Showing posts with label Ian Holm. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ian Holm. Show all posts

Sunday, October 20, 2013

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Boy is this thing bloated. As if there were any doubt, this shows that this is a story that could easily have been told in one movie; perhaps a long movie, to get every rich detail, but one movie nevertheless. Instead, out of obvious and pure greed, the producers decided to stretch the thing out into three movies, mostly by stuffing into the proceedings every drop of backstory and subtext that could be mined from Tolkien’s original tale. The burdens of that approach are apparent: a great deal of expansion on the tangential concern about the Necromancer (Sauron, for those who only saw the previous movies), none of which matches the tone of the actual, by-the-book story at all. The resulting film is discordant and needlessly uneven. But, then again, there are moments of brilliance here: the Riddles in the Dark episode is flawlessly presented, and the (first) rescue by the eagles is an amazing sequence. There’s no point in denying yourself, if you’re a fan; go ahead and watch this flick (and the upcoming two). Just don’t reward the greed by spending a dime on it; get the disc from the damn library.

Saturday, May 9, 2009

Ratatouille

Strange. None of the characters are particularly likeable, at least at first; much of the physical comedy is overdone; some parts of the Pixar template have become too familiar (including the usual, almost banal-at-this-point technical brilliance); and the distracting Familiar Voice Problem is present. And yet, when viewed in its totality, the movie still works better than it should. This is a film that is more than the sum of its parts, and by pulling off that trick, it earns a worthiness that otherwise would not be there. Go ahead and have this one for dinner some night.

Friday, August 8, 2003

Henry V (1989)

The Branagh film--basically his coming-out party. It's undeniably a classic, though I must admit that there are some flaws here. For me the whole Falstaff back-story scenes seem flat, though whether the fault lies with this production or the source material (!) is debatable. What stands without question is that when Branagh's Henry is on screen, this movie is electrifying; no wonder everyone was so impressed.

Wednesday, April 30, 2003

From Hell

The Hughes Brothers win points for ambiguity; the ending is neither happy, nor sad--it just is. Of course, movies about Jack the Ripper have a built in unhappy factor. This one touches on the most prominent suspects--the Duke of Clarence, Dr. Gull--and represents the period fairly well. On the other hand, Johnny Depp and Heather Graham are unconvincing as Victorian Londoners. Tread with caution: there's some serious gore here.

Tuesday, November 5, 2002

The Lord Of The Rings: The Fellowship Of The Ring

Upon a second viewing I conclude that this film is indeed as good as I originally thought. The differences from Tolkien's story don't deviate so much as fill in the blanks. The only negative note: Cate Blanchett is awful as Galadriel.