victoria starring Emily Blunt.
This year is no different. Here I like to present 10 films that people should check out at VIFF.
In Part One, I present 5 films that are a must see.
The first film is An Education starring Peter Sarsgaard, Alfred Molina, Emma Thompson and in her breakthrough role Carey Mulligan. I wrote in a previous blog post that this is one of the films I am looking forward to seeing in the fall and am so glad that it is playing at VIFF.
An Education is the story of a teenage girl's coming-of-age set in 1961 London, a city caught between the drab, post-war 1950s and the glamorous, more liberated decade to come. Jenny (Carey Mulligan) stands on the brink of becoming a woman: a brilliantly witty and attractive 16-year-old whose suburban life is about to be blown apart by the utterly unsuitable 30-something David (Peter Sarsgaard). Urbane and witty, David manages to charm her conservative parents Jack (Alfred Molina) and Marjorie (Cara Seymour). David introduces Jenny to a glittering new world of classical concerts and late-night suppers with his attractive friend and business partner, Danny (Dominic Cooper) and Danny's girlfriend, the beautiful but vacuous Helen (Rosamund Pike). Just as Jenny's family's long-held dream of getting their brilliant daughter into Oxford seems within reach, Jenny is tempted by another kind of life.
The next film on my list is Cooking with Stella, the feature debut of Dilip Mehta, who co-wrote the film with his sister Deepa Mehta. The film stars Don McKellar and Lisa Ray as Michael and Maya, new parents from Ottawa who arrive in New Delhi where Maya has landed a diplomatic post. There taste of India comes from their cook Stella, a brilliant chef, loyal employee, devout Catholic and a bit of a thief. Director Dilip Mehta will be in attendance.
Film #3 is The Eclipse not to be confused for The Twilight Saga: Eclipse, this Eclipse stars Ciaran Hinds (soon to be Aberforth Dumbledore in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows) as a widower who falls for a visiting ghost story writer while enduring some shocking apparitions in a film set in scenic, Cobh, County Cork Ireland.
The Italian film, Mid-August Lunch, is the number 4 film that you should watch at VIFF. The film is abou an obliging middle-aged son who finds himself catering to a spry but temperamental geriatric foursome including his own mother.
Whiteout, a mystery-thriller based on the graphic novel by Greg Rucka and Steve Lieber, starts off in 1957 with a gun fight involving Russians in the air over who knows what and ends with the plan crashing in the icy tundra of Antarctica.
Then it switches to the present day and we see U.S. Marshal Carrie Stetko (Kate Beckinsale) finishing her rounds of a U.S. Station in Antarctica. The basic premise of the film is that Stetko is three days away from her tour of duty in the frozen tundra and is about to return to the States just before 6 months of Winter darkness descends and a whiteout that would pretty much keep the people at the station trapped inside for the entire winter. She as she is preparing to leave, a body is discovered out of the middle of now where and she goes to investigate but has a tight time frame or else she would be trapped with a killer on the loose. Of course her investigation does tie into the beginnings fo the film. Helping with her investigation is a UN operative (Gabriel Macht).
Now I am not sure if the graphic novel was predictable but the movie sure was. I pretty much figured out who did it early on and knew that this person wasn't working alone. If you remember what Yoda said in The Phantom Menace: "Two there are: A master and an apprentice."
And this second person was also easy to predict. It was almost like a Murder, She Wrote. Pick the least likely person to be the killer and that person will be the killer.
Beckinsale was fine but Macht was pretty terrible as Robert Pryce, who was supposedly to have some sexual chemistry with Beckinsale's Carrie Stetko but nothing really came of that. Aside from the lack of chemistry with Beckinsale, his other problem was his line delivery was very flat and also he acts so suspicious all the time that you are supposed to think that he is the killer when you know that the most suspicious person in any mystery usually never does it.
The film used Manitoba as a stand-in for Antarctica and one of the things that director Dominic Sena did well was capture the coldness of the place. I have felt the cold of the Prairies and -40 celcius temperatures so I could relate to what the characters were feeling.
As a thriller, the film really does fail. I wasn't scared at all. The only thing that scared me was when Beckinsale's character got frostbite and had to have some fingers amputated.
In the end, Whiteout had more chills (temperature-wise) than thrills.
A year ago the CBC held a reality show competition called "How Do You Solve a Problem Like Maria?" which was based on a similar show in Britain and was all about finding the lead role for the Canadian production of The Sound of Music.
Now I didn't really want to watch the show but I watched it because one of the contestant Jayme Armstrong was from my hometown Richmond, BC but I couldn't really vote for her because she gradutated from my rival high school, Steveston (I graduated from Richmond High - GO COLTS!!!!)
Anyways, as the show progressed, I became a fan of Elicia MacKenzie, also a fellow BCer, and by the season finale of the show, I thought she was awesome and way better than the front runner, Janna Polzin.
And I usually never, ever vote for reality shows like this. For the entire run, I never voted on the show, but I felt compelled to vote for the deciding one, the episode that would choose Maria.
Because Janna was the obvious favourite, I didn't want it to happen (she didn't exude the tomboy quality that Elicia did for Maria) so as soon as the episode was over, I was on the phone voting several times that night. I can't remember how many times I voted but vote I did.
When the finale episode aired and when they were just about to announce the winner, I was waiting for it to be Janna and was shocked that Elicia won. For some reason, I like to believe that my votes were the deciding ones and that I helped her get the role that she so richly deserved.
See Elicia's winning moment here:
So when I got invited to a wedding in Toronto this year (2009) I knew that one of the things I wanted to while in town was to see The Sound of Music and with Elicia in the title role and not Janna who was named as her alternate (performing on Wednesday evenings and Saturday matinees)
Tonight, August 27, 2009 I finally saw The Sound of Music. First of all, the sets were marvelous. I love the opening scene, after the nuns do their processional along the aisle and we see Maria on the hilltop. That is an amazing piece of scenery and boom right off the bat Elicia wows with the title song.
The nuns were fantastic, in particular the Mother Abbess (I got the understudy Marianne Bindig). Her voice soars when she sings Climb Every Mountain. The other nuns like Sister Margaretta (Mary Ellen Mahoney) provide the comic relief.
All the Von Trapp children were good but the standout was the little girl who played Gretl (Natali Ioffe). She was so adorable in every scene she was in and darn right cute when she sang So, Long Farewell both times.
I got the understudy for Liesl (Anwyn Musico) and she was good as Liesl singing wise, acting-wise not so much. Her love interest Rolf (also understudy Louie Rossetti) wasn't as good in both categories.
Burke Moses made for a very handsome Captain Von Trapp. I particular enjoyed him in his naval uniform when he married Maria. His singing was also first rate especially when he sang Edelweiss.
Now, if there was one small complaint I have about this production it is the acting of Ms. MacKenzie. It was just okay. I was not prepared for her to have a sort of British accent and at times it did sound like she was trying to be Julie Andrews but as the show went on, I think her acting improved which is suprising since she has been doing the show for so long.
MacKenzie truly is a superstar during all the muscial acts. She is so warm and loveable when singing Do-Re-Mi, My Favourite Things and The Lonely Goatherd that you completely understand why the children and the Captain fall in love with her that you fall for her too.
Of course this is a stage play and people tend to forget that The Sound of Music was originally a stage show and not a movie first. I know that Julie Andrews will always be Maria to everyone, she is Maria to me but you got to let that go and also don't complain how the stage show doesn't follow the film. I overheard people saying the didn't know a coupld of the songs and said that they were added to the stage show but in reality they were removed from the film because they just didn't fit. Now one thing that subsequent stage productions have done since the movie is include the two songs that were written specifically for the film: I Have Confidence and Something Good (which replaced Ordinary Couple and Richard Rogers was okay with that since he didn't like that song to begin with). The songs do blend seamless into the stage shows so I am glad they are in there.
Also, the order of the songs is not as they appear in the film for instance, the Mother Abbess sings My Favourite Things to Maria just before she leaves the abbey instead of Maria singing it to the children because they are scared of the storm (she sings Lonely Goatherd instead). I was lucky that I saw the Stratford Festival do the Sound of Music (starring Cynthia Dale) back in 2001 so I was prepared for this production to be different from the film.
What else to say, I mentioned the sets, they were indeed gorgeous. If you check out the video below, you will get a glimpse of what I am talking about. The Von Trapp house is pretty impressive and the costumes too were beautiful in particular Maria's wedding gown. I am lucky that I brought binoculars so I get to see some of the action up close (I was seated in the second to last row in the orchestra of The Princess of Wales Theatre in Toronto).
Another thing is when you are sitting that far back it is hard to get a sense of the chemistry between Maria and the Captain. On film, I felt that Julie Andrews and Christopher Plummer had awesome chemistry but I couldn't really feel it between MacKenzie and Moses but I like to blame it on my seat, because if I were closer and could see their faces and emotions, I might have felt something. Although, I think I felt some chemistry during the Landler. I love that scene in the movie and I think I felt a bit of chemistry between McKenzie and Moses during that scene. When I looked at the two of them with my binoculars, you could see a little something between them.
I have heard from people that the stage version rushes their courtship and I do agree. It is a bit quick but in a movie you can take your time to evolve that. Also rushed was the end scene when the Nazis are searching for the Von Trapps at the Abbey was also truncated and less dramatic as Rolf, who finds them, just says no one is there. No confrontation with the Captain as was in the film.
But I did love the end when they climbed the mountain, again kudos to the sets.
We all gave a standing ovation in the end, especially when Bindig came on but it really got going when MacKenzie came on. She really did deserve it, like I said, her singing was the definite highlight. I am so glad that I voted for her.
There are two things you should not do when you go and see Julie and Julia. The first is don't go when you are jet-lagged, which I did as I just flew in on a red eye from Vancouver to Toronto. Not that the movie wasn't boring, I was just so tired from my trip, I was drifting off that I had move around my seat to stay awake.
The second is not go hungry when you see this movie because I guarantee that you will leave this movie starving and wanting to try some of the dishes yourself that are featured in the movie. My particular favourite was the last one, which was Pate Canard or something to that affect.
I felt the same way when I read the book Julie and Julia by Julie Powell (played by Amy Adams). I really wanted to try and make some of the recipes but all that butter makes me want to have a coronary.
So by now you can tell that Julie and Julia is about cooking and it does indeed tell the tale of office worker Julie Powell who is about to turn 30 in 2002 and seems to have no direction in her life. To find some meaning in it, she decides to cook all of Julia Child's 524 recipes that appear in her cookbook Mastering the Art of French Cooking all within 365 days while risking her sanity and marriage to the ever patient, supportive and understanding husband, Eric (Chris Messina).
Julie chronicles this insane project in blog called The Julie/Julia project. The film captures pretty faithful all the joys and struggles Julie has in making some of the recipes that appear in the Mastering the Art of French Cooking and the tool it takes on her family, in particular her husband and friends.
The film intercuts Julie's struggle with her project with the life of Julia Child (Meryl Streep) while she is living in France. This portion of the film is based on Child's autobiography called "My Life in France" and pretty much traces how Child became interested in cooking by taking lessons at the Cordon Bleu to starting a cooking school to collaborating on what would become her most famous cookbook to finally finding a publisher. Also along for this journey is her supportive husband Paul(Stanly Tucci)
One of the great strengths of the movie is seeing Meryl Streep as Julia Child, she not only does a spot on imitation of the French Chef but someone embodies her can do spirit.
I have read that people really like the Julia part and could do without the Julie part. I disagree. I like both parts. The movies does go a length of time without us seeing Julie for awhile or Julia for awhile that I found myself missing them.
Adams does capture the frustration of Julie that is in the book and it was interesting seeing her adventures on the big screen after only reading about it on the page.
It was also interesting to learn more about Julia Child as I didn't know much about her apart from what I saw on TV and the Dan Ackroyd impersonation on SNL. If it wasn't for the autobiography, I don't think writer-director Nora Ephron could have based a whole movie on just Julie Powell's memoirs as there wasn't enough Julia.
I found it interesting that Julie's mother, who is such a presence in the book, seem relegated to a voice on the phone. It would have been nice to see her on camera.
Another strong point is the performances of Tucci and Messina as the husbands to Julia and Julie. They share their wives frustration but while also enjoying the fruits of their labour (meaning the food).
As I said, don't go into this movie hungry, you will want to devour that yummy chocolate cake and Boeuf Bourginon that also appear in the movie. I am getting hungry just thinking about it now.
With summer wrapping up and the weather cooling down, the fall movie season is upon us and there are several films coming out between September and December that I most looking forward to seeing. Here are a few highlights of some of those films, starting with films that I really can't wait to see and will rush to the theatres probably on opening weekend to see them:
1. The Twilight Saga: New Moon. Opens November 20th, 2009
Starring: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson and Taylor Lautner
What is is about: Based on the second novel of Stephenie Meyer's wildly popular Twilight Saga, New Moon is the second book in the series. The film brings the romance between mortal and vampire to a new level as Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) delves deeper into the mysteries of the supernatural world she yearns to become part of—only to find herself in greater peril than ever before. Following Bella's ill-fated 18th birthday party, Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson) and his family abandon the town of Forks, Washington, in an effort to protect her from the dangers inherent in their world. As the heartbroken Bella sleepwalks through her senior year of high school, numb and alone, she discovers Edward's image comes to her whenever she puts herself in jeopardy. Her desire to be with him at any cost leads her to take greater and greater risks. With the help of her childhood friend Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner), Bella refurbishes an old motorbike to carry her on her adventures. Bella's frozen heart is gradually thawed by her budding relationship with Jacob, a member of the mysterious Quileute tribe, who has a supernatural secret of his own. When a chance encounter brings Bella face to face with a former nemesis, only the intervention of a pack of supernaturally large wolves saves her from a grisly fate, and the encounter makes it frighteningly clear that Bella is still in grave danger. In a race against the clock, Bella learns the secret of the Quileutes and Edward's true motivation for leaving her. She also faces the prospect of a potentially deadly reunion with her beloved that is a far cry from the one she'd hoped for. With more of the passion, action and suspense that made "Twilight" a worldwide phenomenon, "The Twilight Saga: New Moon" is a spellbinding follow-up to the box office hit.
Here is the trailer:
2. The Lovely Bones Opens December 11, 2009
Starring: Sairose Ronan, Rachel Weisz and Mark Whalberg
What is it about: Based on the critically acclaimed best-selling novel by Alice Sebold, and directed by Oscar winner Peter Jackson from a screenplay by Jackson & Fran Walsh & Philippa Boyens, "The Lovely Bones" centers on a young girl who has been murdered and watches over her family – and her killer – from heaven. She must weigh her desire for vengeance against her desire for her family to heal. Oscar® nominee Mark Wahlberg and Oscar® winners Rachel Weisz and Susan Sarandon star along with Stanley Tucci, Michael Imperioli and Oscar nominee Saoirse Ronan. The book was fantastic and a real tear-jerker so I will be bringing my Kleenex to the theatre.
Trailer:
3. An Education Opens October 9, 2009
Starring: Peter Sarsgaard, Carey Mulligan, Alfred Molina, Dominic Cooper, Rosamund Pike, and Emma Thompson.
What is it about: Generating great buzz from Sundance, especially off the breakthrough performance by Carey Mulligan, who I have been a fan of since Bleak House, An Education is the story of a teenage girl's coming-of-age set in 1961 London, a city caught between the drab, post-war 1950s and the glamorous, more liberated decade to come. Jenny (Carey Mulligan) stands on the brink of becoming a woman: a brilliantly witty and attractive 16-year-old whose suburban life is about to be blown apart by the utterly unsuitable 30-something David (Peter Sarsgaard). Urbane and witty, David manages to charm her conservative parents Jack (Alfred Molina) and Marjorie (Cara Seymour). David introduces Jenny to a glittering new world of classical concerts and late-night suppers with his attractive friend and business partner, Danny (Dominic Cooper) and Danny's girlfriend, the beautiful but vacuous Helen (Rosamund Pike). Just as Jenny's family's long-held dream of getting their brilliant daughter into Oxford seems within reach, Jenny is tempted by another kind of life.
Trailer:
Well, those are really the three movies that I most want to see. I also recommend people see The Young Victoria when it comes out on November 13. It is a film that details the early ears of Queen Victoria's (Emily Blunt) reign and her romance with Prince Albert (Rupert Friend). Both Blunt and Friend have great chemistry in the film and is a fairly historically accurate take on how Queen Victoria came to be and directed by a Canadian to boot (Jean Marc Vallee of C.R.A.Z.Y fame).
If you try and wrap your head around the whole time travel concept that is at the heart of The Time Traveler's Wife, don't bother as it will ruin your experience of watching the film if you try and be logical about it. Just sit back and let yourself immerse in this love story about how time travel brings together and threatens to tear about our central couple Henry (Eric Bana) and Clare (Rachel McAdams)
The Time Traveler's Wife is based on the novel of the same name by Audrey Niffenegger. It tells the story of Henry DeTamble who has a genetic disorder that causes him to time travel at a moments notice. He frequently visits his childhood and re-visits the death of this mother (Michelle Nolden) and visiting his wife Clare at various points in her childhood.
What I loved about the novel was the love story between Clare and Henry. Clare has been in love with Henry since she was six years-old and in one of the movie's cute scene a young Clare (Brooklynn Proulx) asks Henry if he is married, to which he answers that yes. Young Clare gets jealous and says she was hoping that Henry married her.
McAdams and Bana do offer great chemistry as Henry and Clare but they don't quite sizzle as the Henry and Clare do in the novel. But Adams is radiant and shines as Clare especially in scenes where she struggles to be a wife to a husband who disappears all the time.
Screenwriter Jeremy Leven and Bruce Joel Rubin have done a pretty good job in remaining faithful to the book. They got some of the key time travel sequences in there but cut some characters in the book like Henry's Korean neighbour Kimmy and the fact that Henry and Clare's friend Gomez (Ron Livingston) harbours an attraction to Clare.
Another highlight are the two young ladies who play Henry and Clare's daughter Alba at age 5 and 10 (sisters Tatum and Hailey McCann). Alba is also a time traveler like her dad and both sisters that play Alba are very cute in their scenes with Bana and McAdams.
Since it is a romanctic drama, tears are supposed to be shed and of course, as a romantic, I shed some tears and when you get to that part of the movie, you will cry too.
When I posted my review of Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen, I wrote that I grew up playing with the toys. But I also played with G.I. Joes. Now, I didn't love playing with them as much as Transformers, I mean action figures didn't do much except move their legs, arms and heads around vs. Transforming robots.
Nonetheless, I played with them. I don't remember all the names of the toys that I had. I remember playing with Scarlet, Gung Ho and Zartan.
When the first Transformers was a box office success, it was inevitable that their would be a G.I. Joe live action film. There as a 1987 animated movie based on the TV cartoon but that was a real dark and twisted movie that I didn't like at all.
Since I wasn't as big a G.I. Joe fan as a Transformers fan, I really had no desire to see this film but I got a chance to see it for free thanks to Norton (who had a product placement in the film).
The movie didn't screen for criticts and that usually is a sign that the movie sucks. And I had low expectations going into the screening. And I wasn't disappointed in that fact.
First off, all of the acting is terrible. Everyone delivers their lines so stitly that it was laughable. In particular, Rachel Nichols was particularly wooden as Scarlett (although I liked seeing her crossbow weapon) and Dennis Quaid was particularly bad and I expected better from him. But what can you expect when the dialogue was just terrible. I laughed everytime Quaid's General Hawk said "We still got Joes out there" and when he said the G.I. Joe tagline: Knowing is Half the Battle, it came so early and out of the blue that it was laughable and when Channing Tatum as Duke, who was equally wooden, repeated it back, it was also laughable.
Also disappointing was their interpretation of Cobra Commander (Joseph Gordon-Levitt). At first he looked like a burn victim with a bad toupee with a half mask that was reminiscent of the medical droid in Empire Strikes Back. Then he ended up looking like Anakin Skywalker at the end of Return of the Jedi and his mask at the end was the iconi pure silver blank mask but he ended up looking like a silver Elephant Man. Also, they re-dubbed Gordon-Levitt's voice as Cobra Commander. What a waste of a talented actor who was so great in (500) Days of Summer.
His henchmen looked either like the Death Eaters from Harry Potter or men with a bug helmet on their head. But it was cool that to see that these henchmen were controlled by Cobra Commander that on their necks you see the Cobra symbol appear on their flesh.
The basic plot of the movie is the G.I. Joes trying to stop some guy name McCullen (Christopher Eccleston -who was so over the top campy) from stealing and then using these weapons he developed called nanomites from destroying the world.
His henchmen include Duke's ex, the Baroness (Sienna Miller) and Storm Shadow (Leey Byung-hun). It actually was laughable when the kept on saying Storm Shadow in regular conversation as if his name was Steve. Of course Storm Shadow as this rivalry with the Joe's Snake Eyes (played by Darth Maul aka Ray Park) as was made apparent with numerous flashbacks employed in the film.
That was also laughable. You can tell when a flashback was coming when one of the characters looks deep in thought.
If I can say one good thing about the movie is the action and fight sequences. I enjoyed the fight sequence at the beginning of the film, the fight at the G.I. Joe headquarters and the chase sequence in Paris, although it did drag in places and the end fight scene.
There were a lot of things that reminded me of Star Wars for some odd reason. You had McCullen's underwater layer that reminded me of Gungan City, home of Jar Jar Binks.
Anyways, don't waste 2 hours and 15 minutes of your life seeing this movie, even the trailers playing in front of weren't interesting.
The only good thing I got out of it was a free T-Shirt!
I think the headline says it all. It wasn't that I dislike HP6 the second go around, I did. I noticed things that I didn't the first time around like the fact that young Tom Riddle had a postcard of the Cave in the orphanage and somethings I didn't like where the heck is Cho Chang?
But it really was the 3D sequences that were very disappointing. I wanted to see HP6 again because of the 3D as the 3D sequences in HP5 (Order of the Phoenix) was phenomenal. The last 20 minutes were just amazing. The flight to London on the Thestrals, the battle at the Department of Mystery where you had prophesies flying at you along with death eaters, fire snakes and water.
In Half-Blood Prince, the only amazing 3D sequence was the trailer to A Christmas Carol that played right before the movie.
There are two sequences in the actual movie that is pretty impressive in 3D and that is the Death Eaters flying through London and into Diagon Alley and then when Dumbledore helps put back together Slughorn's house after he ransacked it to keep the Death Eaters away.
I think that the film makers could have spread the 3D love around the film instead of just the first 12 minutes. Like Quidditch could have been in 3D and the Cave scene and the Astronomy tower would have been great in 3D. I think as an audience member, I wouldn't mind having to take on and off my 3D glasses as long as the sequences were tremendous in 3D.
As I said earlier, the movie is still great. Still love all the stuff that I loved in the first place like Ginny, Ron and Hermione, Quidditch and the cave scene and Luna.
I think when Deathly Hallows parts 1 and 2 come out, I most likely will just see it in IMAX first instead of regular theatre and then IMAX. That way I won't be disappointed paying a premium to see it again.
Funny thing is that I didn't really like HP5 in regular theatre yet when I saw it in IMAX I ended up loving it.
So save $5 and just see HP6 in a regular movie theatre.
News came yesterday that Bryce Dallas Howard will be stepping into the role of Victoria for the third film of the Twilight Saga called Eclipse. According to Summit, the studio that releases the Twilight films, the original Victoria, played by Canadian Rachelle Lafevre had to drop out because of scheduling conflicts with another film (Barney's Version).
Well, according to a statement from Lafevre, she was quite surprised to be replaced and as a fan of Twilight, I was too.
I was quite happy to see a Canadian take on such a role in a very popular series and looked forward to her having a meatier part in Eclipse. In Twilight and New Moon she wasn't quite a major character but her presence was.
But will I miss Lafevre as Victoria? I really don't know until I see how she is in New Moon but I think I can understand that the studio wants a bigger name to take on a role that is larger in Eclipse. That's not to say that Lafevre is not a great or good actress, I just haven't seen her in enough stuff to be the judge.
Dallas Howard on the other hand is the daughter of Ron Howard and does have acting chops. I saw her do As You Like It on HBO and thought she was great. As well, she is no stranger to taking over a role as she played Kate Connor in Terminator Salvation and from my understanding, Claire Danes played the role in the previous Terminator film.
Taylor Lautner was in danger of losing the role of Jacob Black in New Moon because the studio felt that he couldn't pull off Jacob's transformation in the film. The actor worked hard to keep the role and now it is unlikely the role will be recast.
It is unfortunate that if it is indeed they wanted a bigger name for Victoria, it is a shame for Lafevre. I think the studio should have given her a chance since the scheduling conflict doesn't seemed to be that insurmountable.
I would have been mightily pissed if the Harry Potter producers decided to re-cast Ginny for Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince because the part was definitely more major than previous films. I too wouldn't blame them to have a bigger British actress play Ginny because her part was really huge in HP6 but it would have been a major diservice to Bonnie Wright who has played Ginny since the beginning and to fans who have grown to love Wright in the part. I am 100% sure that recasting Ginny was never in the cards but you can't help but wonder sometimes when a role because so much bigger than what it was before.
Recasting isn't uncommon in movies. Maggie Gyllenhaal took over from Katie Holmes in the Christopher Nolan Batman movies. I didn't lose sleep over this one. I remembered Maggie Gyllenhaal more in The Dark Knight than I ever did Katie Holmes in Batman Begins.
Of course the recasted Dumbledore but the Harry Potter producers had to considering that Richard Harris died. It took me forever to accept Michael Gambon as Dumbledore until I saw him in Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.
Over in TV, you had the two Darrens on Bewitched and the two Becky's on Roseanne and of course the two Cecilys on Road to Avonlea. This latter one bugged me. I thought Harmony Cramp's portrayal of Cecily was sweet and cute. There was an episode where her character contracted consumption and I thought that this would be her episode to shine but alas she was relagated to her bedroom. When the character re-emerged in season 6, I thought they brought her back as it seemed those episodes would be meatier Cecily episodes but alas they recasted with Molly Atkinson.
Back in movieland, I am sure there countless other examples in movie history but it is hot and I am tired so I can't think of any right now.
Maybe there is going to be major backlash from Twilight fans over Dallas Howard replacing from Lafevre as Victoria that the studio will have to recant but that is unlikely to happen.
Honestly though, the film that Lafevre is filming instead of Eclipse is based on a Mordecai Richeler novel and stars Paul Giammati and Dustin Hoffman. You are better off doing that movie Rachelle than Eclipse. No offence to Twilighters, I mean I love the whole series but Barney's Version is more a prestige picture.
The debate always seems to rage when either one in the series releases a movie.
I haven't read any articles on these debates because I just don't want to. I think there really isn't anything to debate about. But it seems that you have to love one or the other. For example, I listen to a Harry Potter podcast called Pottercast, now I love Pottercast and everything they talk about but there are times when some of the hosts irk when when they disparage Twilight. The hosts have read The Twilight Saga too and some have enjoyed it but they seem to think it inferior to Twilight.
Now, I agree that storytelling wise Stephenie Meyer is nearly not as good a writer as JK Rowling but why do we have to chose between the two?
I love them both and you can't compare the two. The only thing they have in common is that they are popular book series and that Robert Pattinson is Cedric Diggory to Potter fans or Edward Cullen to Twilight fans. To me, he is both depending on my mood but mostly he is Edward to me.
I wrote in a previous blog post about this debate on which I love the most and I think I said Harry Potter because it got me to read. While that reason holds true still. Twilight crept up over the past few months because of all the New Moon hype and I am a romantic at heart and The Twilight Saga's basis is all about the love story between Bella and Edward.
As I also said in my previous blog, Harry Potter isn't abut romance but about Harry's journey to defeat Voldemort. There are twinges of romance in the books but I think the movies do a better job in bringing that forward and when I saw HP6 and the great job that Steve Kloves did with Ron and Hermione and Harry and Ginny, it has made me realize that I truly do love Harry Potter more. I think when you invest almost 10 years of your life to a book series, I think it deserves some more devotion as oppose to only 8 months with Twilight but I did fall hard for that series.
If there was another thing that the two have in common is that it looks like they are in the rare breed that they will have their entire series made into a film, joining Lord of the Rings. I can't think of another one but if someone knows of one, please post in the comments section.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is filming it's two parts now. New Moon is coming out November 20 and Eclipse starts filming next month here in Vancouver. Robert Pattinson has signed on to do Breaking Dawn but other than that, it still isn't in the bag that it will be made.
Other book series like Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials probably won't have all of those books made into films considering the box office failuer of The Golden Compass.
Lemony Snicket's 13-book series probably won't hit the screen either since the first Lemony Snicket movie (based on the first three books) wasn't that great. I read somewhere that there is supposed to be a sequel but I think that is unlikely since you will have to recast the kids.
Inkheart, which was released earlier this year, really tanked at the box office so it is very unlikely that the rest of the book series will be made.
Percy Jackson and the Olympians is a five book series and the first film, The Lightening Thief, which is coincidentally being directed by HP1 and HP2's Chris Columbus, is coming out this fall. If it is successful then we can expect the rest of the books to be made into films.
People tell me I should read Percy Jackson because I love Harry Potter. My problem is that I really don't want to get into another book series. I resisted Twilight because I was told the same thing but I am glad that I did. So we will see if I pick-up Percy Jackson at the library.
The Chronicles of Narnia looked like they were going to get all of the books made into films considering the success of The Lion, the Witch and The Wardrobe but alas Prince Caspian didn't do as well and Disney dumped the franchise to 20th Century Fox to make The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. Having just read on Wikipedia, it looks like Dawn Treader is being filmed now.
I was really hoping that Narnia will have all of its novels made because I really enjoyed the films. So it is good news to read that Dawn Treader is filming for a 2010 release. Here is hoping that The Silver Chair gets released.
But anyways, Twilight vs Harry Potter. To me there is no debate. I don't have to choose because I love them both equally and it is true depending on what hype cycle I am in, I might love one over the other ever so temporarily.
Director-writer Max Mayer brings us a story of Adam (Hugh Dancy), a young man with Asperger's Syndrome living in New York City. His father just died and he recently lost his job as an electronics engineer. His escape of all his troubles is his love of space exploration.
One day he meets cute his new neighbor, Beth (Rose Byrne), when both come down to do laundry. Beth is a school teacher and aspiring children's book author. After this encounter, Beth is immediately smitten with Adam.
Because of Adam's condition, he is quite awkward in social situations and usually resorts back to taking about space but it is this subject that brings our couple together as Adam shows Beth his home planetarium.
When Beth learns about Adam's condition, she consults a colleague about Asperger's and whether or not you can form a romantic relationship with someone with it. This scene really played out like a very special episode of Blossom.
Adam and Beth also connect over two raccoons in Central Park. Soon enough the two start dating.
A subplot, which was sort of unnecessary to the film's plot, involves Beth's father (Peter Gallagher) as he goes on trial of accounting fraud. He mentions is so casually near the beginning of the film that you think that it was meant to be a comedic bit.
Hugh Dancy offers a fine performance as someone with Asperger's without going too over the top but he tries to be too cute in some scenes like the Christmas party scene or when he meets Beth's parents for the first time.
Byrne also turns in a nice performance as Beth and has nice chemistry with Dancy. Gallagher on the other hand was over the top as Beth's dad especially when he tries to forbid when Beth from seeing Adam.
It wasn't a fantastic movie but overall Adam was a good tale with good performances if only it didn't try to be too cute.
If you haven't read Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince then stop reading this review now. I am warning you that this review will be filled with spoilers. Last warning. Alright, you've been warned and after waiting eight months for the film version to come out, I think I can be a bit spoilerish.
If it wasn't for getting into The Twilight Saga, I would think these past eight months would have been unbearable but thankfully I got into and it helped dull the pain but as the weeks to the premiere ofHP6 started creeping up, I became increasingly anxious to see it.
Well, the wait was well worth it. Steve Kloves returns as screenwriter after taking a break from Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (or HP5) and he has again done a marvelous job of distilling a quite wieldy book into a digestible and enjoyable movie. Just like he did with Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (HP4), he has made the right plot cuts to help keep the movie going forward.
Unfortunately, he made some cuts that I didn't agree with such as Harry inheriting 12 Grimmauld Place from Sirius Black and the fact that he also inherited Kreacher. I hope that these very important plot points are in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part one. I am not going to bother writing a plot synopsis because if you are reading this, you have already read the books.
What I loved about the movie is basically Ginny (Bonnie Wright). I was so happy to see Wright's name finally make it to the credits. I have been so disappointed in how the filmmakers marginalized her role in the movies that it so great that she was such a major character in this film. Sure, she is Harry's (Daniel Radcliffe) love interest but she was simply amazing in the confidence she exudes not only in her feelings for Harry but in her abilities as a witch. I also loved that finally after five movies of merely hinting at Ron and Hermione (Rupert Grint and Emma Watson) they finally are hitting us over the head with the fact that Hermione really fancies Ron and shows great jealousy over Ron's relationship with Lavender Brown (a perfectly cast Jessie Cave). The scene after Ron gets poisoned and he is in the hospital wing with Ginny and Hermione at his bedside and the Lavender comes rushing in demanding to see Ron (or Won Won –thanks Kloves for keeping that bit in from the books), because she is after all Ron's girlfriend and gets jealous after seeing Hermione there and demands to know why she is there. Hermione stands up and says "I'm his friend" and then Ron proceeds to say Hermione's name in his sleep making Hermione happy and effectively breaking up (later much to Ron's happiness) with Lavender. My favourite part of the book and now movie. I've always loved Ron and Hermione and I hope how their relationship is depicted in Deathly Hallows will be great in the movie.
And Freddie Stroma as Cormac McLaggen, a Gryffindor who takes a fancy to Hermione, has the right amount of blowhardness.
One of the things that I love about the Harry Potter movies is the casting. They always get it right, they did an awesome job in finding Evanna Lynch as she is the perfect Luna Lovegood and getting Imelda Staunton to be Dolores Umbridge in the last movie. This movie brings us Jim Broadbent as Horace Slughorn, Hogwart's new potions master that also holds a key memory that delves into the history of Voldemort.
I also finally accepted Michael Gambon as Dumbledore. It took three movies to finally shake Richard Harris' interpretation of the Hogwart's headmaster.
The scene that did that for me was of Gambon and Radcliffe in the cave was lifted straight from the book and director David Yates and Kloves brought it to life in a very chilling sense. Those Inferi were indeed frightening and also having to watch Dumbledore drink that potion to retrieve what they think is one of Voldemort's Horcruxes.
As with Wright, I am so happy that they gave Tom Felton so much more to do than he ever did in the entire film series. His Draco Malfoy had the perfect mixture of school bully and emotional confliction over the task Voldemort asked him to perform. It was also awesome to see Alan Rickman do so much more as Snape than in previous movies.
Other highlights his Nicholas Hooper's wonderful score and the scene with Katie Bell getting poisoned by necklace was also very frightening.
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is right now my favourite movie adaptation of JK Rowling's boy wizard book series followed by Goblet of Fire, Prisoner of Azkaban (except for that final frame), Philosopher's Stone, Order of the Phoenix (I still disagree with some of the cuts) and Chamber of Secrets (those spiders still freak me out).
I look forward to seeing HP6 again but this time in IMAX. I really want to know what scenes are in 3D and also I want to catch all the stuff I might have missed.
Growing up, I was a tomboy. With two brothers on either side of me and being close in age to boot, it was inevitable that I would be one. Transformers were our bonding experience. We had most of the Transformers. Older brother had the leader of the Autobots –Optimus Prime while younger brother had the leader of the Decepticons –Megatron. I got second bananas on both sides –Bumblebee and Starscream.
Imagine our excitement when, in 1986, there was going to Transfomers: The Movie a feature length animated film that was based on the cartoon show that was airing at the time. We thought it was going to be a blockbuster because the one showing we wanted to see was sold out but come Monday, I don't think it made a blip at the box office.
Back then the cartoon movie was like the Citizen Kane to an 11-year old. I re-watched it a few years ago and upon further reflection, it wasn't such a great movie.
Fast forward to 2007 when Michael Bay directed a live-action version of my beloved toys. I wasn't quite sure how he was going to do it but I was excited to see the film. I walked in excited and I walked out disappointed. While the effects where amazing, the story was confusing (the All Spark –what the heck is that?) and the dialogue was terrible. What was with Optimus Prime saying "My bad." Terrible just terrible. But the really awful thing about Transformers was that they turned my beloved Bumblebee from a Volkswagon bug into a Camero and gave him a Herbie-like personality.
Despite not liking Transformers, for some reason I had faint hope that Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen would be better than the first.
The answer to that is no. While the effects were still amazing and the Autobots and DEcepticons had more personality, the dialogue still sucked and the storyline still confusing.
Revenge of the Fallen takes place two years after the events of the original. Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf) in pursuit of a normal life after saving the world, is off to an East Coast college to study Astronomy, leaving girlfriend, Mikaela (Megan Fox –who adds no value whatsoever storyline-wise) and his parents' (Kevin Dunn and the hilarious Julie White) home in LA.
Trouble starts when a shard of the All Spark cube falls out of one of Sam's sweatshirts. He picks it up and upon doing saw gets downloaded with Cybertronian symbols that apparently are a map that leads to a source of Energon on Earth. Apparently, the Decepticons want it and one in particular known as the Fallen, who is so powerful that only a Prime (meaning Optimus Prime) can beat him.
Confused yet? Don't worry, I didn't really quite understand what was going on and in fact I am so confused that I can't even recap the rest of the plot.
There were definitely things I did like about the sequel. The first being the interpretation of Soundwave as a telecommunications satellite (in the original cartoon, he was Walkman that spewed out tapes that acted as his robotic minions).
I also got really excited that the film featured the Constructicons –a subdivision of the Decepticons – that when they combine together form Devastator.
What was annoying? Megan Fox. I know her purpose was eye candy but her line delivery throughout was so wooden. Shia LaBeouf was fine but I don't really see his appeal as this is the fourth movie that I've seen him in where he and the film aren't great (the others are Transformers, Eagle Eye and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skulls). Also, it was really hard to distinguish who was an Autobot and who was a Deception. While their symbols are visible in close-ups, far away they all looked the same and at times, I thought the human army lead by Josh Duhamel were attacking the Autobots.
The two twin Autobots were annoying in a Jar Jar Binks kind of way and weren't really necessary to the story.
And, if you've seen the original cartoon film –you will see some (and I mean a tiny some) elements in this film.
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is definitely one loud and way too long summer blockbuster and it doesn't really matter what I think, there is going to be a Transformers 3 in a couple of years and I will probably be there to watch it.
