She doesn't look *that* different. What have they done to McAvoy's hair though? That's a real crime.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Just pretend that he looks like this throughout the movie and all will be well:

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

There will be Blood.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Seconded. I'm still not sure if I like it, but I keep thinking about it weeks later.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Just watched it last night, agreed that it was quite powerful.

Out of interest, what rating did it get in the UK? Over here it was PG... God help any small child brought along to that one by their parents.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Stardust.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Yeah, I enjoyed that a lot. A fair bit better than the book, in my opinion - burn the heretic!

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Tsk, already having seen it. FINE. Then I recommend you watch the Harold Lloyd collection!

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

better than the book

I didn't dislike the film, but felt like it was a touch simplified.

What did you see that I missed?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

would be a good movie to take any smaller relatives out to see

How much smaller do you reckon?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Hmm, 8-12 age range I guess, but I'm sure Bea could totally cope.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

But of course! It has a princess! Even if she is pig-snouted.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

You don't post nearly often enough these days.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

We saw Game Plan yesterday, at B's request, and it was actually really happy making. Not good, necessarily, but fun.

Other films we have seen recently: Jumper (not worth the effort), Juno (excellent, with a brilliant soundtrack), PS I love you (don't see it if you read the book).

(Reply to this) (Thread)

the genius of a Gilliam or Burton

You're an idiot.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

But an idiot who's right! Despite the diminishing returns of their recent output, perhaps.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

I'll grant you that Burton once had something going. However, anyone who could perpetrate the abominations of Planet of the Apes, Big Fish, or Charlie and the Chocolate Factory has got to have serious question marks, and live grenades, placed firmly by their name. He's racked up more godawfuls than he has godblesses. And that's a shame. Those who show such promise and then deliver turds are the hardest to forgive.

Gilliam, however has always been fundamentally flawed. He just does not understand pacing. He managed - despite himself - to be on the money with Brazil, but looking at the body of his work, it's evident that that was an aberration.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Bah, everything I've seen by Terry Gilliam I've liked, with the dishonourable exception of "The Brothers Grimm". Given the director's track record I'm surprised that Heath Ledger didn't choose to hurry up and die in the middle of production, not that that would have wrecked anything much more badly. The Python films are all great fun, Time Bandits is lovely, Brazil's great, Munchhausen is underrated, Fisher King and Twelve Monkeys are fine, Fear & Loathing is about as true an envisioning of the book as I can possibly imagine... no one, not even Burton is as good at taking the world inside his head and putting it onto the screen for my money.

I too loathe the three Burton films you cite. I wonder if he shouldn't limit himself to animation nowadays. I had no problems with Sweeney Todd, but that was so stylised that it probably could have been an animation, and no one would have been able to tell the difference.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

The Python films as films are not worth counting, despite the love for them that prevails. Likewise Time Bandits. Munchhausen is appalling, a perfect example of Gilliam's total inability to pace a film well. In fact it was the film that made me realise just how deficient he is in that regard. Fisher King, I don't recall, which is an indication of its quality. Twelve Monkeys was so so. Fear and Loathing, I'll grant you rocked.

Which brings us to Depp - who is mostly flawless (he'd play me in the film of my life now that Bogart is dead) - and then to Burton.

I didn't see Sweeney Todd. Firstly, I'd recently read The String of Pearls. Over, and over again, the book stresses how ugly Sweeney Todd was. And they get the most beautiful man in film to play the part? They're not even trying. And then it turns out to be a musical. Well... fuck them.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Hmm, you might as well say that Depp shouldn't have been let anywhere near Ed Wood or Fear & Loathing, on the grounds that he's much too pretty for the parts on paper, but I think he did a good job on both. I'm sure he considers himself a character actor, and why not? The Sweeney Todd in Burton's movie is explicitly a good-looking man turned ugly by years of hardship and despair, and I think Depp does a great job of acting up the grim. I liked it.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Depp int flawless. Chocolat was a poor film, he was one of the worst things about it. totally miscast.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

He was my least favourite thing about Charlie & The Chocolate Factory - Willy Wonka as Michael Jackson? ewww - and he's left me cold in a few other films, such as Blow. It's only on good days that he totally rises above the rest of the production (first Pirates of the Caribbean, I'm looking at you).

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

And, you forgot to mention, an ending which simply affirms the notion of surface beauty.

Despite its many, many flaws it didn't actually disappoint me until the last 20 mins or so.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

A woman with the face of a pig needing to be loved for herself?

Plenty of opportunities at Sci-fi conventions...

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Come now, you can hardly lay the blame for Burn Gorman being grating at this film's door. The man has a talent for being grating, which he is honing at the knee of the master, John "bloody" Barrowman.

The only thing of any consequence that I've seen this year that you've not mentioned is There Will Be Blood. Which is what you'd get if Merchant Ivory made Once Upon A Time In The West.

I do feel, though, that well not see a thing this year a fraction as good as No Country For Old Men. Given that it was also the first thing I saw this year, that's quite sobering.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

I'm really, really enjoying Torchwood Season 2! Torchwood 1 was something I watched under indulgent duress because, well, it was Whoniverse, but I haven't had a major gripe with a single thing about S2 yet. But then again they did shoot Burn Gorman to death halfway through.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

I must say that it has been a vast improvement. I've always thought with Who that you can forgive quite a lot of failings with quality, consistency and indeed sanity, so long as everyone's clearly having fun. If you want to drop the lightheartedness and go somewhere dark, you need to make sure it's worth the trip.
Torchwood S1 barely had a glimmer of light in it, nor was it any good. S2 is frequently rubbish, but remembers that it's supposed to be a giggle at the same time. If anything, they've acknowledged that Burn Gorman is incredibly grating, and made a character virtue of it. Top marks scored for shooting him. I am led to wonder if there's actually anyone at all on the team who'd die if you shot them, we're 0 for 2 so far.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Oh, Enchanted is SO great!

(Reply to this) (Thread)