I know this is sort of random…but i have to let you guys know about this horrible clip that i saw on youtube. I'm not going to post the video because it was WAY to graphic, so I'll just explain it.
It’s called Watership Down it’s an old 70’s movie about rabbits in the wild. It’s meant for 8 year olds but…i don’t even think its suitable for adults. I watched a clip of it on youtube and I wanted to cry…it was absolutely horrible.
I’ll just tell you about clip I saw first… when it first comes on it’s playing Marylin Manson’s Sweet Dreams and there is a shot of the rabbit’s eye then you see another rabbit watch another one be taken by a hawk. After that there are bunnies being gassed and their heads float around in the most disturbing way. You just sit and watch the bunnies eye clench and roll back in their heads just for one last gasp for air. I started crying at this part… After that there are more rabbits in a tunnel and two of them start fighting, the one has it throat ripped out while the other bunnies hide in fear. Shortly after bunnies are shown tearing apart another helpless rabbit. Then there are shots of birds taking the bunnies and a cat shredding up a bunny and a dog chasing the rabbits…catches one then throws it up in the air a chews it up. Finally there is this scene where a rabbit is struggling to hold on to its life…where it is greeted by a bunny ghost..and there it dies and you watch its soul leave it’s body…and the bunny ghost skip around in the air, on their way to the promised land…All of these shots where GRAPHIC!
and what makes it worse is the fact that it’s animated and it’s rated PG
http://www.impawards.com/1978/posters/watership_down.jpg
http://www.premiere.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/images/watership-down/594921-1-eng-US/watership-down.jpg
^
All of the above was written when i had only seen the clip on youtube...but the movie is so different from that. Yes that violence does occur but the movie is not about the killing of bunnies. That clip was extremely misleading. The youtube clip had me crying because it was so awful but the movie had me crying because it was such a heroic journey. All of the horrible shots in the youtube clip all happen, it's just that there is legitimate reasoning for the event( if that makes any sense) I don't want to ruin the movie, but I'll give you an example. The runt bunny has this vision (the gassing of the bunnies) that all of the rabbits in their warren is going to be killed, so he warns the chief but the chief ignores him. So the runt rabbit got a group of rabbits together and they left the warren, thus starting their adventure to Watership Down.I have to say I really liked Watership Down! And I really think all of you should watch it!( You can always fast forward the violent parts) If you don't have Netflicks(or something along those lines) Watership Down may be extremely hard to find. So if you really want to watch it, you can get Netficks(or something along those lines) or you can wait for the remake to come out in 2012 or 2013.
So basically what I'm trying to say is don't judge a movie based on gossip you hear or see. You never know how you'll feel about it until you see it yourself. Remember Paranormal Activity? Half the class said it was the scariest movie ever and the other half said it sucked. So who do you believe? You guessed it! No one, you go see it yourself.
P.S. As much as I like this movie, I still don't think it should be PG. It is NOT a kids movie.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
A Very Nice List, minus Edward Cullen.
http://community.livejournal.com/ohnotheydidnt/44868070.html
Stumbled upon this page, liked it very much. =)
With love, Los Lobos.
Monday, May 24, 2010
Monday, May 3, 2010
Jellyfish
I was watching the Sundance channel this weekend, something that I've been finding myself doing quite often as time passes by, and came across a rather interesting film titled Jellyfish. Jellyfish follows the lives of three women in Tel Aviv- Batya, a caterer whose boyfriend has just moved out, Keren, a newlywed stuck in a dismal hotel room with a busted ankle, and Joy, a home-care worker who misses her son and home in the Philippines. All three women live a life lost in confusion and in need of some way to reconnect with the world and rediscover what they deem important. Directed by Shira Geffen and Etgar Keret, this is a dramatic comedy that deserves to be watched.
Related links:
Saturday, May 1, 2010
New "Nightmare"
First things first:
Jackie Earle Haley is a fantastic Freddy Kruger and does succeed in making the character his own, not a Robert Englund spinoff. Also, Freddy's make-up looks pretty great here, I think (a lot of people have said he looks like an 'alien,' but it's a pretty accurate portrayal of a burn victim), and it's pretty disturbing as well. And it's nice to see Freddy portrayed as scary and malevolent again (though Wes Craven accomplished this in the amazing New Nightmare in the 90's), though he does crack a few (very disturbing) one-liners.
So, with that aside, how does A Nightmare on Elm Street 2010 hold up?
Unfortunately, not too well. While not the disaster many will claim it to be, this redux ultimately doesn't work, and fails to reboot the Nightmare legacy effectively.
The main problem is that it's really just not interesting. With the exception of the dream sequences (none of which were really outstanding, but they were done well) and the stuff involving Freddy, it's all pretty flat. While there are plenty of asides to the original here, none of it really registers or works. It's all just 'there.' The deaths are gory, but not particularly creative (though the new take on the ceiling murder was kinda cool). There's a backstory for Freddy here, which is a bit different than the original (we're shown this time), but it's somewhat effective and helps the film move into its own territory, becoming a little unpredictable even.
One of the cooler ideas was the concept of sleep deprivation, and how the filmmakers run with it. The 'micronaps' tool was pretty neat and worked into the story well, showing the effects of a lack of sleep, which we didn't often see in the originals. Once the story moves into the final act, the pace picks up a bit, but the final confrontation with Freddy is not at all climactic, and not worthy of what had been set up.
One of the biggest problems here is the characters. Not only are they hardly developed and weakly written, the kids are practically indestinguishable from one another. None of the main teens are at all compelling. Most criminal of all is the treatment given to the heroine, Nancy. Originally played endearingly by Heather Langenkamp, here she's portrayed by Rooney Mara. Langenkamp's Nancy was a strong, vulnerable and relatable 'final girl,' and a worthy advisary to Mr. Kruger. Mara simply sulks around, looking morose. When she says "I don't exactly fit in," it's the first hint we're given of it, since her character receieves no development or dimensions. I didn't care if this Nancy lived or not, and considering the original was one of my favorite heroines, that's unforgivable. The rest of the teenagers are so-so; Kyle Gallner is likable as Quentin (the Johhny Depp-esque role). Katie Cassidy is very effective as Kris (aka 'Tina' from '84), and would've been a far better leading lady than Mara. Luckily, the strongest work here is done by Haley, as previously mentioned.
Really, though it's far from terrible, this Nightmare redux is really just 'blah.' It's just not effective or that interesting. None of it's particularly scary either (though it is loud). Some might like it, but I'm a pretty big Freddy fanatic, and this just didn't do it for me. Platinum Dunes' redo's all seem to turn out similarly (the exception being their fantastic remake of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre), especially last year's Friday the 13th, which also looked promising, but failed to deliver. I've taken a lot of flack for my praise of Rob Zombie's Halloween films, but, your opinion of the films aside, it has to be said that the concepts and stories in Zombie's films (particularly Halloween II) were radically different than the originals and extremely creative. Those movies had ideas and explored their characters and themes, and ultimately, were far more ambitious, whereas the new Nightmare, and all Platinum Dunes' remakes, fails to bring anything new to the table. It commits the ultimate sin by just being generic. As I said, while it's not a horrible flick, it ultimately can't justify its existance when the perfectly accesible original still holds up pretty well.
Jackie Earle Haley is a fantastic Freddy Kruger and does succeed in making the character his own, not a Robert Englund spinoff. Also, Freddy's make-up looks pretty great here, I think (a lot of people have said he looks like an 'alien,' but it's a pretty accurate portrayal of a burn victim), and it's pretty disturbing as well. And it's nice to see Freddy portrayed as scary and malevolent again (though Wes Craven accomplished this in the amazing New Nightmare in the 90's), though he does crack a few (very disturbing) one-liners.
So, with that aside, how does A Nightmare on Elm Street 2010 hold up?
Unfortunately, not too well. While not the disaster many will claim it to be, this redux ultimately doesn't work, and fails to reboot the Nightmare legacy effectively.
The main problem is that it's really just not interesting. With the exception of the dream sequences (none of which were really outstanding, but they were done well) and the stuff involving Freddy, it's all pretty flat. While there are plenty of asides to the original here, none of it really registers or works. It's all just 'there.' The deaths are gory, but not particularly creative (though the new take on the ceiling murder was kinda cool). There's a backstory for Freddy here, which is a bit different than the original (we're shown this time), but it's somewhat effective and helps the film move into its own territory, becoming a little unpredictable even.
One of the cooler ideas was the concept of sleep deprivation, and how the filmmakers run with it. The 'micronaps' tool was pretty neat and worked into the story well, showing the effects of a lack of sleep, which we didn't often see in the originals. Once the story moves into the final act, the pace picks up a bit, but the final confrontation with Freddy is not at all climactic, and not worthy of what had been set up.
One of the biggest problems here is the characters. Not only are they hardly developed and weakly written, the kids are practically indestinguishable from one another. None of the main teens are at all compelling. Most criminal of all is the treatment given to the heroine, Nancy. Originally played endearingly by Heather Langenkamp, here she's portrayed by Rooney Mara. Langenkamp's Nancy was a strong, vulnerable and relatable 'final girl,' and a worthy advisary to Mr. Kruger. Mara simply sulks around, looking morose. When she says "I don't exactly fit in," it's the first hint we're given of it, since her character receieves no development or dimensions. I didn't care if this Nancy lived or not, and considering the original was one of my favorite heroines, that's unforgivable. The rest of the teenagers are so-so; Kyle Gallner is likable as Quentin (the Johhny Depp-esque role). Katie Cassidy is very effective as Kris (aka 'Tina' from '84), and would've been a far better leading lady than Mara. Luckily, the strongest work here is done by Haley, as previously mentioned.
Really, though it's far from terrible, this Nightmare redux is really just 'blah.' It's just not effective or that interesting. None of it's particularly scary either (though it is loud). Some might like it, but I'm a pretty big Freddy fanatic, and this just didn't do it for me. Platinum Dunes' redo's all seem to turn out similarly (the exception being their fantastic remake of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre), especially last year's Friday the 13th, which also looked promising, but failed to deliver. I've taken a lot of flack for my praise of Rob Zombie's Halloween films, but, your opinion of the films aside, it has to be said that the concepts and stories in Zombie's films (particularly Halloween II) were radically different than the originals and extremely creative. Those movies had ideas and explored their characters and themes, and ultimately, were far more ambitious, whereas the new Nightmare, and all Platinum Dunes' remakes, fails to bring anything new to the table. It commits the ultimate sin by just being generic. As I said, while it's not a horrible flick, it ultimately can't justify its existance when the perfectly accesible original still holds up pretty well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)