![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Just added some new friends from the recent friending meme, I'm looking forward to getting to know you all better :)
And some films I've watched recently:
I really liked Red Dragon! It did take me a little while to get used to Edward Norton's Will Graham though, at first I didn't feel like he has that much presence in the role, but after a bit he started to grow on me. I actually found the 'tooth fairy' and the investigation into him the most interesting part of the film by far, Anthony Hopkin's Hannibal Lector just didn't make much of an impression on me this time around, nor was I particularly gripped by his interaction with Will Graham in the same way that I was with Hannibal and Clarice in the first two films. I guess that the film's Hannibal is just starting to feel a bit overplayed to me by now quite honestly, those scenes mostly just felt like they were redoing the same old shtick from the first films, the films Will and Hannibal definitely didn't have the same chemistry as Will and Hannibal do on the tv version *g*
It will be interesting to see how the tv series handles the Red Dragon plot, Hannibal appears in it so rarely that surely Mads is only going to get one or two scenes per episode for that plot? I guess that separating the season into two parts makes more sense in that case though, as then they can have a much heavier screen presence of Hannibal in the first half of season 3 while they explore his past, before letting Will take centre stage during Hannibal's imprisonment in the second half? Anyway I'm even more excited now to see how the tv series is going to handle the Red Dragon plot! I have to confess that I still haven't read the book, so I wasn't particularly clued-in to that part of the story, but now I am and it should be awesome to see the tv show's take on the "Tooth Fairy"!
I didn't enjoy Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes much tbh, I found it really hard to get into at first with the long scenes of cgi apes actually. I was a bit surprised because so many people seemed to prefer this film over the first one, so I assumed that I would as well, but meh I actually connected a lot more to Caesar's story in the first film. All of the war scenes in the sequel just weren't my thing, it felt really male-centric, and I found myself getting aggravated with the bad choices that the characters kept making over and over again. I did get into the second half a lot more, but still overall the characters (other than Ceasar of course!) felt so thinly-developed and lacking. I guess that it was too much of a big blockbuster movie for my tastes
I really enjoyed Gone Girl, Rosamund Pike was soooo perfect as Amy and almost exactly how I'd imagine her from the book :D Nearly all of the casting was spot-on (I especially liked the actress playing the main detective in the missing persons case).
I liked how much the film ran with the trial by media subject from the book, with the idea that simply awkwardly smiling at the wrong time can make you guilty in the public eyes. Also how Amy intentionally set herself up as the perfect victim that the public would love, and half of the reason for the public's fascination with the case in the first place was because of the "Amazing Amy" books fictionalizing Amy's childhood and making everyone feel like they knew her, just as she attempts to do herself with the version of herself and Nick that she presents in the diaries. I also liked the whole idea of marriage being a power play with both parties putting up facades to one another at first, Amy's "cool girl rant" was perfect *g*
The only part of the book I was surprised that they left out was Nick's father, quite a big part of the book was Nick's hatred of his misogynistic father and his fear of turning into him, but the film didn't really cover that. It's not that big a deal maybe as obviously they would have had to cut some parts of the book for time, I'm just surprised I guess that Gillian Flynn wouldn't include it in the screenplay when there was a fair bit of focus on it in the book. It was an important part of Nick's motivation in wanting to be seen as the good husband and prove to himself that he's a better man than his Father, as well as being part of why he chooses to stick around in the end to raise his kid differently. (Also it just seemed odd to have his Father briefly appear at the police station muttering "bitch" and then never follow up on that, they may as well have cut that scene completely if he wasn't going to get any more scenes after that)
And I know that the ending is a pretty controversial one, but...I didn't hate it. Obviously they had the most dysfunctional marriage EVER, but I didn't see the ending as Nick only staying to protect the baby from Amy. In the book he does want to put Amy in prison for her crimes (before Amy one-ups him), but even then he's still thinking that prison would involve regular visits lol, so I think that we were meant to agree with Amy when she argued that Nick would get bored with anyone else. Plus there was all of Nick's baggage with actually wanting to play the role of the perfect husband and father for Amy, something which maybe doesn't come across in the film as much, but the book ends with Nick admitting that he can no longer imagine his life without Amy, "Now at last I'm the hero. I am the one to root for in the never-ending war story of our marriage...She's my forever antagonist." Well and the film does also touch on that with Amy pointing out that Nick liked the version of himself more when he was trying to be someone that she might like
So yeah honestly I couldn't feel all that sorry for Nick being stuck with Amy, I always thought the point was that he was choosing to stay with Amy. He could have exposed the holes in Amy's stories and stopped going along with her if he had really wanted too, and I think that's part of why viewers/readers get frustrated at the book and film seeming to just ignore Nick's better options, but I saw it as Amy giving him the excuse that he needed to stay. In the film he pretty much can't answer when Go accuses him of wanting to stay with Amy. It was definitely a very chilling note to end it on though as Nick was clearly never going to feel safe in his own home again! (And in the book also you definitely get the sense that it's all going to unravel very quickly after Nick doesn't give Amy the right answer as to why he's doting on her so much)
I wasn't such a fan of Under The Skin because it left out the most interesting parts of Michel Faber's novel! Maybe the book was a bit too on the nose with its factory farming themes, but I would much rather have seen the plot and the characters from that, as opposed to a film which mostly just consisted of Scarlet Johansson driving around in a van to make awkward small talk and pick up strangers. It got really boring and tedious after a while, I'm afraid that I couldn't even finish it
And I'm currently reading Never Let Me Go which I'm enjoying so far, I'm planning to try and see the film for that next
And some films I've watched recently:
I really liked Red Dragon! It did take me a little while to get used to Edward Norton's Will Graham though, at first I didn't feel like he has that much presence in the role, but after a bit he started to grow on me. I actually found the 'tooth fairy' and the investigation into him the most interesting part of the film by far, Anthony Hopkin's Hannibal Lector just didn't make much of an impression on me this time around, nor was I particularly gripped by his interaction with Will Graham in the same way that I was with Hannibal and Clarice in the first two films. I guess that the film's Hannibal is just starting to feel a bit overplayed to me by now quite honestly, those scenes mostly just felt like they were redoing the same old shtick from the first films, the films Will and Hannibal definitely didn't have the same chemistry as Will and Hannibal do on the tv version *g*
It will be interesting to see how the tv series handles the Red Dragon plot, Hannibal appears in it so rarely that surely Mads is only going to get one or two scenes per episode for that plot? I guess that separating the season into two parts makes more sense in that case though, as then they can have a much heavier screen presence of Hannibal in the first half of season 3 while they explore his past, before letting Will take centre stage during Hannibal's imprisonment in the second half? Anyway I'm even more excited now to see how the tv series is going to handle the Red Dragon plot! I have to confess that I still haven't read the book, so I wasn't particularly clued-in to that part of the story, but now I am and it should be awesome to see the tv show's take on the "Tooth Fairy"!
I didn't enjoy Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes much tbh, I found it really hard to get into at first with the long scenes of cgi apes actually. I was a bit surprised because so many people seemed to prefer this film over the first one, so I assumed that I would as well, but meh I actually connected a lot more to Caesar's story in the first film. All of the war scenes in the sequel just weren't my thing, it felt really male-centric, and I found myself getting aggravated with the bad choices that the characters kept making over and over again. I did get into the second half a lot more, but still overall the characters (other than Ceasar of course!) felt so thinly-developed and lacking. I guess that it was too much of a big blockbuster movie for my tastes
I really enjoyed Gone Girl, Rosamund Pike was soooo perfect as Amy and almost exactly how I'd imagine her from the book :D Nearly all of the casting was spot-on (I especially liked the actress playing the main detective in the missing persons case).
I liked how much the film ran with the trial by media subject from the book, with the idea that simply awkwardly smiling at the wrong time can make you guilty in the public eyes. Also how Amy intentionally set herself up as the perfect victim that the public would love, and half of the reason for the public's fascination with the case in the first place was because of the "Amazing Amy" books fictionalizing Amy's childhood and making everyone feel like they knew her, just as she attempts to do herself with the version of herself and Nick that she presents in the diaries. I also liked the whole idea of marriage being a power play with both parties putting up facades to one another at first, Amy's "cool girl rant" was perfect *g*
The only part of the book I was surprised that they left out was Nick's father, quite a big part of the book was Nick's hatred of his misogynistic father and his fear of turning into him, but the film didn't really cover that. It's not that big a deal maybe as obviously they would have had to cut some parts of the book for time, I'm just surprised I guess that Gillian Flynn wouldn't include it in the screenplay when there was a fair bit of focus on it in the book. It was an important part of Nick's motivation in wanting to be seen as the good husband and prove to himself that he's a better man than his Father, as well as being part of why he chooses to stick around in the end to raise his kid differently. (Also it just seemed odd to have his Father briefly appear at the police station muttering "bitch" and then never follow up on that, they may as well have cut that scene completely if he wasn't going to get any more scenes after that)
And I know that the ending is a pretty controversial one, but...I didn't hate it. Obviously they had the most dysfunctional marriage EVER, but I didn't see the ending as Nick only staying to protect the baby from Amy. In the book he does want to put Amy in prison for her crimes (before Amy one-ups him), but even then he's still thinking that prison would involve regular visits lol, so I think that we were meant to agree with Amy when she argued that Nick would get bored with anyone else. Plus there was all of Nick's baggage with actually wanting to play the role of the perfect husband and father for Amy, something which maybe doesn't come across in the film as much, but the book ends with Nick admitting that he can no longer imagine his life without Amy, "Now at last I'm the hero. I am the one to root for in the never-ending war story of our marriage...She's my forever antagonist." Well and the film does also touch on that with Amy pointing out that Nick liked the version of himself more when he was trying to be someone that she might like
So yeah honestly I couldn't feel all that sorry for Nick being stuck with Amy, I always thought the point was that he was choosing to stay with Amy. He could have exposed the holes in Amy's stories and stopped going along with her if he had really wanted too, and I think that's part of why viewers/readers get frustrated at the book and film seeming to just ignore Nick's better options, but I saw it as Amy giving him the excuse that he needed to stay. In the film he pretty much can't answer when Go accuses him of wanting to stay with Amy. It was definitely a very chilling note to end it on though as Nick was clearly never going to feel safe in his own home again! (And in the book also you definitely get the sense that it's all going to unravel very quickly after Nick doesn't give Amy the right answer as to why he's doting on her so much)
I wasn't such a fan of Under The Skin because it left out the most interesting parts of Michel Faber's novel! Maybe the book was a bit too on the nose with its factory farming themes, but I would much rather have seen the plot and the characters from that, as opposed to a film which mostly just consisted of Scarlet Johansson driving around in a van to make awkward small talk and pick up strangers. It got really boring and tedious after a while, I'm afraid that I couldn't even finish it
And I'm currently reading Never Let Me Go which I'm enjoying so far, I'm planning to try and see the film for that next
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-15 05:46 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-15 06:44 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-15 05:52 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-15 06:41 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-15 07:02 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-15 07:13 pm (UTC)Just finished Never Let Me Go!
Date: 2015-02-18 10:18 pm (UTC)To me it had a lot of parallels to oppressive human systems like slavery, while there were always some that tried to run or tried to lead uprisings against their oppressors, the vast majority did think that they had no choice but to go along with the way that things were. I thought that it was really interesting and sad to get a story from that perspective, as opposed to the usual narrator raging about the unfairness of life in these sorts of stories
I liked the film adaption of it too, Carey Mulligan was especially good as Kathy I thought. Urgh it was really hard for me to get through the scene where Tommy and Kathy are asking Madame for a deferral though, I was crying so hard when Tommy got all of his pictures out and was so hopeful :(
Re: Just finished Never Let Me Go!
Date: 2015-02-19 09:39 am (UTC)I saw a lot of musings about life and death and loss in the story. I saw the clones' lack resistance, the fact that not one even tried to escape, as symbolic of how it's impossible to escape our own mortality. Kathy and Tom thought maybe love or their own souls might provide a way out, but that was just a myth.
I liked the film adaptation a lot too. It buffed off the edges of some of the more devastating aspects of the novel, particularly in regards to Kathy and Tom's relationship in the end.
Re: Just finished Never Let Me Go!
Date: 2015-02-19 11:50 pm (UTC)And I agree, the film did make the ending slightly softer by having Kathy and Tommy share those last moments through the glass at least
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-15 08:49 pm (UTC)Ooh, when you finish Never Let Me Go, feel free to check out my post about it here. Definitely another one that required some processing!
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-15 11:18 pm (UTC)And will do :)
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-15 10:52 pm (UTC)Never Let Me Go was an awesome book. I watched the movie too, book was better but the movie definitely worth a watch. My husband refuses to watch it because the subject material unsettles him too much.
Was thinking about watching Gone Girl, will definitely give it a watch.
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-15 11:13 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-15 11:10 pm (UTC)I really enjoyed reading what you had to say about Gone Girl, and completely agree. Have you read Flynn's other books? They are also amazing!
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-15 11:12 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-15 11:22 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-16 12:35 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-16 10:39 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-16 03:55 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-16 09:31 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-18 12:25 pm (UTC)Omg I saw Gone Girl at the cinema and wished I hadn't. Whilst it was a stand out performance by Rosamund Pike - the best I've seen her, I just found it too disturbing in parts. There were a couple of scenes where I just had to look away (you can probably guess the ones I mean) I read an article somewhere interviewing Rosamund about the movie and she said that playing that role did affect her and having had to immerse herself in such darkness is what made her want to have another baby - some that was life affirming and good in contrast.
(fresh comment)
and then Under Her Skin, the second most, or should I say just as disturbing movie I've seen this year. Now I haven't read the book and I wouldn't have thought the movie was based on one because of the lack of dialogue. I thought it a very brave performance by Scarlett but even more so by the guys. It's rare to get a male full frontal in a mainstream movie but there was rather a lot more going on this time which obviously aside from porn you never see. Seeing as you've read the book I just have to know - what the heck was that black water they kept stupidly walking in to? Took me ages to get the image of that one guy...urgh! can't think about it..."disappearing" shall we say. Feel sick.
Oh and then there was the baby on the beach. That was really diffilcult to watch. It's a film I'll never, unfortuately, forget though.
Rainbows and bunnies Rainbows and bunnies....
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-18 01:44 pm (UTC)And Under The Skin was a VERY loose adaption of the novel, basically the first part is sort of similar to the film where Isserley is going around Scotland and carefully picking out hitchhikers that won't be missed for some unknown reason. It's then gradually revealed that she's an alien who has been surgically altered to take on human form, she's bringing humans back to her homeworld as their meat is considered a delicacy there. Isserley starts to connect with some of the humans that she picks up though and struggle with what she's doing, so she eventually decides to see what happens to the humans after she hands them over. This is where it gets really horrible. They're kept in some building way underground, they're fattened up a LOT and have their tongues removed, and basically there are not at all subtle parallels with factory farming. There's even some high-up from her homeworld who is protesting the eating of human meat on ethical grounds, and Isserley tries to hide from them that the human beings are capable of speech, because on their homeworld humans are basically considered to be dumb animals who are incapable of communicating.
It's vey different from the film obviously! That seemed to just take the early build-up of the book and make that the entire focus of the film, but with no plot or dialogue to carry it along? Even Scarlet Johnson isn't much like Isserley is described as in the book, she's in constant pain from the form that her body has been altered into, and she is very self-conscious about how ugly she feels around people from her homeworld. The black pool of water wasn't in the books, but I imagine that's meant to represent sucking them over into the other world for processing? It didn't make much sense to me that the guys seemed sooo oblivious when they walked into it though, maybe that was meant as a comment on being that wrapped up in the beauty of Scarlett Johnson's character?
ETA And the book probably doesn't sound that great from my summary heh, but I liked it okay, especially the character (I forget his name now!) who was protesting the eating of human meat. I really liked his scenes with Isserley, I kept hoping that he would find out the truth about humans having their own language, but he never did. It was a secret that they kept from the majority of their species, they believed that humanity were more or less like how we think of sheep, Isserley was one of the very few who got to interact with humans and speak their language, but had to keep that knowledge hidden from everyone else
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-19 10:11 pm (UTC)Thanks for all the info ;)
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-19 11:40 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-18 08:53 pm (UTC)Gone Girl
All that stuff is in the script. I have no idea why they cut it. Maybe they wanted the ending to be ambiguous?
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-18 10:15 pm (UTC)