This is a surprisingly good movie, available streaming on Netflix.
For a movie that carries practically zero dialogue, it was not boring by any means.
The main character Maddie, is a deaf writer, living out in an isolated area. A stalker/murderer decides to make her his next victim, and he uses the fact that she is deaf to somewhat of an advantage in the beginning, by taking pictures of her with her own phone from within her own house, which he shows to her on her computer screen.
There is just some really fantastic elements in this movie. The ones that I enjoyed the most were moments when she is screaming in pain, but you don't hear anything. It was brilliant to mute out the sound because she can't hear, and you can get a sense for what it must feel like to be in so much pain and you're in a vacuum. I also love the scene where she can't hear him over her head on the porch, so she placed her hand on the wood underneath the porch to feel the vibration of him walking instead. It was a very nice touch of realism.
The man who is the murderer, was brilliantly played. A perfect blend of calm and dangerous.
I was a little surprised after watching it when I realized it was a Mike Flanagan movie, the same one who did Oculus which I reviewed a while back. This in my opinion, soars over Oculus. I didn't hate Oculus, and I loved the concept of the movie, but it was not really one I have a desire to watch again. Hush, I will watch again, probably some time later this week actually.
Thursday, July 28, 2016
Sunday, May 15, 2016
Hannibal TV series final episode
Well, the series is over. I both loved it and didn't.
The first season I thought was phenomenal. With the truly uncomfortable and brutal imagery of murders, to the subtle and mysterious looks of Hannibal, the way he messed with Will in every opportunity he could, while at the same time wanting to love him and be friends with him, it was just an insanely brilliant story arc. Season two I loved, because how many times did I sit there and question who Will was. Even when you knew he was himself, you didn't really know. Did he love Hannibal or not? How much of a game was he playing? How many of things that he said regarding his feelings for Hannibal, in that he was wanting to change, he was wanting to become, he was creating his own design...what was real and what was a lie just to get people on board with him? I saw someone who I both knew from the books and this show, and someone I didn't know. How many times did I want to be able to see inside Will's head? What was Will really thinking? The first season and part of the second season, you knew. You could see it in his face. You could see his distress, his shaking hands.
But after Abigail died a second time, who was Will? From that moment on he was a game of words. There were only tiny glimmers of who he used to be; the genuine laugh he shared with Molly on the telephone in the hotel room, and the pained look he had when he talked to Molly's son in the hospital. Every other moment with Will was guarded. The writers didn't let the audience see him. Even to the bloody end; how much was an act, how much was a misinterpretation, how much of it might be the conclusion that's hard to swallow? That Will and Hannibal survived, and will run off together and do who knows what.
I don't think these two are, or would ever be, lovers. I think there is a rare and strange love, in just two people at the extreme opposites of personality who share a brutal trait in common; they can see the design of murder. At Will's core, even after the death of the Dragon, I don't think he is a murderer. He kills when he has to. There were other times he could have killed and didn't. I think he has too much empathy for those who are slain, to ever be comfortable with being a murderer himself.
But, nor do I think he is disgusted with Hannibal as a murderer. In the books, there was no blurring of the lines like in the TV show. In the books, Will did not like Hannibal. He would not want to be anywhere near Hannibal ever. He was not friends with Hannibal. He didn't seek to understand Hannibal. Hannibal nearly killed him and that was all he needed in terms of contact with Hannibal.
The book never had Will confused by his feelings for Hannibal. Hannibal was insane as far as definitions would allow. Will only needed Hannibal for one thing; help in deciphering his thoughts and the Dragon's actions, to find him and stop him from killing other families. While the book hinted that the Dragon was looking to kill Will's family, the book got Molly and her son out of harm's way early on and it was not really an issue again.
The TV show destroyed the relationship between Will and Molly.
Season three was rough for me. I loved the Italy arcs, but it was misplaced. The flow was difficult because it strayed out of order from the books. A lot of things between the books and the show were strayed, but there was also a lot of truth's even if characters were switched around a bit like Bloom essentially being in Chilton's role, Chilton being in Freddy's role, and at times, Will being in Hannibal's role. It was a strange diversion that worked.
Season three though did weird things. The Verger story arc was very strange. The cow growing a human baby inside it was just wrong and superfluous. In the books, Hannibal was in prison for years before meeting Clarice, falling in her love with her, escaping and living in Italy before eventually being lured back to save Clarice, and ultimately through the use of drugs and his warped psychological manipulation, he turned Clarice into someone else entirely.
The TV show had Hannibal disable Alana, Will and Crawford, kill Abigail, was never in prison, and fled to Italy with Bedelia which also to me, a very unnecessary story arc. I hated the whole Bedelia story line, but I did love Gillian Anderson's performance. She is a brilliant actress. I love how all of her lines she said so slowly, so carefully, so perfectly and sharply enunciated. It had power. However, if they had cut the Bedelia arc, they could have spent more time on the Dragon and more time on Will, and that would have served season three much better. And I wish they would have just left Abigail in the grave after the season 2 finale. To have her sporadically reappear in season 3, didn't serve any real point in my opinion. The most it did was we learn for sure that Hannibal cut off Abigail's ear to frame Will as the murderer, but really, we could figure that out without needing to see how her death was faked.
If some of these cuts had been made, then the Dragon could have been more center stage and he needed to be. You can't give the Dragon six episodes to tell his story. No discussion was given to his abusive childhood--none. This was necessary to understanding why he bit. Understanding why he had that big house. Understanding why he had wheelchairs. No attention was given to explaining how he picked his victims. Yes, they showed Dollarhyde working in a place that gave him access to film, but that was it. This was the pivotal moment in the book at tracking Dollarhyde.
In the book Will caught on to what we see is what we covet. He then matched up the two murdered families home movies to having been transferred to film by the same film company. When they searched the film companies records of employees to the profile Will had of the Dragon, then we find Dollarhyde in the depths of his trying to not kill a woman he had fallen in love with, and his desire to kill her for the love of the Dragon. It's important, and the TV show missed the mark completely.
We also don't truly see the agony of why Will would even see Hannibal again. In the first movie telling of the Red Dragon, which was called Manhunter, we see Will running out of the prison in a cold sweat. We see him dizzy and sick to his stomach after being anywhere close to Hannibal again. You could feel his level of discomfort. You could feel his anxiety and maybe fear. You could feel contempt and that is important. In the second re-telling of this story with Hopkins and Norton, Norton's Will is also visibly distressed to be in the same room as Hannibal. He has enormous pit stains from the sweating and anxiety while waiting for Hannibal to look over the case history on the Tooth Fairy's murders. Norton's Will was ill at ease, was nervous around Hannibal. He didn't trust Hannibal. Will was only there for one reason...to save the lives of families that the Dragon would go after next. The Dragon killed children. This was a brutality that Will could not stomach. This was what he had to stop.
The TV show, I never felt that same quality of discomfort from Will and Hannibal. I didn't feel the loathing and contempt that should have been there. After all, the TV series messed with Will way more than the books. The TV series had Will sent to prison for murders he didn't commit, Hannibal orchestrated the death of Will's unborn child, Hannibal stole the affections of Alana who Will was falling in love with, and Hannibal took Abigail away from Will twice. Hannibal gutted Will with a knife. Hannibal also cut into Will's forehead with a saw, in order to get to his brain, and if not stopped, he probably would have eaten it. All Hannibal did was destroy Will's life in the TV show. But you never got to see that in Will's interactions with Hannibal behind the plexi-glass of Hannibal's cell. There was a lot of meaningless conversations that didn't serve either of the character's any justice. It was sloppy and rushed.
The ending of the TV show, was a true cliffhanger, and literally a cliff dive. It left room for a new story arc if anyone else picks up Hannibal on cable. It left room for enough speculation to last a year of internal dialogue. It was heart breaking and weird, everything that made the show truly unique. Is it real? Is it figurative? Is it symbolic?
Here is my opinion of the last scene, and I watched several times taking a different viewpoint every time. The hardest thing for me to accept was Will saying to Hannibal "It's beautiful," as reference to the act of them killing together. I don't buy it. Even if Will feels like he may become like Hannibal, he has stated more than once that Hannibal has to die. He knew going into this that his ultimate goal was for Hannibal and Dollarhyde to die. Jack said this himself,too.
When Will said "It's beautiful," I believe he was referring to what Hannibal said. Hannibal said this is all he wanted for Will, all he wanted for the both of them. I think that's what Will was referring to as beautiful. The words, not the deed.
However, the writers of that episode actually released some script pages that had notes we don't get to see in the finale. One of those notes stated that when Will and Hannibal were both simultaneously attacking the Dragon, Will got a sense of what it was like for dogs in a pack to bring down a prey and kill it together. Will's affinity for dogs, and appreciation of their very nature, this is what Will thought was "beautiful."
As for this sexual tension and that they were primed to kiss in the final scene, again, I call bullshit. I don't think for one moment that Will is turning bi-sexual. There has been no true indication that Hannibal is bi-sexual. There is no doubt a love component between these two. I am in love with my daughter. Every day I know I am in love with her. There is nothing sexual in that. You can be in love with people and it doesn't have to speak of your sexuality.
In the moment when Will wraps his arms around Hannibal in a lover's embrace, and he rests his head on Hannibal's chest, also a strangely loving act, I think there's a few things going on. I think Will knows he is going to take Hannibal off the cliff with him. He has to get close. He has to get his full body onto Hannibal's to apply the pressure he needs to knock them off balance. Hannibal is not a dipshit. He's not going to allow himself to be pushed. If you look carefully, I feel like there is some resistance in Hannibal's hug back to Will, as if he also doesn't fully trust this new affection coming from Will. He doesn't quite grab Will in the same man hug.
I think Will is not the same Will. I do believe he is changed forever. Even before the final act of the show, I told my husband that I felt Will was going to die. My exact words to him were "I don't think Will wants to live after all this."
Some of the small nuances I loved about the final 10 minutes were, when Dollarhyde is setting up the camera and Hannibal is laying wounded on the floor, there's a moment when Will is reaching for a gun in his back. I think he was never going to let the Dragon kill Hannibal. From there, I'm not 100% sure if Will would have killed Hannibal or gone off into the sunset with him. The reason I say this is because he told Bedelia he doesn't plan for Hannibal to be caught a second time. And Hannibal who never winces at anything, I mean this man was stabbed in the back by Verger, not a wince. Yet, when Will gets stabbed in the face, he winces. That's the compassion he feels for Will, even though he has been nothing but un-compassionate to Will through the whole three seasons. Hannibal told Dollarhyde to kill Will's wife and step-son. C'mon.
The last and biggest controversy over the final scene with Bedelia. I don't believe she cut off her own leg, waiting for Hannibal to arrive, for many reasons. First Fuller pretty much stated she did not do this to herself, and went as far as to say she was hiding a fork under the table to use as a weapon. Bedelia is clearly high in this scene, and if she had just cut off her own leg, there is no way, even with the best narcotics, that she could fix her hair and makeup, and don this lovely sexy dress. No woman is going to feel sexy after cutting off her own leg. Plus, what she is wearing is not really her style of dress. It is though, Hannibal's style of dress. It looks lux and expensive.
If you think about this dress, the low plunging neckline, the showing of breasts, the sexiness of it, you have to remember that Hannibal did this before with Clarice. He drugged Clarice. He put her in an expensive, sexy and breast baring dress. He sat her at the dinner table and he served up her nemesis. While the movie had Clarice cuff Hannibal to a refrigerator, thus forcing him to cut off his own hand to flee, the book did not do that. The book had Clarice offering her nipples to Hannibal to suck on and they ran off together with Clarice more or less being brainwashed.
I do believe this means Hannibal is alive, and that Hannibal is serving up Bedelia's leg. Fuller said that there are three place settings at the table. I don't know if that means Will is alive. There are so many possibilities of what that third place setting could indicate. It was a great little ending to leave us all wondering, until hopefully a season 4 of Hannibal comes out on cable TV or until Bryan just dishes his secrets if he knows there will never be another re-telling from him.
The first season I thought was phenomenal. With the truly uncomfortable and brutal imagery of murders, to the subtle and mysterious looks of Hannibal, the way he messed with Will in every opportunity he could, while at the same time wanting to love him and be friends with him, it was just an insanely brilliant story arc. Season two I loved, because how many times did I sit there and question who Will was. Even when you knew he was himself, you didn't really know. Did he love Hannibal or not? How much of a game was he playing? How many of things that he said regarding his feelings for Hannibal, in that he was wanting to change, he was wanting to become, he was creating his own design...what was real and what was a lie just to get people on board with him? I saw someone who I both knew from the books and this show, and someone I didn't know. How many times did I want to be able to see inside Will's head? What was Will really thinking? The first season and part of the second season, you knew. You could see it in his face. You could see his distress, his shaking hands.
But after Abigail died a second time, who was Will? From that moment on he was a game of words. There were only tiny glimmers of who he used to be; the genuine laugh he shared with Molly on the telephone in the hotel room, and the pained look he had when he talked to Molly's son in the hospital. Every other moment with Will was guarded. The writers didn't let the audience see him. Even to the bloody end; how much was an act, how much was a misinterpretation, how much of it might be the conclusion that's hard to swallow? That Will and Hannibal survived, and will run off together and do who knows what.
I don't think these two are, or would ever be, lovers. I think there is a rare and strange love, in just two people at the extreme opposites of personality who share a brutal trait in common; they can see the design of murder. At Will's core, even after the death of the Dragon, I don't think he is a murderer. He kills when he has to. There were other times he could have killed and didn't. I think he has too much empathy for those who are slain, to ever be comfortable with being a murderer himself.
But, nor do I think he is disgusted with Hannibal as a murderer. In the books, there was no blurring of the lines like in the TV show. In the books, Will did not like Hannibal. He would not want to be anywhere near Hannibal ever. He was not friends with Hannibal. He didn't seek to understand Hannibal. Hannibal nearly killed him and that was all he needed in terms of contact with Hannibal.
The book never had Will confused by his feelings for Hannibal. Hannibal was insane as far as definitions would allow. Will only needed Hannibal for one thing; help in deciphering his thoughts and the Dragon's actions, to find him and stop him from killing other families. While the book hinted that the Dragon was looking to kill Will's family, the book got Molly and her son out of harm's way early on and it was not really an issue again.
The TV show destroyed the relationship between Will and Molly.
Season three was rough for me. I loved the Italy arcs, but it was misplaced. The flow was difficult because it strayed out of order from the books. A lot of things between the books and the show were strayed, but there was also a lot of truth's even if characters were switched around a bit like Bloom essentially being in Chilton's role, Chilton being in Freddy's role, and at times, Will being in Hannibal's role. It was a strange diversion that worked.
Season three though did weird things. The Verger story arc was very strange. The cow growing a human baby inside it was just wrong and superfluous. In the books, Hannibal was in prison for years before meeting Clarice, falling in her love with her, escaping and living in Italy before eventually being lured back to save Clarice, and ultimately through the use of drugs and his warped psychological manipulation, he turned Clarice into someone else entirely.
The TV show had Hannibal disable Alana, Will and Crawford, kill Abigail, was never in prison, and fled to Italy with Bedelia which also to me, a very unnecessary story arc. I hated the whole Bedelia story line, but I did love Gillian Anderson's performance. She is a brilliant actress. I love how all of her lines she said so slowly, so carefully, so perfectly and sharply enunciated. It had power. However, if they had cut the Bedelia arc, they could have spent more time on the Dragon and more time on Will, and that would have served season three much better. And I wish they would have just left Abigail in the grave after the season 2 finale. To have her sporadically reappear in season 3, didn't serve any real point in my opinion. The most it did was we learn for sure that Hannibal cut off Abigail's ear to frame Will as the murderer, but really, we could figure that out without needing to see how her death was faked.
If some of these cuts had been made, then the Dragon could have been more center stage and he needed to be. You can't give the Dragon six episodes to tell his story. No discussion was given to his abusive childhood--none. This was necessary to understanding why he bit. Understanding why he had that big house. Understanding why he had wheelchairs. No attention was given to explaining how he picked his victims. Yes, they showed Dollarhyde working in a place that gave him access to film, but that was it. This was the pivotal moment in the book at tracking Dollarhyde.
In the book Will caught on to what we see is what we covet. He then matched up the two murdered families home movies to having been transferred to film by the same film company. When they searched the film companies records of employees to the profile Will had of the Dragon, then we find Dollarhyde in the depths of his trying to not kill a woman he had fallen in love with, and his desire to kill her for the love of the Dragon. It's important, and the TV show missed the mark completely.
We also don't truly see the agony of why Will would even see Hannibal again. In the first movie telling of the Red Dragon, which was called Manhunter, we see Will running out of the prison in a cold sweat. We see him dizzy and sick to his stomach after being anywhere close to Hannibal again. You could feel his level of discomfort. You could feel his anxiety and maybe fear. You could feel contempt and that is important. In the second re-telling of this story with Hopkins and Norton, Norton's Will is also visibly distressed to be in the same room as Hannibal. He has enormous pit stains from the sweating and anxiety while waiting for Hannibal to look over the case history on the Tooth Fairy's murders. Norton's Will was ill at ease, was nervous around Hannibal. He didn't trust Hannibal. Will was only there for one reason...to save the lives of families that the Dragon would go after next. The Dragon killed children. This was a brutality that Will could not stomach. This was what he had to stop.
The TV show, I never felt that same quality of discomfort from Will and Hannibal. I didn't feel the loathing and contempt that should have been there. After all, the TV series messed with Will way more than the books. The TV series had Will sent to prison for murders he didn't commit, Hannibal orchestrated the death of Will's unborn child, Hannibal stole the affections of Alana who Will was falling in love with, and Hannibal took Abigail away from Will twice. Hannibal gutted Will with a knife. Hannibal also cut into Will's forehead with a saw, in order to get to his brain, and if not stopped, he probably would have eaten it. All Hannibal did was destroy Will's life in the TV show. But you never got to see that in Will's interactions with Hannibal behind the plexi-glass of Hannibal's cell. There was a lot of meaningless conversations that didn't serve either of the character's any justice. It was sloppy and rushed.
The ending of the TV show, was a true cliffhanger, and literally a cliff dive. It left room for a new story arc if anyone else picks up Hannibal on cable. It left room for enough speculation to last a year of internal dialogue. It was heart breaking and weird, everything that made the show truly unique. Is it real? Is it figurative? Is it symbolic?
Here is my opinion of the last scene, and I watched several times taking a different viewpoint every time. The hardest thing for me to accept was Will saying to Hannibal "It's beautiful," as reference to the act of them killing together. I don't buy it. Even if Will feels like he may become like Hannibal, he has stated more than once that Hannibal has to die. He knew going into this that his ultimate goal was for Hannibal and Dollarhyde to die. Jack said this himself,too.
When Will said "It's beautiful," I believe he was referring to what Hannibal said. Hannibal said this is all he wanted for Will, all he wanted for the both of them. I think that's what Will was referring to as beautiful. The words, not the deed.
However, the writers of that episode actually released some script pages that had notes we don't get to see in the finale. One of those notes stated that when Will and Hannibal were both simultaneously attacking the Dragon, Will got a sense of what it was like for dogs in a pack to bring down a prey and kill it together. Will's affinity for dogs, and appreciation of their very nature, this is what Will thought was "beautiful."
As for this sexual tension and that they were primed to kiss in the final scene, again, I call bullshit. I don't think for one moment that Will is turning bi-sexual. There has been no true indication that Hannibal is bi-sexual. There is no doubt a love component between these two. I am in love with my daughter. Every day I know I am in love with her. There is nothing sexual in that. You can be in love with people and it doesn't have to speak of your sexuality.
In the moment when Will wraps his arms around Hannibal in a lover's embrace, and he rests his head on Hannibal's chest, also a strangely loving act, I think there's a few things going on. I think Will knows he is going to take Hannibal off the cliff with him. He has to get close. He has to get his full body onto Hannibal's to apply the pressure he needs to knock them off balance. Hannibal is not a dipshit. He's not going to allow himself to be pushed. If you look carefully, I feel like there is some resistance in Hannibal's hug back to Will, as if he also doesn't fully trust this new affection coming from Will. He doesn't quite grab Will in the same man hug.
I think Will is not the same Will. I do believe he is changed forever. Even before the final act of the show, I told my husband that I felt Will was going to die. My exact words to him were "I don't think Will wants to live after all this."
Some of the small nuances I loved about the final 10 minutes were, when Dollarhyde is setting up the camera and Hannibal is laying wounded on the floor, there's a moment when Will is reaching for a gun in his back. I think he was never going to let the Dragon kill Hannibal. From there, I'm not 100% sure if Will would have killed Hannibal or gone off into the sunset with him. The reason I say this is because he told Bedelia he doesn't plan for Hannibal to be caught a second time. And Hannibal who never winces at anything, I mean this man was stabbed in the back by Verger, not a wince. Yet, when Will gets stabbed in the face, he winces. That's the compassion he feels for Will, even though he has been nothing but un-compassionate to Will through the whole three seasons. Hannibal told Dollarhyde to kill Will's wife and step-son. C'mon.
The last and biggest controversy over the final scene with Bedelia. I don't believe she cut off her own leg, waiting for Hannibal to arrive, for many reasons. First Fuller pretty much stated she did not do this to herself, and went as far as to say she was hiding a fork under the table to use as a weapon. Bedelia is clearly high in this scene, and if she had just cut off her own leg, there is no way, even with the best narcotics, that she could fix her hair and makeup, and don this lovely sexy dress. No woman is going to feel sexy after cutting off her own leg. Plus, what she is wearing is not really her style of dress. It is though, Hannibal's style of dress. It looks lux and expensive.
If you think about this dress, the low plunging neckline, the showing of breasts, the sexiness of it, you have to remember that Hannibal did this before with Clarice. He drugged Clarice. He put her in an expensive, sexy and breast baring dress. He sat her at the dinner table and he served up her nemesis. While the movie had Clarice cuff Hannibal to a refrigerator, thus forcing him to cut off his own hand to flee, the book did not do that. The book had Clarice offering her nipples to Hannibal to suck on and they ran off together with Clarice more or less being brainwashed.
I do believe this means Hannibal is alive, and that Hannibal is serving up Bedelia's leg. Fuller said that there are three place settings at the table. I don't know if that means Will is alive. There are so many possibilities of what that third place setting could indicate. It was a great little ending to leave us all wondering, until hopefully a season 4 of Hannibal comes out on cable TV or until Bryan just dishes his secrets if he knows there will never be another re-telling from him.
Room (2015)
I definitely think it was worth the Oscar noms it got for bringing attention to what life must be like for those who have been abducted and kept locked up.
There are just some basic problems I have with the movie. She was locked in a shed in a pretty populated neighborhood. I understand the shed was soundproofed, but it was still just a shed, not underground or anything. My first issue is, to me, there were enough things in that shed that could have been stacked to try to reach the glass skylight and break it out. I'm not saying it would have worked by any means, but if I'm locked in a shed for 7 years with a child, you bet your ass, I'm going to try. I'm going to try tying every piece of clothing and fabric and see if I can make some kind of pull system to get me up to that window and try to break out that glass.
If I can't do that, then I'm thinking I'm going to try to get some baking soda or even just plain water, and given seven years of time, I am going to try to erode one of those walls. I don't think it would work either, but I'm going to try.
Now I know she said she tried once to hit her abductor over the head with the toilet tank lid and it failed miserably. I get that he's violent and threatens her with death. I get that there's a code on the door that he keeps hidden from her and the window of escape is narrow. But she has knives in this room. We see her cut open an apple. You bet I'm going to hide on the side of the door and stab that guy in the throat or face as many times as I can and wedge him so that door can't close.
Her abductor always told her to turn her back when he punched in the code, but she kept her son tucked away in a wardrobe and he could see out the slats. Again, I'm not saying it would work, I don't quite know the angle of the room, but I would try to see if he could ever see the numbers while being tucked away in the dark where the abductor paid little attention.
All those things aside, I have an issue with two other elements in the movie. Ma's dad played by William H. Macy (seriously, how does this guy continue to get roles in anything? There has never been a single movie or TV show I have ever watched with Macy in it where I thought to myself--that was a good choice on their part to cast Macy. He really did that role justice. Not ever have I thought this.) He can't stand to even look at the little boy Jack. We are left to assume why, and then he's out of the picture all together. What is it? He can't handle that his daughter was raped repeatedly? He can't handle that his grandson is sharing genetic traits with an abductor/abuser? He can't handle that his grandson has long hair? He can't handle that his daughter become a mother at 19? What is the fucking reason? It makes no sense. That little boy had to to the scariest of things; pretend to be dead, escape a moving truck in a world that he has never seen before, and try to explain to adults where he had been, what he had gone through, where his mother was still locked up, when he had never talked to another human being other than his mother before. And he did his job. He saved himself and his mom. You would think his grandfather despite how little Jack was created, would appreciate all that.
The last thing that didn't seem to fit to me is the scene where Ma is being interviewed by a reporter. No respectable reporter in the world would dare ever ask the questions to her that this reporter did. Things like; did you ever think to kill yourself, and why didn't you make the abductor take the boy when he was a baby and free him? You would never see a Connie Chung or a Savannah Guthrie, or anyone ask those kinds of questions. The latter question about why didn't you have your abductor take the child when it was born and free him...what the fuck? Where exactly is an abductor supposed to take a baby, born from a girl who he kidnapped when she was 17, that wouldn't have any questions asked or raised any eyebrows? If anything, I would think if she begged him to take the baby and "free" him, that he would just have killed the child, so that was just dumb.
There are just some basic problems I have with the movie. She was locked in a shed in a pretty populated neighborhood. I understand the shed was soundproofed, but it was still just a shed, not underground or anything. My first issue is, to me, there were enough things in that shed that could have been stacked to try to reach the glass skylight and break it out. I'm not saying it would have worked by any means, but if I'm locked in a shed for 7 years with a child, you bet your ass, I'm going to try. I'm going to try tying every piece of clothing and fabric and see if I can make some kind of pull system to get me up to that window and try to break out that glass.
If I can't do that, then I'm thinking I'm going to try to get some baking soda or even just plain water, and given seven years of time, I am going to try to erode one of those walls. I don't think it would work either, but I'm going to try.
Now I know she said she tried once to hit her abductor over the head with the toilet tank lid and it failed miserably. I get that he's violent and threatens her with death. I get that there's a code on the door that he keeps hidden from her and the window of escape is narrow. But she has knives in this room. We see her cut open an apple. You bet I'm going to hide on the side of the door and stab that guy in the throat or face as many times as I can and wedge him so that door can't close.
Her abductor always told her to turn her back when he punched in the code, but she kept her son tucked away in a wardrobe and he could see out the slats. Again, I'm not saying it would work, I don't quite know the angle of the room, but I would try to see if he could ever see the numbers while being tucked away in the dark where the abductor paid little attention.
All those things aside, I have an issue with two other elements in the movie. Ma's dad played by William H. Macy (seriously, how does this guy continue to get roles in anything? There has never been a single movie or TV show I have ever watched with Macy in it where I thought to myself--that was a good choice on their part to cast Macy. He really did that role justice. Not ever have I thought this.) He can't stand to even look at the little boy Jack. We are left to assume why, and then he's out of the picture all together. What is it? He can't handle that his daughter was raped repeatedly? He can't handle that his grandson is sharing genetic traits with an abductor/abuser? He can't handle that his grandson has long hair? He can't handle that his daughter become a mother at 19? What is the fucking reason? It makes no sense. That little boy had to to the scariest of things; pretend to be dead, escape a moving truck in a world that he has never seen before, and try to explain to adults where he had been, what he had gone through, where his mother was still locked up, when he had never talked to another human being other than his mother before. And he did his job. He saved himself and his mom. You would think his grandfather despite how little Jack was created, would appreciate all that.
The last thing that didn't seem to fit to me is the scene where Ma is being interviewed by a reporter. No respectable reporter in the world would dare ever ask the questions to her that this reporter did. Things like; did you ever think to kill yourself, and why didn't you make the abductor take the boy when he was a baby and free him? You would never see a Connie Chung or a Savannah Guthrie, or anyone ask those kinds of questions. The latter question about why didn't you have your abductor take the child when it was born and free him...what the fuck? Where exactly is an abductor supposed to take a baby, born from a girl who he kidnapped when she was 17, that wouldn't have any questions asked or raised any eyebrows? If anything, I would think if she begged him to take the baby and "free" him, that he would just have killed the child, so that was just dumb.
Steve Jobs (2015)
Liked it, didn't love it.
Hands down, far better than the Jobs movie starring Ashton Kutcher.
I loved Kate Winslet in this. I think she stole the movie to be honest. I thought it was a good movie, but because they sort of only chronicled 1984 up to the release of the iMac, the whole thing felt a little one-dimensional to me. I didn't like that practically every scene was basically Jobs "at work." We didn't see a home life. We didn't see much interaction with anyone other than his colleagues, and the few times they had his daughter Lisa, they were strained, ill-placed and uncomfortable.
The sweetest part of the whole movie is the last minute when Jobs gives his daughter the picture she drew on the computer back in 1984, but because there is no little connection with Lisa through the film, it doesn't pack as much of an emotional punch as it could have.
I kind of understand and can appreciate why they chose to document such a short period of his life for this movie, but it just didn't feel complete. They barely touched on the technical aspects of what he was creating, other than a really long and pointless dialogue about what constitutes a cube and our perception of a cube, and a slots discussion in the garage scene with Wozniak. I think they missed a lot of opportunities there in the story.
To neglect to tell his role in Pixar, the re-connection to his birth mother and sister, his marriage to his wife, his creation of his other groundbreaking and revolutionary products, and then to not even mention his death in the credits as any kind of a tribute, I don't know. It felt more like a two hour preview trailer versus an actual movie.
Hands down, far better than the Jobs movie starring Ashton Kutcher.
I loved Kate Winslet in this. I think she stole the movie to be honest. I thought it was a good movie, but because they sort of only chronicled 1984 up to the release of the iMac, the whole thing felt a little one-dimensional to me. I didn't like that practically every scene was basically Jobs "at work." We didn't see a home life. We didn't see much interaction with anyone other than his colleagues, and the few times they had his daughter Lisa, they were strained, ill-placed and uncomfortable.
The sweetest part of the whole movie is the last minute when Jobs gives his daughter the picture she drew on the computer back in 1984, but because there is no little connection with Lisa through the film, it doesn't pack as much of an emotional punch as it could have.
I kind of understand and can appreciate why they chose to document such a short period of his life for this movie, but it just didn't feel complete. They barely touched on the technical aspects of what he was creating, other than a really long and pointless dialogue about what constitutes a cube and our perception of a cube, and a slots discussion in the garage scene with Wozniak. I think they missed a lot of opportunities there in the story.
To neglect to tell his role in Pixar, the re-connection to his birth mother and sister, his marriage to his wife, his creation of his other groundbreaking and revolutionary products, and then to not even mention his death in the credits as any kind of a tribute, I don't know. It felt more like a two hour preview trailer versus an actual movie.
Sunday, February 28, 2016
The Visit (2015)
So, I have a love/hate relationship with M. Night Shyamalan. Sixth Sense, loved! Unbreakable, hated. Signs, loved. The Village, meh. Devil, double meh. Lady in the Water, hated. The Last Airbender, I loved and the rest of the world hated. The Happening, parts of it I thought could turn out to be a decent creepy movie. Then of course, Wahlberg spoke, and that killed the creepy, and turned it right to corny.
The Visit..I can't say I loved it, but close, so close. I really, really enjoyed watching it. I actually laughed a lot, and not in a bad way, genuine laughter from lines like Sarah McLaughlin said out of fear, to a scene where the boy is imitating his grandmother's "Sundowning" syndrome, that boy stole the whole movie. This kid delivered.
So we've got characters Becca and Tyler (Olvia DeJonge, who is also brilliant in this film, and Ed Oxenbould). Just a month ago or so I watched the movie Paper Planes about World Paper Plane Championships in Japan.It's an Australian film, and Ed is an Aussie, though you wouldn't know it in The Visit, so it was really refreshing to see him again so soon, and in a much more complex and mature role.
Becca and Tyler are brother and sister, and their mom has this I haven't spoken to my parents in 15 years issue. Her parents want to meet their grandchildren for the first time, and she hesitatingly agrees.
Becca and Tyler's grandparents, played by Deanna Dunagen and Peter McRobbie, seem a little off from the start. Becca is creating a documentary about the visit, and at first when I saw part of the movie was done in the "found footage" genre, I thought I was going to hate it, because I'm getting really tired of the hand-held camera point-of-view shooting that seems to be over saturating the industry right now, but this was nicely done. M. Night did a good job of using some hand-held footage, but kept a majority of the film in a nice level view.
The last 10 minutes or so, that's worth the whole movie. It took off in a direction that with all my film viewing experience, I probably should have seen coming, but I didn't and I loved it, especially when you started piecing together some of the things that had been said, like visitors from the hospital that the grandparents counseled at.
I loved the acting. The pace was decent. It wasn't an in your face horror movie by any means. It has that subtlety you can expect from M. Night where you only gets peeks of the creepiness that lurks within, and that works for this story.
If I were to rank this movie, I would give it a very generous 4 out of 5, because the bits of unexpected humor, especially from M. Night, I really enjoyed. It was those little bits of humor that I loved in the Signs that endeared me to it so much.
Pop some popcorn, turn the lights down low, and watch this movie.
Thursday, February 25, 2016
Somm (2012)
Somm is a documentary I discovered when typing for a financial advisor who had a client who was in some capacity, a oenophile. I love documentaries...and wine, so to Netflix I went.
I enjoyed this documentary. You follow a group of men who are looking to become Master Sommelier's or master wine tasters. The three part test they have to pass is according to the documentary, monumentally challenging. It's being able to tell what wine it is, how old it is, what region of the world it comes from, what it's components are, down to the grape variety, all from blind taste testing.
I think as of 2013, they had their 197th Master Sommelier, to give some idea as to what a small and elite club this is.
The documentary is interesting, sometimes funny, very intense, and after watching it, my husband told me how much it reminded him of when he had to take the exam for his PhD in Physics, and the similar vein of small groups of people studying and conversing about the questions after the exam.
If you're looking for a wine documentary that will teach you about wines...this is not that documentary. This is a look into the challenges that people undertaking the Master Sommelier test face, the stress it puts on their lives and families, their desire and dedication to receiving the diploma and pin, and the career paths that are a result of achieving this diploma.
This documentary got such a nice reception, that a sequel has already been made, Somm; Into the Bottle.
Wednesday, February 3, 2016
Movie directors--stop with the black eyes already
After watching Lazarus Effect which I gave a review on previously, I noticed a trend that I'm feeling annoyed with now. It's the big bulging black eyes movie directors are doing to elicit a fear response from movie goers. It's getting old.
Lazarus Effect
Exorcism of Emily Rose
It doesn't even have to be the horror movie genre that gets afflicted with this, like beautiful Jean Grey in the X-Men movies.
There are scarier tricks that you can do with eyes than just turning them black, special effects people. I'd like to think by now, things could be a bit more savvy.
Speaking of eyes, I have yet to see one movie starring Hannibal Lecter, portraying his eyes on the big screen as they were written in the book. The books said "Lecter's eyes were a shade of maroon and reflected the light in "pinpoints of red".
I haven't seen one attempt of any director giving Hannibal this shade of eye color, when the books and movie posters all have him with red eyes. Try to think outside the box a little bit movie industry.
Brian Cox as Lecter - not maroon eyes
Anthony Hopkins as Lecter - not maroon eyes
Mads Mikkelsen as Lecter - not maroon eyes
Lazarus Effect
Exorcism of Emily Rose
It doesn't even have to be the horror movie genre that gets afflicted with this, like beautiful Jean Grey in the X-Men movies.
There are scarier tricks that you can do with eyes than just turning them black, special effects people. I'd like to think by now, things could be a bit more savvy.
Speaking of eyes, I have yet to see one movie starring Hannibal Lecter, portraying his eyes on the big screen as they were written in the book. The books said "Lecter's eyes were a shade of maroon and reflected the light in "pinpoints of red".
I haven't seen one attempt of any director giving Hannibal this shade of eye color, when the books and movie posters all have him with red eyes. Try to think outside the box a little bit movie industry.
Brian Cox as Lecter - not maroon eyes
Anthony Hopkins as Lecter - not maroon eyes
Mads Mikkelsen as Lecter - not maroon eyes
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
