I took Teddy to a “special screening” of this last night(I have no idea why Pittsburgh got a screening of a movie that opens in “select cities” tomorrow and then everywhere else the following weekend, but I got free passes from work, and I don't ever question the goodness of free passes).
I like Tim Burton as much as the next erstwhile hipster, but I haven’t seen one of his movies for years and I remember them being much darker than this one. It’s inarguable, of course, that accidentally marrying a corpse is dark, but this movie is positively cheerful and even (and I shudder to use the phrase) life-affirming to a Disney-like degree. It isn’t precious at all, as Disney can be; it sort of echoes old-school Disney, like Sleeping Beauty.
It was fun and cool to look at, especially considering that everyone and everything recalled those Christmas specials with Rudolph and Chris Kringle and the elf who wanted to be a dentist.
I liked the songs, and I liked the story, and I even got a little choked up at the very end (because I’m a sap and a sucker and cried when Snoopy wouldn’t come home), but all in all, . . . eh. I’m glad it was free.
**********************
We saw the trailer for Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, which looks like it will be lots of fun. I’m very fond of this book, and will be disappointed if the movie is as bad as the first two. The boy who plays Ron seems to be growing less annoying as he gets older, which is a relief.
**********************
I’m reading Infinite Jest. It’s going to take me forever, because I have tons of reading for school this semester, but I found myself getting crabby because I wasn’t reading for fun. I know David Foster Wallace makes some people want to swing annoyed punches, but I eat him up.
9 comments:
So is this a good movie to wait for the video on?
I'm thinking this might be worth seeing for free, or buying on DVD if it's cheap enough.
I have issues with Johnny Depp (who plainly can't act) but perhaps his annoyance is mitigated by stop-motion animation.
Don't get me started on the Harry Potter films. In a certain sense, I think the 1st one was the high-water mark for the franchise. There was a sense of timeless wonderment in seeing Hogwarts in MGM-like Technicolor. The third, and now the fourth, which might look great these days will look SOOOOO dated in 15 years it won't even be funny. When I saw HP&TPOA the first thing I noticed was the horrible washed-out color (yes, I know, it's a darker film, and the film stock...blablabla) and me thinking to myself: "This is gonna look like $#!+ on DVD." And then the characters were all dressed in contemporary clothes. ('cause, y'know, Hermione's Juicy Couture hoodie will still look current in 2012, right?).
OK, end rant.
-J.
I don't know, Carolyn--Teddy liked the movie well enough, so your kids might too. And like I said, I didn't *dislike* it--it was a nice evening out.
I read a very compimentary review of it on Salon this morning, which I was expecting. I was surprised, though, that the reviewer didn't mention Disney once, nor did she mention how little of the *living* bride the audience is given. In fact, now that I think of it, the only "character" that gets any real love and attention from Burton (aside from Emily, the Corpse Bride), is the land of the dead.
I think the bottom line on this movie is that you won't suffer if your kids really want to see it and you go, but neither will you be missing out if you wait for the DVD release.
As far as Harry Potter goes, though, Joke . . . maybe I should be embarrassed to admit this, but I don't watch the movies as stand-alone entities. I see them as visual supplements, or moving illustrations that accompany the books.
I know what you mean about seeing Hogwarts on screen for the first time--I was delighted. I truly don't remember much from the second movie, but the third's version of Harry's patronus recalled for me the feeling I had when I *read* the scene, and that made me very happy. That's all I ask for, really.
That, and those sweet British accents--the accents charm me
Gina I was excited to see the subject line of your post. I think you're so lucky you got to see The Corpse Bride for free. Your review, however, sounds like mine after I went to see a sneak preview of the animated movie Anastasia. I actually bought the soundtrack on the way home, like a good little consumer, then the next day wondered why the hell I did that?
I was (ok, "am") seriously considering going to see The Corpse Bride while it's still on the big screen, because I never got to see The Nightmare Before Christmas full-size (which admittedly sort of falls apart at the end but I still love it).
I think that, since you're already inclined, you should see the movie in the theater. The visuals *are* remarkable, and if that's something you'll appreciate, you should go for it.
If you're like me, you'll leave the theater feeling happy and charmed, and that's worth something, even if you do cool off toward it later.
Gina,
I am bipolar when it comes to the HP films. On the one hand--as befits someone who accidentally minored in film (don't ask)--I see them not only as separate from the books, but also separate from each other. But as a book-head, I tend to look at them like you do a visualization of the books.
Where the film vision doesn't clash with what I had in my head from reading the books, that becomes My Official Vision of (Hogwarts, Uncle Vernon, whatever), but when it doesn't (the "new" Dumbledore who looks like a 98 year old hippie woman with a long-ass beard, or what Lupin looks like as a werewolf, to name but two) it rankles to this day.
In my mind the world of Harry Potter is supposed to be a timeless thing, so just imagine what the movies would "feel" like if Harry and Ron dressed like Starsky and Hutch. See what I mean?
And Johnny Depp still can't act.
-Joke
I think I may be one of the only women in the world who doesn't "get" Johnny Depp. I liked him in Edward Scissorhands, but I haven't seen that since I wanted to *be* Winona Ryder. Who knows what I'd think of it now. Didn't see Wonka, thought he was skeevey in Pirates of the Blah, Blah, Blah, and . . . what else? I don't know. He's creepy.
I know what you mean about wanting HP movies to be timeless, and I think they are to the degree that they can be without looking like "period" pieces, which might not make for good . . . merchandising? It'll be interesting to see how things look in fifteen years.
One word re Johnny Depp. Chocolat!
(Generally speaking I don't care for him either, but oh, in that movie...)
He CAN'T act! In fact, he can't act worse than Keanu Reeves can't act, andthat's saying something. He can, however, do impressions and hold the for a whole film.
You don't believe me, I know. Howe'er, I offer the following films and the impressions JD did in lieu of thespianic skill:
Edward Scissorhands? Robert Smith (frontman for The Cure)
Ed Wood? Jon Lovitz
Charlie & The Chocolate Factory? Michael Jackson
Pirates of the Caribbean? Keith Richards.
The prosecution rests.
Post a Comment