The MOVIE REVIEW Thread

[Kaftig]

MUST LOVE DOGS

 

The score was tied at 2 all: Tristan and Angelo wanted to watch Skeleton Key while Chicoy and I opted for Must Love Dogs. We asked Donald to break the tie (since he would rather meet a girl than watch either movie). When he said that he loves animals, the dogs (no offense meant, Chicoy) won the match.

 

Must Love Dogs tells the story of Sarah (Diane Lane), a recently-divorced pre-school teacher whose family is desperate to find a suitable replacement husband for her. It reaches the point where her sister puts up a phony personal ad for her over the Internet. A series of disastrous dates later, Sarah meets up with Jake (John Cusack), a recently-divorced boatmaker who, like Sarah, loves dogs. The problem is Sarah has also fallen for Bob (Dermot Mulroney), the father of one of her students. Sarah goes through an emotional roller coaster ride before ending up with the man who really loves her.

 

People can say that the plot is unoriginal and full of contrivances, but I will say this, "I enjoyed the movie!" Sure, I agree that the start of the film was boring, but the story grows on you. I also agree that the ending was cheesy, but it was still heartwarming. In other words, I enjoyed the movie! A big part of this enjoyment stems from the witty lines that were perfectly delivered by the talented cast. In the scene where Stockard Channing gives advice to her 15-year old Internet "lover," I was on the edge of my seat laughing. Maybe it's one of those movies that you have to be in the mood for romance to enjoy.

 

The only thing I didn't like about the movie was the unromantic final kiss at the supermarket. Ugh! Couldn't the writer-director (Gary Goldberg) find a more romantic spot?

 

In the end, Must Love Dogs proves a fact of life - romance is for all ages (and species, too).

[Kaftig]

THE GREAT RAID

 

When Ian and I watched The Great Raid yesterday, I entered the cinema with a sense of apprehension. A phrase from Inquirer Libre kept repeating in my mind - "universally panned." Almost everyone who has seen the movie says that it is one of the worst war movies ever. Only our Research Head, Monjam, liked it, and I think he liked it because of the movie he saw in his mind and not the movie that was shown onscreen. However, Ian and I had already bought our tickets. There was no turning back.

 

Based on the books The Great Raid on Cabanatuan and Ghost Soldiers, the movie retells the successful mission of a group of American soldiers, with the help of Filipino guerillas, to rescue more than 500 prisoners of World War II held in the Cabanatuan prison camp.

 

The movie is not as bad as US critics would like you to believe. The Great Raid is the kind of movie that you have to watch with a certain mindset in order to appreciate it. For one thing, this is not an action-based war movie. Those looking for impressive battle scenes will be disappointed. The Great Raid is a drama-based war movie. It attempts to present the personal, emotional stories of certain people involved in the raid.

 

However, I have to admit that the movie failed to achieve just that. Yes, it presented personal, emotional stories but those stories were unoriginal and uninteresting. The love story between Margaret Utinsky (Connie Nielsen), an American nurse working in Manila, and Maj. Gibson (Joseph Fiennes), a POW in Cabanatuan, is cheesy and uninspired. It would have been better had the story focused on the dilemmas of the soldiers and guerillas involved in the rescue mission. That would have given us a glimpse of what the raid means to them. Was the whole thing worth dying for?

 

Perhaps that is what the movie lacks - focus. The sprawling narrative covers three separate segments that were not threaded tightly. In fact, the love story between Utinsky and Gibson was dropped during the last 1/3 of the movie to give way to the climatic battle scene. The director (John Dahl) should have already seen this problem beforehand. As the head of the project, he should have known which stories are important and which are not.

 

As for the actors, I could not blame them for giving uninspired performances because their characters are flat, one-dimensional. Except for Utinsky and Gibson, all other characters are devoid of back stories. You do not understand why they are part of the mission and what it means to them. As for Cesar Montano, the actor who plays the leader of the Filipino guerillas, his performance shows his limited acting range. He offers nothing different from his performances in his recent Filipino movies.

 

Of the technical aspects of the film, I found the production design commendable. The movie shows just how colorful and beautiful Manila was before and during the war. However, there were several glaring inconsistencies. Fort Santiago looked different from the real one. The pedicabs looked distinctly Chinese. Even the forest trees do not seem indigenous to the Philippines. I am no history and botany expert, but these elements made the movie less authentic to me.

 

The Great Raid had noble intentions, but it failed to achieve those. This could have been a better movie had the creators reviewed and revised their material before shooting it. Then, it could have had its own place in history.

[maroon5]

any reviews sa cinderella man????

[Kaftig]

RED EYE

 

Last night, my barkada and I celebrated my birthday. (I have work during the weekend so last night was the only time I could spare for them.) It was a fun evening, especially because we were complete for the first time in years. It could have been the perfect evening of my life, except that we had to watch Red Eye.

 

Red Eye is hands-down the worst suspense-thriller movie I have ever seen. When Adolf me that it sucked big time, I should have listened to him. Quark, I want a refund!!! (He told us that this movie was great. Now, I'm not sure if he was being sarcastic when he said that.)

 

Red Eye tells the story of Lisa (Rachel McAdams), a hotel manager, who bumps into a gentleman, Jackson "Jack" Rippner (Cillian Murphy), as she catches the red-eye flight to Miami. (By the way, "red eye" refers to the last flight for the day.) What could have been romantic encounter turns into a nightmare as Jack threatens Lisa's life during the flight. He wants her to change the room assignment of a government official staying in her hotel. It turns out that Jack is working for a group of assassins who wants to k*ll the government official. Lisa tries everything she can to escape his clutches, but Jack has no intention of letting her go.

 

I don't have to tell the rest of the story because any intelligent human being will be able to predict it. This movie has no major plot twists or turns. It is simply a series of chases and fights.

 

For a suspense thriller to work, it has to succeed in making you suspend your disbelief. That will only happen if the movie's plot set-up is logical and tight. Unfortunately, Red Eye's plot is loose and full of loopholes.

 

For one thing, the idea of blackmailing a hotel manager to assassinate a government official is absurd. Given today's technology, it is not difficult to hack into a hotel's IT system and change room assignments. If they need human backup, the assassins could have easily planted a member of their group to act as a hotel employee. Don't these assassins know that involving innocent civilians in their plan or leaving a body trail of victims only makes the whole plan complicated? It also didn't help that Murphy has no other fighting skill except for head-butting. He is probably the most inefficient assassin I have ever seen.

 

Second, the movie is full of contrivances. McAdams was just so lucky that there were several disturbances inside the plane that gave her time to think of a plan, that there was an empty, running car outside the airport for her to escape, that there was a lot of furniture in her dad's house, that her dad's house was being renovated to allow her to move freely between rooms, and so on. On the other hand, Murphy was lucky enough that a 911's service was inefficient so the cops arrived late. The set-up's in this movie was so obvious that you could play "plant and pay-off" without watching the rest of the movie.

 

Third, this movie lacks a narrative voice. Except for the weak suspense-thriller plot, it offers nothing else. It doesn't have anything to say about what happens in the real world. You don't even know why the assassins want to k*ll the government official. Hence, nothing much is at stake for the viewer. It would have helped if the government official stood for a political principle that the assassins feel is not helpful to the citizens. That way, the movie could have had a wider scope and it would not have become a run of the mill, better suited for TV suspense thriller.

 

However, I have to give credit to the movie's fast-paced editing. In the few sequences that work, the editing kept me at the edge of my seat. Then again, editing can only take you so far. In the end, it is still the story that counts. Sadly, this movie doesn't have one.

 

If only Visine could help me...I need something to take Red Eye out of my system in 60 seconds.

[sickness]

KAIRO (PULSE)

 

Cast: Haruhiko Katô, Kumiko Aso, Koyuki, Jun Fubuki

 

Director: Kiyoshi Kurosawa

 

Synopsis: A freighter roaming endlessly in the ocean, the captain seeks contact, in vain, with the shore. Among the few people aboard is a young woman, Michi. She starts her story. When she was working for a small company and visited a friend she hadn’t heard from a while, she found him at home. But nor much later, he hung himself. On the wall was a strange black patch, as if there had been a huge short circuit. His friends search the apartment and a found a diskette that seems to have a strange virus. Is there any link with the suicide? A young man looking for games on the internet puts the diskette in his machine and seems to spy on the boring life of strangers with a webcam. A message appears: “Do you want to meet a ghost?”

 

Review: I think the movie was good, the effects were good and the whole film had a sense of dread and general creepiness about it. “Kairo” is basically about the ghost world actually being so full of ghosts that it has run out of room to hold them all so some ghosts are left going into our realm of existence. In order for the ghosts to stop from people dying and more ghosts being created and overflowing their already-filled up world they would make living people disappear into their own loneliness. They would show themselves to people which would somewhat make them go crazy and eventually turn into nothingness. Eventually towards the end of the movie the whole city is pretty much gone and it closely resembles that of the end of the world. Kurosawa creates a dark, harrowing atmosphere based on a painful philosophy: that at the end of the line there isn't anything except a fearful nothingness - no heaven or hell, just a miserable eternity of living in between states.

 

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

[Kaftig]

THE LONG WEEKEND

 

Chicoy and I watched The Long Weekend last Sunday, but I deliberately postponed the writing of this review till a week later. We were both in a good mood that day, and I was afraid that my high spirits might affect my perception of the movie. So I took a few days off before I analyzed the film.

 

My judgment? It is a bad film.

 

The Long Weekend tells the story of two brothers, Cooper (Chris Klein) and Ed (Brendan Fehr). Reeling from a devastating break-up, Ed is in danger of losing his job. He has the entire weekend, which also happens to be his birthday weekend, to come up with an ad campaign that will impress his company's clients. Things get more complicated when Cooper arrives with a mission - to get his brother laid. In search of that ideal woman, the brothers get into all sorts of troubles with Ed getting the worst end. He has been chased by the police, arrested, imprisoned, nearly raped by male prisoners, etc. Just when he couldn't stand the string of bad luck, the ideal woman arrives and Ed is inspired to create his best ad campaign.

 

It is a totally brainless comedy that relies heavily on old jokes. Some of the old jokes worked, but most of them fell flat. The entire movie seems like a more mature version of American Pie. However, I must stress that "more mature" does not necessarily mean "better."

 

The only interesting aspects of the movie are the intercutting home video clips that serve as metaphors for the movie's scenes. Had this visual treatment been used for a wittier, edgier screenplay, The Long Weekend could have been a better comedy movie.

 

It sure was a great thing that The Long Weekend was a pretty short movie. Had it been any longer, I might have asked for a refund.

[hoopburners]

Cinderalla Man

 

Starring - Russell Crowe, Ren้e Zellweger, Paul Giamatti, Craig Bierko

 

Directed by Ron Howard

 

Storyline - In the middle of the Great Depression, when an America in the grips of a devastating economic downturn was nearly brought to its knees, there came along a most unlikely hero who had crowds cheering on their feet-as he proved just how hard a man would fight to win a second chance for his family and himself.

 

That common-man hero was James J. Braddock-a.k.a. the "Cinderella Man"-who was to become one of the most surprising and inspirational sports legends in history. By the early 1930s, the impoverished ex-prizefighter was seemingly as broken-down, beaten-up and out-of-luck as much of the rest of the American populace. Like so many others, Braddock had hit rock bottom. His career appeared to be finished, he was unable to pay the bills, the only thing that really mattered to him-his family-was in danger, and he was even forced to go on Public Relief. But deep inside, Jim Braddock never relinquished his determination. Driven by love, honor and an incredible dose of grit, he willed an impossible dream to come true.

 

In a last-chance bid to help his family, Braddock returned to the ring. No one thought he had a shot. In bout after bout, the talk was that poor Jim Braddock was criminally out-matched and perilously in over his head. Except that Braddock, fueled by something beyond mere competition, kept winning. Suddenly, the ordinary working man who couldn't get a job became the mythic athlete who could not lose. Carrying the hopes and dreams of the disenfranchised on his shoulders, Braddock rocketed through the ranks, until this underdog who defied all the odds chose to do the unthinkable: take on the heavyweight champ of the world, the unstoppable Max Baer, renowned for having killed two men in the ring.

 

Review - I just watched this film yesterday and this one's really good.

 

The film inspires the uninspired, gives hope to those who lost hope and gives courage to those who has none as I would simply call it.

 

It reveals how one endured a great deal of suffering, struggled to put food in the table for his family, and conquered all odds to become the nation's icon of hope. This film is very signifant to third world contries like the Philippines because where the realities of this film depicted are very open in us. A lot of us have experienced similar things to what James Broddick and his family has gone through, and are looking for ways to survive.

 

Like a fairytale story or very-known telenovelas, the hero would achieve the impossible. He has a run of successful wins over opponents and was predicted to take the title during the early years. But with unfateful events that leads to force and early retirement from boxing, struggling to find work and keeping everything in place, Broddick and his family hit rock-bottom. But things clearly was turning on side when he was offered another chance to box, a passion he discovered while working a series of jobs when he was young. He would win matches everybody thought would be impossible, stopping and knocking down opponents with his shear courage and determination and later on face a menacing opponent, known for killing 2 men in the ring, and dueling in an epic 15 round match.

 

I'm not so sure if the character of Max Baer is really that bad (I haven't look at his profile yet on the net) because he was depicted as a very bad person in the film. And Braddock was still in shape even though he barely had enough to eat during those times.

 

With Russell playing Broddick, Renee as his wife and Ron Howard directed, I predict this film would win a lot of awards from award-giving bodies. A nomination for Best Picture, Director, Actor/Actress is what I expect, and none from those would be shameful.

 

Recommendation - It's for everyone to see. I'm planning to own a dvd (original) copy of this when it becomes available in the future. Your money is worth watching this film, and I guarantee you'd be smiling (or slight) when you walk out the cinema after seeing this movie.

 

Rating - A

[Kaftig]

CORPSE BRIDE

 

In a year of weak animated films, Tim Burton's Corpse Bride certainly stands out. In fact, it is even a better film than his Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Before you assume that Corpse Bride is a great film, I'll make it clear that it is not ( Nightmare before Christmas is far better than this one.). However, it is a good film.

 

Co-directed with Mike Johnson, Tim Burton's Corpse Bride is about the accidental marriage of Victor Van Dort (voiced by Johnny Depp) to a corpse, Emily (voiced by Helena Bonham Carter). The problem is that Victor is already engaged to Victoria Everglot (voiced by Emily Watson). Now, he has to find a way to annul his marriage to Emily so he can return to the world of the living and marry Victoria.

 

The film has a lot of impressive elements. One of which is the animation. Burton and Johnson presented the world of the living as a drab, monochromatic place that is, ironically, devoid of life. Meanwhile, the world of the dead is vibrant and colorful, pulsating with the irrepressible energy of its dead population. Such visual was well-used throughout the film.

 

I also enjoyed Danny Elfman's quirky yet witty songs. The musical score and songs he composed for this film are some of the best he has done. It takes some time to get used to the unusual music, but once you've grown accustomed to it, you'll be surprised at how emotionally moving it is.

 

The film's only disappointing aspect (and it's a major one) is the story. One gets the feeling that the writers and directors have not fully explored the emotional depths of the film. The formulaic back story and the predictable flow of events, especially the whodunit angle, further give the film a sense of emotional detachment. For one thing, I never really understood if Emily fell in love with Victor. Or was she simply using him as a filler for her frustrations on love and marriage? I also wanted to know if Victor truly learned to love Emily. Was he able to see certain qualities in this corpse that he had not seen in his fiancee? A stronger love triangle plot would have made the story more emotional and the final sacrifice more poignant. This is after all a romance movie.

 

Also, it would have helped if we saw more scenes of Victor adjusting to the world of the dead. I would really love to know how different life in the world of the dead is from life in the world of the living. Why do people and animals go to that place after death? Is it the final resting place or is it a transitory place where you have to earn your place in heaven? The writers and the directors have this chance to totally change our concept of life after death. Unfortunately, they did not take the chance to do so.

 

Still, credit must be given to the writers for coming up with a brilliant concept and to the directors for bringing that concept to life. Let's just hope that Burton will surpass himself when he makes his next animated film.

[50fd]

The 40 Year Old Virgin

 

 

The plot is simple. A man is forty years old and he is a virgin. When Andy's coworkers earn about his lack of experience, they swarm him, teaching him to look better, act more confident, and to never take his eyes off the prize. (As the title suggest) Yet, behind this simple joke, we are given a deep, complex story that is not only one of the funniest you'll ever witness, but has genuine lessons behind it.

 

Best R/comedy i've seen for a long time. almost all of the jokes hits me. plus the story line.. super.

 

 

The way "The 40 Year-Old Virgin" plays out is indeed funny from start to end, but I'll leave that up to you, to observe. Surely, if anyone can go through the things Andy does and still have the strength to attract a woman as sexy as Catherine Keener, then it's true: It is never too late!

 

 

My advice: go to see it for huge laughs and an incredibly enjoyable movie on top of it.

[Kaftig]

BIYAYA NG LUPA

 

Last November 10, ABS-CBN hosted a special screening of the award-winning film, Biyaya ng Lupa. It was the culminating event in a series of talks between ABS-CBN and LVN, which eventually led to the transfer of LVN's film archives to ABS-CBN. For the next 20 years, ABS-CBN will release the LVN films on television through its cable channel, CinemaOne.

 

Manuel Silos' Biyaya ng Lupa is one of the LVN films acquired by ABS-CBN. Set in the 1950's, the film tells the story of a rural Filipino family who struggles to remain intact in face of the almost insurmountable odds that come their way. It was an official entry to the 1960 Berlin International Film Festival and the 1960 Asian Film Festival.

 

What makes Biyaya ng Lupa so remarkable is its undeniable influence on Filipino films that came after it. The film's story elements, which may seem original in 1959, are now staples of local family drama movies and soap operas. Viewed decades after its initial release, the film's story doesn't lose its impact due its universality. Modern-day viewers can still relate to the story and the theme of the film. After all, the problems that the family confronted are still the same problems we confront today.

 

Among the actors, the ones that truly stood out were Rosa Rosal, Leroy Salvador and Danilo Jurado. Rosal was effective as Maria, the matriarch who served as her family's stronghold after her husband's (Tony Santos) death. I was told by Emman dela Cruz that at the time the film was made, Rosal was only four or six years older than her co-stars. Yet, she was believable as a mature and strong-willed mother. Salvador was endearing as Maria's deaf-mute son, Miguel. Although I doubted the authenticity of the sign language he used, Salvador was believable and consistent as a deaf-mute. At first, he only served as the film's comic relief. Yet as the film progresses, his character develops emotional layers, which Salvador effectively portaryed. The most poignant moments of the films were actually the scenes between Salvador and Jurado, who portrayed Lito, the youngest son. Jurado should also be commended for acting at par with his older co-stars.

 

Since the film was made in 1959, the filmmaking techniques were obviously crude. For the most part, however, Silos was successful in telling his narrative. He manged to keep the film light and exciting despite the dramatic story. He complements this with strong visuals that showcase our rural landscapes. My only problem with Silos' direction is his sense of time. There were certain sequences that appeared to have happened in a matter of days, but actually happened in a matter of hours.

 

Biyaya ng Lupa's look and story are distinctly Filipino. It is a film that we should be proud of. However, what we cannot be proud of is the (lack of) development of the Filipino film industry nearly 50 years after Biyaya ng Lupa was made. Could it be that Biyaya ng Lupa's success has become the curse of succeeding Filipino films? Certainly not! The film's success simply proves the innate talent of Filipinos in the art of filmmaking. It is up to our modern-day filmmakers to come up with films that will not only match the achievements of Biyaya ng Lupa, but surpass them as well.

[Barenaked-NoMre]

Just came from watching "Just Like Heaven" ...

 

My rating - nice, sweet, cute and of cors, romantic! ;-)

 

Typical of a Reese Witherspoon movie.

 

It's a cross between "While You Were Sleeping", "Ghost" and a modern day "Snowhite". ;-)

 

GREAT date movie! ;-)

Edited November 22, 2005 by barenaked

[Kaftig]

HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE

 

Before anything else, I just want to make it clear that "loyalty to the original material" is not a major factor in my appreciation (or lack of appreciation) of this movie. A scriptwriter myself, I understand the necessity of changing details of the original material to make it suitable for the film medium. There are certain elements in the book that have to be changed to make it "filmic."

 

Even though The Goblet of Fire is my favorite book in the Harry Potter series, I threw my biases to the wind and viewed its film adaptation without any expectations. In a nutshell, the movie isn't bad. However, there is nothing great about it as well.

 

I have to admire the way the scriptwriter compressed the story into a 2 1/2-hour movie. Only the essential events were showed. (Although, I hated the fact that they edited out the Quidditch World Cup because I was so eager to see how professional Quidditch players play as compared to student players like Harry.) One thing you can't certainly complain about this movie is the lack of action scenes.

 

The movie's primary problem is Mike Newell's directorial treatment. His visuals are darker than Cuaron's, but they lack character. Cuaron was able to infuse grandiosity and excitement with his dark visuals in The Prisoner of Azkaban, but Newell wasn't able to achieve that. His visuals were simply dark and depressing. This movie also proves that Newell is not a good action director. The action scenes lack punch and originality. He was not able to present the three tasks of the Tri-Wizard Tournament as fresh and exciting sequences. His shot list was so predictable that I almost slept throughout the action scenes. I also remarked to my friend that the movie lacked magic - not in quantity, but in quality. Scenes involving magic also lacked originality; thus, depriving you of the sense of wonderment each time the characters use their wand. The most disappointing aspect of this film is the visual treatment of Voldemort. Don't get me wrong. I am a big fan of Ralph Fiennes, but his performance here has got to be his worst ever. Voldemort is supposed to be an intense, larger-than-life, evil warlock. I was expecting to see him as a threatening, fearsome yet awe-inspiring evil entity, much like Gary Oldman in Bram Stoker's Dracula. Fiennes' Voldemort is simply an ugly creature, lacking the menace of the original character.

 

Newell is well-known as the director of romantic comedies, such as Four Weddings and a Funeral. It was no wonder then that he was able to maintain a light feel for the movie, despite his dark visuals and the heavy story. Most of his comedy scenes worked well. For some reason, I was swept away by the romantic set-up and visuals of the Yule Ball. Working within his strengths, Newell successfully portrayed the joys and pains of first love.

 

Although it is better than the first two Harry Potter movies, The Goblet of Fire is a far second to The Prisoner of Azkaban. Cuaron might not have been loyal to Rowling's book, but at least he gave us a movie that was filled with visual splendor. Newell was more loyal to the book, but he failed to translate the magic of the book to the big screen.

[Wolf]

For the benefit of everyone, I'm posting the revised rules for posting movie reviews.

 

1. Only movie reviews of those currently being shown in theaters shall be allowed, whether Pinoy or foreign. Non-movie review posts shall be deleted. (I think I have to emphasize that. )

 

2. The format shall be:

 

A. Caption

Title of the Film

Director

Lead Actors/Actresses

Remarks (e.g. Based on a book by..., comeback film by... Academy Award-Winning... etc)

 

B. Synopsis of the Movie

 

C. Review/Criticism

 

D. Rating (To be placed at the bottom of the post)

 

3. If a member has some opinion or reaction on the review made by another member, a new review should be made. No quoting of posts shall be allowed.

 

 

Thank you very much. :thumbsupsmiley:

 

NOTE: Off-topic posts will be deleted without warning.

Edited January 10, 2006 by Wolf

[Guest Inquisitive]

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe

Directed by Andrew Adamson

Starring: Tilda Swinton, Georgie Henley, Skandar Keynes, William Moseley, Anna Popplewell

Based on a book by C.S. Lewis

 

Synopsis of the Movie

 

The Pevensie children are sent away in order to be safe from the German Air raids of London in World War II. They are sent to the home of eccentric Prof. Digory Kirke. There are certain rules that must be followed and among them is never to disturbed the professor. During one dull and dreary day, the children decide to play hide and seek. Lucy, the youngest of the children decides to hide in a big wardrobe cabinet only to find out that it leads to another world which is Narnia. At first her siblings do not believe her but when all of them had to hide from the housekeeper, the other three realized that Lucy was not lying because they all end up in Narnia. This is the start of their adventure. They meet talking badgers, deal with murderous wolves and meet a talking lion named Aslan.

 

Review/Criticism

 

Do not commit the mistake of trying to compare this film with the LOTR trilogy. LOTR is very rich in imagery and the way it was written was nearly poetic. However, that does not diminish the value of Narnia. In fact, those who dislike incredible and large scale special effects will like this film. Unlike LOTR, this film is easier to view for those who do not like their eyes to be challenged by tremendous CGI effects.

 

This film is easy to understand and watch notwithstanding its running time which is more than two hours (2:20). You will not feel jittery or want the film to end because of its length. The pacing of Narnia is just right considering the length of its story in the book.

 

The special effects are noteworthy especially the presentation of Aslan. He looked majestic and regal, so kudos to the people who designed him. The other creatures were gruesome looking especially those following the White Witch. I specifically liked the centaurs, they really looked awesome.

 

Tilda Swinton was very convincing in her potrayal of the White Witch. In fact, she was so effective that there were times that everytime she was in a scene, she would literally take over. Being the White Witch she perfectly showed how malevolent and evil that character is.

 

Some are saying that Aslan is a metaphor or symbol of Jesus Christ. A strong argument can be made in favor of this but I suggest that you watch the film and determine for yourselves.

 

What I really liked about this film is that it transports children to Narnia. It plays on the fantasies of children who dream of becoming heroes, warriors and rulers of far away lands. It is easy for children identify themselves with the Pevensie children because they are just like them. This is not the case with LOTR because the heroes in the trilogy are not children but adults.

 

Another factor to consider and no disrespect to Andrew Adamson but he's no Peter Jackson. Andrew Adamson made Shrek and Shrek 2 which are notably good films but how can they compare to Peter Jackson's LOTR films and King Kong? Simply put, Peter Jackson is one hell of a director and while Andrew Adamson's also did well in directing this film, the former just set the bar too high in the making of fantasy films.

 

Rating

 

On a scale of 1 - 5, the latter being the highest, I give this film a 3.75. It is not like the LOTR films and perhaps there would be no other fantasy film like them. The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is a good film but will not achieve the statuts of the LOTR films. However, in spite of that it is still worth watching and is a welcome respite from the inanities of the last Metro Manila Film Festival.

[tobats04]

A. Caption

Title of the Film: Chronicles of Narnia

Director Andrew Adamson

Lead Actors/Actresses Tilda Swinton, Georgie Henley, Skandar Keynes, William Moseley, Anna Popplewell

Remarks (e.g. Based on a book by..., comeback film by... Academy Award-Winning... etc)

 

B. Synopsis of the Movie

The opening scenes was during war time (WWII) in England with the Pevensie Children and their Mother. And then the story continues with

the children being tranported to a country to be adopted temporarily by

an rich old man. Aside from meeting a mean Head-caretaker of the estate the children discovered a magical closet full of wardrobes that links them to the magical world of Narnia. The whole story evolves in the quest of the four children helping the talking-Lion Aslan to free Narnia from the evil curse of the white witch and defeat her armies.

 

C. Review/Criticism

I find it amusing that a lot of people do compare Narnia with LOTR. From

my point of view Narnia is very,very different from LOTR. even the battle scenes are very different from the way LOTR was made. One word that differentiates both of them is LOTR is grotesque. Meaning - battle scenes of LOTR are very vivid and dark in concept and in picture. Narnia's battles are depicted as lively, colourful and radiant. Graphics are not as good as LOTR or KingKong since you can easily spot the back scenes effect as ordinary back drop only. But the way the plot is being played throughout the film is good - one thing is, it is not boring. The story are developed from one scene to another without dragging the characters and pefecting its fluid motion of achieving the plot. If you watch the movie you would never feel that the plot was too short nor too long. It's just perfect. The graphics is good not perfect. But the storyline was too great to make up for below par performance of the effects. It's like combining the concept of Harry Potter and LOTR in one - mixing up childhood fantasies, medieval battles and reality common sense. For what LOTR boasts of Frodo and Gollum/Smeagol, so does of Narnia of having its own Lucy and Tumnus - which is quite very dearing and very dramatic than the scenes of LOTR. What makes it so very elite from the other fiction movies such as LOTR and Harry Potter is that it was a film so Walt Disney-Tailored Fit. Why? it was so magical! and it was great, because no other Hollywood company could ever make a story so magical no other than Walt Disney.

 

D. Rating (To be placed at the bottom of the post)

I'll give it a 4.5 out of 5. Narnia rises the same as the rest, with the same par performance as LOTR, Harry Potter and King Kong. Considering the superb performances of its newcomers like Georgie Henley (Lucy) or James McAvoy (Tumnus) and the only veteran-actress Tilda Swinton, the movie deserves to be applauded as the same ranks as with Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter), Elijah Wood(Frodo) and Ian McKellen (Gandalf). Walt Disney is not much known for its graphic creations but it is well-respected for it's child-fantasy-dreams-turn-into-reality movies, and I think this is where Narnia do excel. Narnia has its own distinction on fiction films because it is a wholesome movie which can range from children to adults. As what I've heard, Narnia have toppled KingKong from the blockbuster charts considering its budget was much lower than King Kong's. This was worth watching over and over for many times, because this captures the hearts from the eyes of a 3-year old child to a mature age-old Grandpa. See it now... it's great.