Showing posts with label coloured. Show all posts

First Quarter Movies

Posted by the lamplighter

Last year, I resolved to spend more time inside the cinema and I did. I made sure that I watched at least one movie a month. So far, I enjoyed most of the movies I've seen.

To start the year right, Tiger and I went to see James Cameron's AVATAR. I feel asleep for about 10 minutes right in the middle of the movie. I guess I got all dizzy with the swooping shots and panoramic landscapes.

The movie was not so bad but it felt like much of the thought was focused on the effects and not the plot. I guess that was just too much to ask.

In February, I pleaded to see Percy Jackson and the Olympians: The Lightning Thief. I adored the book and could not wait to see how they will appear in the movies.

I was not impressed but it was fun. I felt the urge to be apologetic in behalf of the filmmakers since I understand that there is not possible way of translating that engaging series flawlessly into the big screen. And by the looks of it, that would be the first and last Percy Jackson movie they would attempt to make.

Last year we could not stop talking about the buzz that Johnny Depp will play the Mad Hatter in the next Tim Burton movie and back then we knew this is something to watch out for.

And so We went into the rabbit hole and revisited the Underland with Alice and the many colorful characters who calls it home. We watched the antics of the insufferable queen and braved the many terrible yet awesome adventures that Alice never grew tired of.

It was nothing short of amazing. We can always count on Burton to turn our well-loved classics into the dark and twisted. I loved it.

To cap off the quarter, Tiger and I saw Clash of the Titans. The effects were decent and at times spectacular. There were a lot of things that were a bit needless.

Ultimately, it was not the best movie to close the quarter but there are a lot more movies to come as 2010 unfolds.

For the second quarter, we ought to get ready for Shrek Forever After, Toy Story 3, The Karate Kid and The Last Airbender.

Filed under coloured, play harder 0 comments

whoa percy!

Posted by the lamplighter

Warning: there may be spoilers here.

It's not that I'm entirely satisfied, I just understand how difficult the task could be.

Percy Jackson and the Olympians is an intricate and delicious piece of literature. It's classic and contemporary. And it is arguably one of the best series in the young adult literature in ages.

I've always felt the pull towards mythology. For me, it's the origin of all soap opera plots ever written. And to be able to read it in contemporary form is nothing short of amazing.

When I heard of the film adaptation, I got all giddy. I heard Columbus is directing and I thought another Harry Potter-ish film - the making of a classic. In my excitement, I forgot how the Potter films are inferior to the book.

Seeing the movie is actually a mixed experience for me. I was fascinated as to how much the film deviated from the book but remained interesting at the same time. I also realized how the makers are going to be in hot water when the reviews come in.

There are a lot of details in the book to cram in (insert run time), but it's still not a valid excuse to make an adaptation faithful to the book.

First, the main villain is not even in the movie. Kronos' name was mentioned as well as the most possible motive that he has for going after the Olympians. The villain was not clearly defined actually- which is okay in the absence of the Kronos detail, since every god is basically neither friend nor enemy to Percy. Well, they've not decided yet anyway.

Second, there was Percy's quest- which is basically the whole plot of the novel. It's totally different. I was waiting for the opportunity for the movie to pick up its feet and reveal that it's as smart as the novel, but I was left wanting.

And third, the most interesting- albeit annoying- characters were removed. Nancy Bobofit, Clarisse, and Ares were no show. It's important to have these characters because they elicited the reactions that define Percy.

I still enjoyed the film. Percy's character is funny and has that near-endearing swagger, a split between Radcliffe's Potter and Efron's Troy . The effects were great but not too extraordinary. There are just too many factors which could have made it much better. Some argued that the reason for these compromises is the existence of a target audience. Do filmmakers "sacrifice" too much simply because they feel that their audience wouldn't get it?

If you take away the fact that the movie was based on a book, it would've been better. It makes sense anyway. But as it is, it is not. And that makes all the difference.