innocent_lex | Entries tagged with films

Has anyone seen the film version of the Time Traveller's Wife? Is it as hideously paedophilic (is that a word? You get my point) as the book or is all that stuff removed? And even if it's removed, does just knowing it was all over the book make it just too icky to watch?

Crossposts: http://innocent-lex.livejournal.com/551920.html

Saw the last HP film this afternoon and it was very good. It was the first one that actually seemed to hang together as a story instead of a set of scenes one after the other. The books didn't have that quality, so I do wonder if it was deliberate on behalf of the filmmakers. The music was wonderful, orchestral, its own character, so I've ordered the CD.

I know they needed to leave a lot out of the story, even having turned it into two films, but there was a lot left that seemed significant, not least all of the Dumbledore backstory. If I hadn't read the books, I'd have been a bit bewildered by some of it, though, and certainly wouldn't have seen the significance of a lot of the small moments.

Am now giving The Watchmen a shot (it was on last night? the night before?) and about 30 minutes in I can say that Rorschach suffers from a serious case of purple prose and I have no idea what's going on. Although, huh, naked blue dude. Yeah, no, this is really dull.

Crossposts: http://innocent-lex.livejournal.com/540555.html

I've just watched a programme about the 50 greatest Harry Potter moments. Some of them were good, though not sure they'd count as great. But the most bizarre thing about it was that they claimed Dobby the house elf was one of the most loved characters of the whole franchise. The various people who were talking did manage to keep straight faces, but I'm fairly sure they were joking. Dobby is only beaten by that peculiar creature from the Star Wars prequels as the most annoying character ever created in fiction.

I generally forget that I have movies on demand (and telly on demand and who the heck knows what else). But I fancied watching a film today, which I do very rarely these days. With no other reason than to watch something pretty run about, I picked Prince of Persia. It was fine, pretty good for a kids' film these days. But, seriously, do none of these film makers ever stop and think about what messages they're giving to kids? The film had one woman in it who spoke, which I guess is better than none. And even that woman was treated as chattel most of the time, though I can only presume the audience was meant to think the whole thing was terribly romantic. Serious failure of imagination.

Current Mood: disappointed

I watched Agora over the weekend. It's a film about Hypatia, who was a very smart, well respected woman who was both a scientist and a teacher in Alexandria. It wasn't what I expected. And when I say that, I bought the DVD because I thought it was going to be a great film about a strong, intelligent woman. Sometimes it was about that, but actually it was mostly about religious wars and the men who fought them. When I say 'men' I really do mean that. Not only does this film fail the Bechdel test, it does it in quite the spectacular manner: I don't recall seeing a single other woman in the whole film. Not one. Now, I wasn't actually looking out for women specifically, but once I realised the issue I thought back through the film and... nope, couldn't remember one. Either they weren't there (which would have to have been a deliberate choice on the part of the film-makers) or they were so inconsequential that they were easily forgotten.

It was a film that made me think, but it only made me think the same things I'd been thinking before I watched it, just now in vivid colour. I don't know if it is in any way historically accurate (because what I know about Hypatia could be written on the back of a beermat), and I don't know what the heck the film-makers were trying to get at with the lack of women (or if they even noticed), but I can honestly say I don't recommend anyone watch it for its feminist ideals. Or, frankly, for any ideals. Men beating, stabbing and slashing each other to death when they're not busy playing political power games isn't my idea of a fun time.

I feel pretty conned by this one, honestly.

I just watched a Christmas movie (yes, in August) that was almost enough to put me in a diabetic coma. But it was lovely, like they're supposed to be, and I'm sure it'll come out again at some point. It had Jared Padalecki and Peter O'Toole (no, not a combination I'd ever imagined) and they were both excellent.

What was a surprise was that RIchard Burgi was in it. That man gets bloody everywhere. Does he never sleep?

Apparently there's a big screen film being made of The Equalizer, which was one of my favourite programmes back in the day. Yay! But... also apparently Russell Crowe is going to star in it. Boo! I have a while to decide if my love for the show will beat out my dislike for the actor.

Just watched Star Trek on buray. I didn't mean to, was just going to see how the quality compared to the DVD I already had, and ended up watching the film. The detail is stunning, and I can see why people get incredibly good tellies to watch it on. But so far I have a grand total of 3 bluray discs, and since I can do much less with them than I can with DVD I'm sticking with mainly DVD purchases for the time being. My DVDs still look damn good upscaled on the HD telly.

The trouble with Star Trek, though, is it's yet another film about blokes. While I was travelling back and forth on my long plane journeys for the hols, there were a shedload of films to pick from, and out of four flights all over 10 hours I watched one film: Whip It. It's about women's roller derby (not something I knew of before) and was an absolute pleasure to watch. None of the other films were about women in a way that means I'll watch, i.e. they were all "romcoms" meaning neither romantic nor even slightly amusing. And this kind of thing is so ubiquitous that most people don't even seem to notice.

But the BAFTAs (film edition) were on this evening and Kathryn Bigelow got best director for The Hurt Locker, beating James Cameron for Avatar. Now, I haven't seen The Hurt Locker yet but I want to, but I'm incredibly pleased by this. Also pleased she beat out whoever directed District 9 (bought it, watched it, didn't like it and wasn't sure what there was for people to be impressed by) and Tarantino. In fact, The Hurt Locker won a lot of awards that I expect will go to Avatar when the Oscars happen.

Also, Carey Mulligan, she of the weeping angels, won leading actress. Haven't seen that film either, but I adored her in Doctor Who.

I hate it when writers don't explain stuff. I hate it when they talk mystical bollocks and blather just because they couldn't be bothered to figure out why something they're writing doesn't make any sense, or figure out how to explain it so it works within the universe they've created.

Two cases:
( behind the cut for spoilers )

I watched Knowing today. The second half was apparently written by a troop of monkeys on crack.

/review

Y'know, I'd like to be impressed at a film. Actually impressed. And not just impressed at most of it but disappointed at their treatment of women, but really, truly, wholeheartedly impressed. I'm trying to remember when that last happened.

I got some cheap DVDs this week - 3 films that I haven't seen and thought would be interesting. First: W. I'm intrigued to see what this turns out to be about, and what angle is taken on Bush's existence and what that's meant for the rest of us. Then Spider-man 3, just because. And finally, Out Of The Blue, about a horrendous mass shooting in New Zealand. Three films for fourteen quid, which is still nowhere near as much of a bargain as a whole series for a tenner.

And on that whole series for a tenner topic, I've finished Supernatural. All of it. Damn.

This evening is yet more sorting out of the house, followed by a weekend of sorting out of the house and moving a lot of furniture around. Everything hurts already because of the stuff I've done so far this week. I see a lot of hot baths and massage thingys in my future.

For those who don't know, the Bechdel test is about how women are treated in film. Actually, it could easily apply to television and books and any other media, but it was created to apply to film. The requirement a film must meet to pass the test are:

1) It has to have at least two women in it
2) Who talk to each other
3) About something besides a man

It should be shocking how many films don't pass this test. Turns out, though, that it's usually only a shock to men I mention the test to - women are already well aware how underrepresented we are.

A quote from a discussion thread on Shakesville about the latest Star Trek film: "Here's a question I've been mulling in my mind: Which is the weaker passing of the Bechdel test - Star Trek Insurrection, which passes due to a conversation between Troi and Crusher about how their boobs are firming up, or this new movie in which Uhura and Gaila discuss a distress signal from Klingon space, but do it in their underwear?"

It's damn depressing, that's what it is.

Saw it. Liked it. Spoilers now.

( Read at your peril. )

Still awake. Poo.

Saw Slumdog Millionare earlier this evening, which was pretty damn good. I had very little idea what it was about and what to expect, but I don't think it would have been that. Haven't seen such an original film in quite a while.

Saw Hancock last night, which was most excellent. I don't want to say anything at all that might spoil it for someone who hasn't seen it, because I was completely unspoiled and it was a wonderful state to be in. Coming up: Dark Knight, Narnia, James Bond, other stuff that I saw trailers of that made me squee and that I can't remember. After a long stretch of little to nothing at all worth going to the cinema for, this makes a change.

Going to lunch now with les parents, and hopefully will be able to fix their computer. I'll come back later and put some spoilery comments behind a cut in case anyone else has seen it and is interested to chat.

It was Indiana Jones! Complete with hat, whip and music! Yay!

What can I say? I loved it. *happy sigh*

I'm watching The Queen - the film. I know it was out a while ago, but it was on telly over Christmas and I thought I'd watch it at last. This is the third time I've watched it, now, and it's just utterly intriguing. Not the acting (which is excellent) or the story (I was around for that) but the whole depiction of the world of the royals, HMQ in particular. It's just bloody odd. Apparently the film is fairly accurate. If that's true, then I'm fairly horrified by it. All of the power dynamics are particularly disturbing. I keep watching it, trying to figure out whether there's something that creates this kind of behaviour and whether that something is inherent or learned. For me, this is the classic television I can't seem to look away from. Bizarre.

Okay... I really wasn't expecting that. Wow.

I'm going to have to watch that again. I might even have to watch the next Star Trek film - it turns out Simon Pegg can be quite hot.