eclipsse Reviews

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

Not true to the books, but an excellent alternate vision

[10/10 · 9 January 2003]

I will cheerfully admit that I am a Tolkien fan, and was concerned about the changes that I had heard/read about on the web sites etc.

However, I decided to go and see it - keeping an open mind - and try to keep my rabid fandom under control (!)

Yes, the film is excellent. Yes, there are flaws, but not enough to change the experience significantly. Yes, the story is substantially changed from the book. So what?

I have read the book at least once a year since I was nine, which adds up to a "tidy few". I would just like to make one or two points -

1. Literature and film are two completely different media, with completely different strengths and weaknesses, problems and constraints, and those expecting to see exactly what was in the book - everything that was in the book - were always going to be disappointed.

2. In the book, Tolkien "travels" with each group in turn, skewing the timelines substantially until everything is tied up at the Black Gate. In film, it would be confusing to do that, as you would have subtantial chunks of the film based around each set of characters in turn, so many cuts and a "contemporaneous action" system makes sense, as Peter Jackson has so ably done.

3. The book finishes on a particularly grim note, and is not a suitable cinematic closing point.

The review bit - I thoroughly enjoyed the film. I thought the acting was superb, the technical aspects unmatched in any other film I have seen, and the production felt so much that this was a living, breathing world that we were somehow able to get a sneaky glimpse into. I thought that Orlando Bloom and Viggo Mortenson developed their characters superbly, with my only major niggles being the 'comic relief' role that has been given to Gimli - he is never very prominent in the book, but the "jokes" began to grate almost immediately. I was also very irritated by the fact that <spoiler> Gandalf's return <end of Spoiler> was shown in the trailers - that completely ruined the tension and wonder of the moment.

My rating? 8.5 - maybe 9 if it does what the Fellowship did and improve on second watching.

A Beautiful Mind (2001)

Good film, but over-hyped

[7/10 · 4 March 2002]

Don't get me wrong - I thought that this was a well crafted and interesting film, which covered a difficult and sensitive subject extremely well.

Nash's battle with his own mind was a fascinating tale, and the doctor I went to see it with said that he thought that all psychiatry students should see it as an introduction to the reality of Schitzophrenia for the patient.

However, I was expecting something....more. THe acting was good, everything was good, but it didn't have that extra something to raise it into the realms of the great.

I enjoyed this film, and would recommend it, but best film.... Not for me.

7.5/10

Moulin Rouge! (2001)

Rollercoaster ride of a film!

[9/10 · 27 February 2002]

I went to see this film with a large number of reservations - although I am an out-and-out movie muppet, and will go and see anything on the screen, I wasn't sure.

Boy was I wrong.

From the first, the story entertained, twisted and poked fun; Yes, I know it's derivative, yes, the score was hardly original - but -

Wow!

I won't ruin it for anyone by going through the plot - La Boheme meets La Traviata and rocks!

I thought the cast were superb, particularly the two leads - if Nicole Kidman doesn't get the Oscar there is definitely something wrong.

Original, witty and brash - Mr Luhrmann - we salute you!

9/10

Black Hawk Down (2001)

Technically brilliant, but uninvolving

[4/10 · 27 January 2002]

I thought this was a very well made dramatisation of the events of the Battle of Mogadishu, the cinematography was brilliant, but although it was well acted (not a British accent in sight - well done guys!)I found that there was no "hook" to the characters, meaning that their fate was, ultimately, not that important to me.

I know there was little screen time for each, being somewhat of an ensemble movie, but it can be done (see The Longest Day for how!)

It looked, and felt, like a documentary, rather than a film. I didn't feel "involved" with the story, so it was a very long 2 1/2 hours. I kept looking for the next pyro or clever camera move, rather than staying with the plot.

Glad I saw it, but ranks low on the star rating, I'm afraid. 4/10

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001)

The plot, yes... the magic and "soul", no

[6/10 · 15 January 2002]

I was one of the adults (without nagging children) who have been looking forward to this film - I thoroughly enjoyed the books and looked forward to their portrayal on screen.

I really wanted to like this film a lot. I really, really did -

and it was OK - but no more - rather to my sorrow. Don't get me wrong - I enjoyed the film, and would recommend others to go and see it, but - possibly because of all the hype - I was disappointed.

I found it much less engaging that the books. There were lovely elements - particularly the backgrounds - pictures etc, but for me, there was none of the soul that the books have - and it was largely missing the sly humour. The books have an edge that the film was lacking, I found some of the actors were "distant" - reading the roles rather than acting them. The film also felt choppy - with no real sense of development, it seemed to just jump from one incident to the next.

I was also disappointed by the marginalisation of many of the characters who are important in the book - particularly the rest of the Weasleys and Malfoy. I know that there are time constraints in a film, but there could have been more characterisation and less eye-candy, especially in an adaptation of such a superbly characterised book.

Summary - not a bad evenings viewing, but I, for one, would rather re-read the books. 5/10

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

Best fantasy film yet - Absolutely!

[10/10 · 6 January 2002]

I am normally an (avid) film watcher, not an ersatz reviewer, but having read other reviews/comments on the IMDB, I felt that I had to air an opinion, too!

Firstly, I loved the film. It is the best presentation of a fantasy story ever brought to the screen, and I am counting the days until the next film.

Yes, it's not a word for word translation of the book. Yes, there are flaws - (the only major one being IMO the frenetic pacing) - but come on people, film and literature are two totally different media, and deserve to be treated as such.

I have been a Tolkien reader from the age of 7, and was terrified that this adaptation would ruin my cherished feelings for the book.

It didn't. The film is a beautiful adaptation, and much credit to all involved in the production.

It certainly exceeded my wildest expectations - amazing casting, (particularly the two Sir Ians, Elijah Wood and Viggo Mortensen) cinematography, FX, the list goes on. I thought it was an inspired and inspiring film, and deserves those 10/10 in my opinion.

Its only flaws- for me - were a rushed feel to the second half of the film and lack of proper introductions for the non hobbit/human members of the fellowship - but these are minor niggles in a film I have now enjoyed seeing twice - oddly, for me it actually felt substantially shorter second time round.

A lot of comment has gone into the fact that it is currently on the top of the IMDB "chart". Why are people so upset by this? If it is the truly great film that devotees (including me) believe it to be, then it will stay there, if it is only "hype", then it will slip.

Why all the vitriol?

I agree that there are other great films, but for me, at least, The Godfather would be struggling to be in the top 10. Everyone's entitled to their own opinions...

In summary - for me this was not only the greatest fantasy film yet, but also a fantastic, beautiful and persuasive visualisation of Middle Earth. The Two Towers beckon...!

Stella Does Tricks (1996)

Thought provoking and disturbing

[6/10 · 6 January 2002]

I thought this was one of those films you simply have to see with someone else - to go over it afterwards.

Although rambling in places, I found the lead characters were mesmerising, in that you simply had to watch to find out what happened. James Bolam, in particular, was disturbingly nasty as the pimp, showing an incredible characterisation. As I have only seen him in light comedy before, I wondered whether he was suitable for such a gritty drama - and he proved eminently so!

Overall, a disturbing film due to the subject matter, but a very well acted and presented drama which leaves an enduring impression in the mind after the film ends - one of the marks of a good film, to me.