Cool News
Capone travels to The Inbetween to examine Peter Jackson's flawed but hypnotic take on THE LOVELY BONES!
Hey, everyone. Capone in Chicago here.
People are going to have problems with Peter Jackson's take on Alice Sebold's novel THE LOVELY BONES, especially people who have read the book. Hell, I have problems with it and I never read the book. But I'm still recommending the film because there's just enough here to admire from a craftsmanship standpoint from both the filmmakers and the actors. And in the end, I saw the story as one about how hard we sometimes hold onto a loved one who is taken from us unexpectedly. Of course, it's also about a child-murdering bastard, and it's about the closeness and necessity of family.
The dividing line on THE LOVELY BONES could very well occur over the vision Jackson gives us of Susie Salmon's (played by Saoirse Ronan) world of The Inbetween. Susie's death was violent and sudden, and as a result she is clearly not ready to move on to what we assume is heaven. She lingers, somehow able to watch her family's struggle and fractured attempt to find her killer, and even inspire them in small ways to continue the search. And the world that Susie occupies is the product of her young, still maturing mind. It's a place that literally revolves around her, and it changes like a giant mood ring, somehow tied to her emotional swings. I've seen a couple of critics mistake The Inbetween for heaven, and that tells me they weren't paying attention. The Inbetween is made up of Susie's dreams, ideals, visual cues, and inner turmoil. At first, she thinks it's cool that she can watch over her family, but eventually she comes to realize she's torturing herself and them with her presence.
There's a part of me that believes that The Inbetween is also the product of Susie's father, Jack (Mark Wahlberg), who misses his eldest daughter more than he can express to even his wife (Rachel Weisz). The film's early scenes, including Susie's abduction, murder, and the early stages of the investigation of her disappearance are some of my favorite, thanks in large part to Ronan's rock solid performance. There's a look in her eyes that sells even the most far-out moments in this film, and she couldn't be more perfectly cast.
But THE LOVELY BONES' not-so-secret weapon is Stanley Tucci and Salmon family neighbor George Harvey, who also happens to be a child killer. Does he look a little too much like the creepiest guy in the neighborhood? Kind of, but Tucci so completely inhabits this monster that it doesn't matter. He's as capable of vanishing into the background as he is being right in your face and completely undeniable. His actions as he plots how to catch and kill his next victim are so casual and matter of fact that you almost forget what he's up to. Tucci is so damn good in this movie that he sometimes underscores what's wrong with other sections of it.
There are times when THE LOVELY BONES's most potentially interesting moments or characters scurry away just as we're getting interested in them, while far less compelling moments are pushed to the forefront. The investigation of Susie's disappearance (led by a detective played by Michael Imperioli) isn't particularly gripping, while the scenes of the Salmon family falling apart are terrific and there aren't nearly enough of this internal struggle. Plus, Rachel Weisz has one of the most expressive and awe-inspiring faces in movies today, and she's barely in this movie. When she gets emotional, I got emotional. When she cried, I was right there with her. But she vanishes from huge chunks of this movie and leaves a huge void.
Instead, what we are left with is the single worst sequence in that Peter Jackson's has ever shot--a comic relief music montage featuring a wacky Susan Sarandon (as Weisz's boozy, smoking mother) and the younger Salmon children trying to keep the household together while husband and wife attempt to focus on saving the family. Not only is the tone horribly off, but also it just isn't that funny. I literally cringed. The characters Jackson lets us spend time with improve the movie, but a disproportionate number of them are simply sketches of interesting characters, and that frustrated me.
Thankfully, later in the film, Rose McIver steps to the forefront as Susie's sister Lindsey, who, years after Susie's death, takes an interest in the case and, in particular, Mr. Harvey down the street. The sequence in the trailer where she breaks into his house to search for evidence is truly terrifying, and McIver ended up giving one of my favorite performances in THE LOVELY BONES. But the moments I felt the most enriched were those set in the Inbetween, which is both a beautiful and terrible place that never ceased to amaze me. Jackson doesn't go overboard with the visuals, but at the same time, he shows us places and things we've never seen before. It's a place that is both soothing and the cause of much anxiety and fear--kind of like this movie. I really did get pulled into the world of Susie Salmon and those she watched over. But nearly as often, I kept getting yanked out by the bipolar nature of the storytelling. Still, there's more than enough going on in THE LOVELY BONES to recommend it, with a mild warning that cinematic whiplash may occur.
-- Capone
therealcapone@aintitcoolmail.com
Follow Me On Twitter
-
+ Expand All
-
Yeah I'm gay
-
As flawed as it is, the film stayed with me days after seeing it. And some of the imagery here is absolutely stunning. Tucci's Mr. Harvey and Ronan's Susie Salmon are reason alone to watch the film. Tucci is absolutely terrifying and Ronan is just a joy to watch. She just glowed off the screen. I'm able to forgive its flaws because what is great here, is truly truly wonderful.
-
I'm looking forward to being one of the few people going to see this having NOT read the book. I'm sick to death of reviews rambling on about the damn book instead of focussing on the FILM!
That obviously doesn't apply to this review, which was good. -
I read the book years ago and thankfully forgot most of it. I didn't mind so much if they didn't get the details of the story correct but the film really handled characters wrong. Weisz and Wahlberg were just poorly developed characters and that's attributed to bad writing. The characters just had alot going on in the book and it's something they should have translated over to the movie so that we could feel a bond toward them. The only person I bonded with was Susie Salmon, unfortunately. But I still loved the movie.
-
...and consequently felt like the movie was abridged, with many subplots and characters rushed over.
-
the reviews, however, are deflating my expectations.
-
Jan 15, 2010 7:40:06 AM CST
a Spectacular Failure of a movie, think "Bonfire of the Vanities
by irc-hollywood
Avoid this movie at all costs, it's not worth the heart ache of watching a great director get it so, so wrong.
-
Jan 15, 2010 7:40:09 AM CST
An issue that I think has been missed by the mainstream media
by sonicriver
is that Peter Jackson made this film to show off how great he is. It's kind of like how comedians try and tell the aristocrat's joke. The good ones succeed, and the bad ones fail, because the joke is so awful. Thematically this film is tough and awful. It's a film where a paedophile rapes and murders a girl, and basically gets away with it. Sure, the bastard dies a possibly painful death, but this occurs years later, and he never faces justice through legal channels. Despite the tough themes, Peter Jackson somehow pulls off a film that is not only watchable, but strangely enjoyable. And if that doesn't demonstrate how great he is, nothing will.
-
c'mon man.
-
I enjoyed the book somewhat until it took a strange turn in the end which soured it for me, but I do not know why he even made a film based on this book. It is a story about a family dealing with this horrible tragedy, not a special effects showcase. It looks like he did not want to follow the source material and went off in his own weird direction with this one.
-
Sorry mate. I was just trying to say why the film was worth seeing, and got a bit carried away.
-
makes me cringe every time I see an ad for it on TV. How cliche can you get?
-
That is why it was not released in December as originally intended. I hear it is not that good. But Peter Jackson just isn't that good anymore. King Kong was a piece of crap.
-
Maybe then he'll start making good films again
-
He did make better movies when he was a fat fuck. And it makes sense, when you are not focusing on yourself, and your health, you concentrate more on the movie. And crank out a better film, kinda makes sense. Eat some grease Jackson, return to your glory of actually making movies that are worth a damn.
-
One: NO VISUAL EFFECTS. Two: Play it as a straight drama with Susie narrating the story from Heaven but you don’t see her until the end. Three: At the end of the movie, reveal Susie in Heaven surrounded by her family as Heaven would be a non-linear plane of existence and, as such, they would already be there with her. Four: Give the audience the satisfaction of knowing that although the killer is never caught, and dies accidentally, Susie reveals that the existence of Heaven means that there is also a Hell and you see the murdering scumbag writhing in eternal agony. The fucking end. This could have been a very simple story but I guess when you own a FX company, you can't make anythng small scale anymore and look to shove as much FX shit into everything you do, whether or not the story demands it. Jackson, in just a few short years, has turned into this generations George Lucas, complete with shitty movies. I worry that The Hobbit will be his Phantom Menace. I know Del Toro is doing it but then that just means that it could be Jackson's Crystal Skull. Sell the FX company Jackson and focus on just making movies.
-
something was missing. Probably because I wanted more revenge in it.
-
Right on. Never thought of it that way. But Jackson is turning into George Lucas. I thought Lovely Bones was going to be very low key. Lots of Practical effects since it sounded like a drama. I must have really been smoking some hard shit to think that.
-
For all it's flaws, I'll take King Kong over The Phantom Menace any day of the week.
-
having recently re-read the book I felt like it kind of bridged the gaps left in the movie, when taken together. Lindsay was my favourite character in both though, so I do wish her arc was fleshed out a bit more. Worth checking out, it was ultimately pretty faithful. Wonder if there's some extended cut lurking around.
-
If you play the adaption as a straight drama, as you suggest, the film becomes one where the parents try to track down their daughter's killer, and fail. That just sucks, prima facie. Even if you later reveal Susie to be in a non linear heaven with her family, while her killer faces divine retribution in hell, your idea still sucks, because it lacks originality. Face it, Peter Jackson kicks your ass.
-
I'm looking forward to the sequel where Lana Clarkson haunts Phil Spector. It's called, THE REALLY HOT BONES.
-
is a nice way of saying this is an utter piece of crap. Which it is.
-
this site is failing, half the reviews are from capone, the guy is a half fledged retard. here's some of the movies on his "best of" 2009 list. -humpday, -up -500 days of summer -antichrist -i love you man -where the wild things are -the hurt locker -up in the air....and btw, those all ranked higher than avatar. he's here 'critiquing' peter fucking jackson?!? who the fuck let this guy in the room?!?! is AICN that desperate?!? someone plz get some genuine movie fans on this site or let it die.
-
If you think that avatar is better than 500 days of summer, than you have never had a girlfriend.
-
but what he gets right, makes 'em worth while. but i probably won't see this in theatres
-
I want the Jackson who made the crazy Braindead. I want the Jackson that made me love Michael J Fox again in The Frightners. I want the Jackson who made the three best fantasy movies of all time.I don't want King Kong Jackson and I don't, by the sounds of it, want this Jackson either. If he has to get fat again, so be it. Just find your sparkle again dude.
-
Is he as good as he was in THE HAPPENING? As nuanced a performer as he demonstrated in SHOOTER? As subtle an actor as playing MAX PAYNE? I gots to know...
-
Jan 15, 2010 9:54:29 AM CST
Jackson was never the right choice. It's not his sort of materia
by moonlightdrive
-
...Hugo Weaving as Jesus spanking Stanley Tucci, whose tears are raining down from Heaven and watering a beautiful rose growing from Susie's grave.
And then Jesus winks at the camera, and we fade to black. THE END. -
. . . because they found out way back when that Jackson was adapting it? SHIT . . .
-
Funny you should say that. My wife had the book and I needed something to read on the train. I heard PJ was making a movie so I figured I would give this a read. Ehhhh, kind of wish I didn't bother. The book fell flat towards the end and the movie sounds like a trainwreck.
-
A place where, strangely enough, I can't breathe.
-
And that was in 1994. A terrific movie that seemed to promise great things from this director. Sadly, everything he's done since then has been meaningless gloop.
-
Not perfect, definitely some odd choices, but I'm still processing it two weeks later--to me, that's a sign of a good film.
-
Translation = It sucked but he's big director and I'm a star fucker.
-
but also limitations, as this film demonstrates.
-
I guess Hollywood is a little behind the curve.. after Susan's career-killing performance in Enchanted, it's a surprise that anyone at all continues to put that no-talent dessicated mummy on screen. She is a sure-fire guarantee to kill any scenes she is in.
-
And I don't fault Jackson's use of special FX- look at what Del Toro accomplished with PAN'S LABYRINTH- a fantasy/reality tale that was extremely emotional and worthwhile. It comes down to the director- Jackson doesn't deliver anything profound here. It's not a terrible movie, but it's not even close to being a good one either.
-
which I think is the fault of the book. It didn't know if it wanted to be a straight tear jerker drama where the family tries to heal or a police thriller where we search for the killer.Again the book is at fault because it tried to weave both in and failed hence the film failed.
-
That's what passes for character development with this flick. Susie is having fun in heaven...montage! The moms leaving...montage! Mark Wahkberg is really investigating this crime...montage! Susan Sarandon is taking care of the kids...montage! Jackson wanted to cram every plot point from the book but didnt want to be bothered establishing anything around those points to give them weight.
-
Though she would probably be wasting her talent if she went for that role, unless it WAS Cameron at the helm, because we all know how well he treats his female characters.
-
Whenever he's on screen I just think about the fact that he's Mark Wahlberg, that I don't enjoy him as an actor and that he's been in a bunch of movies I wanted to like, but couldn't, because he was in them. That being the case, along with the fact that exactly NOBODY has given this film a great review (as much as I love PJ's films), I'll have to pass.
-
Regardless of which movies better (Haven't seen Summer yet but I will soon, and I have quite high expectations), leaving Avatar off of a top 30 of 2009 list is just laughable. Even if you hate the movie, it's innovation alone deserves it a spot in any top 25...And considering 2009 was a so/so year for cinema, Capones choices reek of him trying to be "hip". It's sad.
-
After Kong, I'll avoid his crap like the plague...
-
and I have to say that I was Hugely dissappointed. The book at best is not all that great and the movie was worse. The imagery of halfway to heaven is totally uninspired and I thought the movie was very boring.
-
melodramatic shite
-
Jan 15, 2010 1:35:56 PM CST
Avatar deserves a spot on Best Of lists because it is "innovativ
by borishumphrey
Bull. Fucking. Shit.
Recycled white guilt storyline and some nice CGI do not entitle you to be on everybody's favorite least, even if they thought the film was garbage.
James Cameron is the perfect example of style over substance. Take out all the CGI and 'revolutionary' special effects, and you're left with a writer/director who relies on cliches and melodrama to tell his stories (or whomever he has stolen the stories from).
Paint some actors blue, send them out into a jungle with some practical effects, and tell me how much you love Avatar then.
Man, some of you people are the types who could have your wallets stolen by a guy who distracts you with a 'levitating playing card'.
Who gives a fuck how revolutionary and innovative Avatar's effects were?!
If he didn't come up with it, some other asshole would have eventually, and probably utilizing a much better story as a foundation. -
What the fuck was that all about? I'm I the only person who found this movie mind-numbingly stupid? It's two hours before anybody even considers that the schlubby, single, dollhouse building next door neighbor might have done it. You're honor I present exhibit A: JUST LOOK AT THIS FUCKING GUY!!!
-
What the fuck is a Certificate of Appreciation? Why would that be the first thing you pack when you've just been accused of child murder and need to skip town. Where in The Fugitive does Harrison Ford whip out his Certificate of Appreciation to evade capture?! Am I missing something? Is there something in the book that explains this? And if you're going to tell me "OceanWang, none of that stuff matters. What's important was the acting and symbolism." Well that all sucked too. Just an awful fucking movie. And I like Peter Jackson. Just sayin...
-
I just lost over two fucking hours watching this raging piece of shit. I was actually furious by the end at how badly directed this movie. Peter-roland emmerich-Jackson is about as subtle as a jackhammer. Some of the scenes from this movie play like a teen drama on the CW.
Don't get me wrong, Stanley Tucci is effin brilliant and creepy thru and thru and Susan Sarandon does quite a bit with her limited role but Marky Mark is impossible to buy and a lot of the supporting characters are doing things that don't make any fucking sense at all. For some reason PJ thought it would be clever to fall back on the tired method of substituting character stupidity for tension.... it's just so retarded. Don't get me started on the soundtrack either. It felt like every couple minutes you could really get into this movie and then you kicked in the neck by the worst goddamn exchanges between certain characters. Just all round fucking retarded. I'm mad. -
Seriously dude. I hated King Kong but at least there was a beautifully animated Gorrilla in it. This film has no redeaming factors. It's Terrible! OceanWang, the book doesn't explain much and is, seriously, just as boring and full of shit like the movie.
-
notice when she came on board all PJ movies suddenly got these terrible scipts?
-
Jan 15, 2010 7:35:06 PM CST
It shows the ridiculous hyperbole of the geeks...
by turd_has_risen_from_the_grave
that King Kong is considered a 'travesty' and a 'disaster'. It was a four star movie, and with some judicious editing and some effects polishes (namely, the bronto stampede), it could have been a five. I understand Jackson wanted to release the film in summer 2006 and cut at least 20 minutes out, but the studio browbeat him into releasing a rough cut instead because they wanted a christmas release. But it is not a bad movie, or even a mediocre one, by any means.No way Jackson is the new Lucas - but then again, I like Lucas more than most. Jackson has plenty of gas left in the tank. I'd like to see him tackle a sci-fi movie. He should have directed Halo himself; then it would have actually gotten made. Or maybe he should just give us Meet the Feebles 2 in 3D, complete with in-your-face vomiting and hippo sex in three dimensions.
-
Jan 15, 2010 7:39:07 PM CST
And for the record, The Phantom Menace is looking not half bad
by turd_has_risen_from_the_grave
these days. No, it's not a great movie, but it has actually aged well. It's a good deal better than most blockbusters released in the 00's.
-
...WAY! TOO! LONG! Like, an HOUR too long. And when you compare the effects to what we'd just seen in the LOTR trilogy, there is some failure there. The seen when they're running on the cliff as the rocks fall away? Ugh!!!! That looks SOOOOO fake that I actually laughed out loud IN THE THEATER. If they had shortened up about 2/3 of the scenes, removed another 6-10 of them and taken the time to really finish the effects I might be able to get with that "four star" thing. As it is, I can't go above two. Which is disappointing to me on multiple levels. One, I really love Peter Jackson's films and have for a long time. This movie seems to have soured a lot of people on him and that really sucks. Two, there are parts of Kong that are great! I mean really, really great. The end still packs a great emotional punch, even though I'd been bored for an hour by the time I got there. I've always wondered how much of that was Peter taking advantage of the freedom he had to do whatever he wanted with a dream project, or the studio taking advantage of the fact that Peter had just released three very successful, very LONG movies. Considering he released a lot of material surrounding the project and didn't complain about anything (which he did quite vocally with New Line and the LOTR trilogy), I'm guessing it was the former.
-
I've read about some of the content in the book. This movie needed to be rated R.
-
That a bad bad word! I saw it and meh.... ok....I loved the chemistry within pretty much all the family members. The almost in heaven sections were straight out of that Robin Williams movie... "What Dreams May Come".... And the song of the siren is way overused these days....it's a nice song but it's been used soooo many times !! It was even used in one of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre previews....for heaven's sake ! Hire New Musicians ! Oh boy...I'm on a weird tangent now...so I will stop typing
-
...It showed Saoirse walking out of a magazine cover and spinning around having her photo taken, too over the top. Would she really be fantasing about such things? Wouldn't she be dreaming of being with her family, rather than being in a Hannah Montannah music video?I did like the ships in bottles crashing against the rocks, and othe rinstances where the In Between reflected things happening in the living world.
-
Yeah, Lost Highway is the owner of Song to the Siren. No one else.
-
The Lovely Bones - Stanley Tucci should get a BSA nomination for this, but there's a lot to dislike about what Jackson's done here. I thought he fumbled the murder scene, and some of the "Inbetween" is too abstract for too long. We need a dramatic hook, not a endless series of pretty pictures. A few of his sins of the past (way too much slo mo) really come back to haunt him here. Some great suspense, but this felt too long, and disjointed. Seemed like there was not enough focus on the family dilemma and there was too much time spent with Susie being ethereal and shit. Oh, but Mark Wahlberg was actually pretty good in this, and I don't think I've ever said that except for maybe The Departed. 5/10.
-
Remember the speech Sam gives to Frodo at the end of The Two Towers? That overwrought, cornball speech? Yeah, that one. She wrote that, didn't she?
Jackson needs to go in a new direction with the screenwriting part of his projects. When he and his wife Phillipa and that other woman are in control, the writing gets amateurish. It's harming his movies. -
I don't think she ever really does any interviews on his DVD's... at least not on LOTR, elsewhere I could be mistaken. Anyway, I always got a bad feeling about the other chick, Phillipa Boyens, and I think it all started with the overly assertive way she had explained their decisions to cut certain parts of the LOTR books out of the screenplays, combine characters, and completely change certain things. I don't even disagree with what they did (for the most part), I understand the justification, it's just that she comes off as really arrogant and know-it-all-ish to me... Rick McCallum is different, he just seems like the biggest yes man to ever walk the earth.
-
And other than attending the Oscars she does very little in public, nor did she participate directly in the extensive LOTR special features. She's often spoken of by Peter and Phillipa, but she's not filmed. From what I understand she stays out of the public eye so she can be less recognizable in order to help their kids (her and Peter's) have somewhat of a normal life. I agree with most of what they (Peter, Phillipa and Fran) did with changing things around, or leaving them out (other than Tom Bombadil - I will forever hate that), mostly because they clearly read the books and the appendices MANY times to come to those decisions. What they did works very well for the story nearly all of the time. I'm more annoyed with the liberties they took adding things both big and small. But still, small gripe overall as I really love the trilogy. I did get the feeling from the special features that she was a strong hand in regards to shaping the script, though.
-
The problem is that the book sucked. It's really just the story of a family trying to cope with a death in the family. Susie is devoid of any emotion and acts only as a narrarator and a magical heaven whore at the end of the book, nothing more. Peter Jackson tried to make it more interesting but you just can't. It's not good enough source material.
-
Jan 16, 2010 1:54:52 AM CST
In the book they only find an elbow...and the mom cheats
by slimbutnotreally
When the police find an elbow...its pretty fucked up. Peter Jackson should have had the nuts to put that in there. He also shouldn't have had that weird scene where it looks like Susie escapes. So, I kind of take it back...some of it was Peter Jackson's fault.
-
Jan 16, 2010 5:45:47 AM CST
It's hilarious how "The Inbetween" is flying over people's heads
by burnhollywood
...Including Ebert. It's NOT "Heaven". Capone seems to have grasped it...it's a fake, synthetic realm created by the recently dead trying to stay in our realm, governed by short-term emotional states and in the long run, irrelevant and unsustainable. Worse, it has adverse effects on the still-living loved ones.
-
You can't just blame Philippa Boyens for LOTR, King Kong, and Lovely Bones. Jackson HIRED her - and continues to do so. She's only doing what is within her abilities to do. And what did she accomplish before Jackson hired her? Some amateur play in NZ which allows her to call herself a 'playwright'. Jackson could easily hire a better writer - and it's his fault for not doing so.
-
but thats the same as saying George Lucas should fire Rick McCallum. Everybody knows succesfull directors are surrounded by an inner circle of friends, phillipa is such a friend, so he wont fire her.
-
About to sit down to a glass of ice tea and what he thinks is a 13 year old girl only to be bombarded by chris hanson and the boom mic.Why the fuck isn't rape and child molestation taken more seriously.these sick fucks need to be put away for good.how many lives need to be destroyed? really want to see this but all this negative feedback is making me second guess
-
Whether Jackson fires her or not isn't the point. In fact it's way too late to fire her: the damage is already done - LOTR, King Kong, Lovely Bones.But friend or not, the director is ultimately responsible for a movie - and no-one else. It's his job to make the tough decisions necessary to protect his movie - and everyone knows that. You can be sure Boyens knows that too. So if Jackson doesn't make the right decisions - whether people are his friends or not - it IS his fault.
-
Some actors should NEVER be allowed to use cigarettes as props...
-
..The subject is treated seriously in the film, the whole film is about how a violent death affects those loved ones that are left behind. Regardless of what people may think of the films quality, it cannot be accused of not taking it's subject matter seriously, just because it didn't engage in the gore porn of actually showing us the brutal murder of Susie Salmon. I for one had no interest in seeing in, nor did I need to. None of us have to be educated in how horrorible the savage and heartless murderof a child is, the scene was horrifying enough without it, I was pleading for Susie to run even though I knew already that she was doomed to die at this monsters hands
-
Thanks for the reply i wasn't talking about the movie i was talking about in society.more needs to be do to protect people from sexual predators.it's like that sicko who was found with bodies all through his house in cleavland.that guy should have never been back on the streets in the first place.i just have seen so many shows and cases where it could have been prevented.and think about how many women/girls have been molested/raped in their life.it's shocking.it can be very destructive and more needs to be done about it
-
Jan 17, 2010 4:03:23 AM CST
haha people are blaming Philippa Boyens!?
by player_two_has_entered_the_game
You sad stupid little idiots. Peter, Fran and Philippa all write the scripts. There is nobody to blame but yourself. If you don't like the films they write then I'm afraid that's your issue. I happen to enjoy their work (along with many others). Give it a rest with all this scapegoat, poor me bullshit!
-
it takes allot to make me cry (not trying to sound tough, it's just a fact) and most movies just make get misty eyed at most, but The Lovely Bones had me crying like a baby, I haven't read the book yet and even if the book is better this film still got to me emotionally and for that I give it a thumbs up, plus Saoirse Ronan is excellent in it
-
Loved it!All the issues brought up by
the reviewers of this film were for me non issues.Strange -
Totally agree with Jaka about MW. What's he doing in this piece?
-
I have never read the book, but enjoyed this movie. It made me cry, which is a rarity for myself. I agree that the relationship between the husband and wife could of been explored further. There seemed to be scenes missing explaining why Weiz's character left. It was confirmed later to me by my wife, who has read the book. The special effects were awesome and only benifited the movie. Ultimately, the main message came through and I think Peter Jackson did a hell of a job. Lets face it, anything done by Peter Jackson is a mile ahead most of the crap that is coming out these days. The outcome of the killer in the end made me laugh because it was so enjoyable to watch. Is that wrong? lol
-
I don't think Jackson was the right director for this movie at all, all the Inbetween stuff was given too much prominence simply because he wanted to use effects. I think a different director could have made it a far more personal movie of Susie's journey.
I agree with Capone that the montage jarred a little but I felt it kinda worked in that it showed that while Susie's death devastated her parents, the way a little boy would deal with it would be totally different. At hisage she was just dead, gone and he would have accepted it without much of the agnosing and questioning that adults would. It showed that the grandmother knew 'someone' had to be there to put some normality, some fun, back into his life because neither of his parents were capable of it at that time.
Tucci was excellent in it though, and yes, the scene where the sister was in the house was gut clenchingly tense. All in all, enjoyable enough but for anyoine who has read the book, not a patch on it. -
These are two expertly crafted scenes where even the detractors must admit Jackson done a hell of a job putting together. Amoung the best scenes of the year in my opinion...
SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The scene where Mark Waulberg first approaches the killer and helps him with his trap in the back yard. The look on his face when he realises for certain that this is the man that killed his daughter...just a great scene, well orchestrated. The second great scene is of course where Susies sister is searching for evidence in the killers house.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 425 total posts 425 posts
- Quint travels to Barsoom and visits the John Carter set!!! -- 125 total posts 94 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 155 total posts 79 posts
- Rest In Peace Bethesda’s Adam Adamowicz -- 70 total posts 70 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 67 total posts 67 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 86 total posts 66 posts
- The Sensorties Revisit The Friday Docback (And Still Smell)!! DOCTOR WHO Story #7 Again, The Coming Of Season/Series 7, And More!! -- 65 total posts 65 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 57 total posts 52 posts
- Ridley Scott's Next Will Be Cormac McCarthy's THE COUNSELOR! -- 48 total posts 48 posts
- Wanna smell like the Hulk? What about Cap? Consider yourself a Thunder God or a unisex God of Mischief? -- 45 total posts 44 posts